Laboratuvar Fareleri, Gerbiller ve Kobaylarda Gastrointestinal Parazitler ile Türler Arası Duyarlılığın Araştırılması

Öz

Bu çalışmada, deneysel amaçlarla üretilen laboratuvar fareleri, gerbiller ve kobaylarda gastrointestinal parazitler ile türler arası duyarlılık incelenmiştir. Çalışma kapsamında 32 kafeste 335 fare, 7 kafeste 140 kobay ve 1 kafeste 4 gerbil kullanılmıştır. Her kafesten yeterli miktarda taze dışkı örneği toplanmış, örnekler homojenize edilmiştir. Toplanan dışkılar flotasyon yöntemi ile işlenmiş ve ardından ışık mikroskobunda incelenmiştir. Yapılan incelemeler sonucunda kobay ve gerbil kafeslerinde herhangi bir parazit türüne rastlanmamıştır. Ancak, farelerin bulunduğu tüm kafeslerde (%100) paraziter enfestasyon saptanmış; parazitlerin dağılımı ise %46,9 Eimeria spp. ve Syphacia muris, %25 Aspiculuris tetraptera ve Hymenolepis nana, %15,6 H. nana ve %12,5 A. tetraptera olarak belirlenmiştir. Çalışmada, kobay ve gerbillerde gastrointestinal paraziter enfeksiyonların bulunmadığı, ancak aynı tesiste benzer bakım ve besleme koşullarında yetiştirilen farelerde insan sağlığı açısından da önem taşıyan türleri kapsayan yoğun bir paraziter yükün bulunduğu sonucuna varılmıştır. Araştırma, kobayların helmint enfeksiyonlarına karşı farelere kıyasla daha dirençli olduğunu göstermekte ve enfeksiyon riskinin belirlenmesinde tür seçiminin kritik rolüne işaret etmektedir. Ayrıca, laboratuvar hayvanları arasında önemli bir yere sahip olan farelerde paraziter enfestasyonların önlenmesinde biyogüvenlik önlemlerinin gerekliliğini vurgulamakta; bunun yanı sıra bakım ve besleme koşullarının iyileştirilmesi ile rutin tarama uygulamalarının önemini ortaya koymaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Biyogüvenlik
• fare
• kobay
• paraziter hastalıklar
• zoonoz

Etik Beyan

Bu çalışma, İzmir/Bornova Veteriner Kontrol Enstitüsü Yerel Hayvan Deneyleri Etik Kurulu’nun onayı ile yürütülmüştür (Karar tarihi ve no: 09.09.2025, E-71705440-550-20966224). Etik ilkelere uygun olarak örnekleme sırasında hayvanlar üzerinde invaziv herhangi bir işlem yapılmamış; hayvan refahı ve biyogüvenlik düzenlemelerine azami özen gösterilmiştir.

Teşekkür

Yazarlar, hayvan çalışmalarındaki yardım ve desteklerinden dolayı Zülal Tavlı Yıldırır’a teşekkür eder.

Investigation of Gastrointestinal Parasites and Inter-Species Susceptibility in Laboratory Mice, Gerbils, and Guinea Pigs

Öz

In this study, gastrointestinal parasites and the interspecies susceptibility of laboratory mice, gerbils, and guinea pigs bred for experimental purposes were investigated. Within the scope of the study, a total of 335 mice from 32 cages, 140 guinea pigs from 7 cages, and 4 gerbils from 1 cage were used. Adequate amounts of fresh fecal samples were collected from each cage, and the collected samples were homogenized. Samples were processed by the flotation method and subsequently analyzed under light microscopy. As a result of the examination, no parasitic species were detected in the guinea pig and gerbil cages. However, parasitic infestation was identified in all mouse cages (100 %), with the distribution of parasites as follows: 46.9 % Eimeria spp. and Syphacia muris, 25 % Aspiculuris tetraptera and Hymenolepis nana, 15.6 % H. nana, and 12.5 % A. tetraptera. The study concluded that no gastrointestinal parasitic infections were found in guinea pigs and gerbils; however, mice raised under similar husbandry and feeding conditions at the same facility exhibited a heavy parasitic burden, including some parasites relevant to human health. The study demonstrates that guinea pigs are more resistant to helminth infections than mice and highlights the critical role of species selection in determining infection risk. Additionally, it emphasizes the importance of biosecurity measures in preventing parasitic infestations in mice, which hold a significant place among laboratory animals, as well as the necessity of improving husbandry and feeding conditions and implementing routine screening practices.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Biosecurity
• guinea pigs
• mice
• parasitic diseases
• zoonoses

Etik Beyan

This study was conducted with the approval of the , İzmir/Bornova Veterinary Control Institute Local Animal Experiments Ethics Committee (Decision date and no.: 09.09.2025, E-71705440-550-20966224). In accordance with ethical principles, no invasive procedures were performed on animals during sampling; maximum attention was paid to animal welfare and biosafety regulations.

Teşekkür

The authors would like to thank Zülal Tavlı Yıldırır for their help and support with our animal studies.

Kaynakça

1. Albers, T. M., Henderson, K. S., Mulder, G. B., & Shek, W. R. (2023). Pathogen prevalence estimates and diagnostic methodology trends in laboratory mice and rats from 2003 to 2020. Journal of the American Association for Laboratory Animal Science, 62(3), 229–242. https://doi.org/10.30802/AALAS-JAALAS-22-000097
2. Baker, D. G. (1998). Natural pathogens of laboratory mice, rats, and rabbits and their effects on research. Clinical Microbiology Reviews, 11(2), 231–266. https://doi.org/10.1128/CMR.11.2.231
3. Bakare, A. O., & Owoyele, B. V. (2020). Bromelain reversed electrolyte imbalance in the chronically constricted sciatic nerve of Wistar rats. Naunyn-Schmiedeberg’s Archives of Pharmacology, 393(3), 457–467. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00210-019-01744-8
4. Beyhan, Y. E., Gürler, A. T., Bölükbaş, C. S., Açıcı, M., & Umur, Ş. (2010). Bazı laboratuvar hayvanlarında nekropsi ve dışkı bakısı ile saptanan helmintler. Turkiye Parazitoloji Dergisi, 34(2), 98–101.
5. Beyhan, Y. E., Özkan, A. T., & İde, T. (2013). Laboratuvar fare, sıçan ve kobaylarında dışkı bakısı ile helmintlerin araştırılması. Etlik Veteriner Mikrobiyoloji Dergisi, 24(2), 33–36.
6. Coşkun, N. C. (2024). Design of animal experiments in pharmacological research. Düzce Medical Journal, 26(S1), 87-94. https://doi.org/10.18678/dtfd.1489639
7. Çetinkaya, H., Taş, T., & Vuruşaner, C. (2017). Determination of the parasites in the faeces of laboratory animals by using flotation technique in Istanbul, Turkey. Journal of Istanbul Veterinary Sciences, 1(2), 35–39. https://doi.org/10.30704/http-www-jivs-net.322964
8. Daryani, A., Amouei, A., Pagheh, A. S., Sharif, M., Sarvi, S., Rahimi, M. T., & Rezaei, F. (2023). Prevalence of ecto and gastrointestinal parasites of Rattus rattus in Mazandaran Province, North of Iran. Turkish Journal of Parasitology, 47(1), 53–58. https://doi.org/10.4274/tpd.galenos.2022.85570

9. Easterbrook, J. D., Kaplan, J. B., Vanasco, N. B., Reeves, W. K., Purcell, R. H., Kosoy, M. Y., Glass, G. E., Watson, J., & Klein, S. L. (2007). A survey of zoonotic pathogens carried by Norway rats in Baltimore, Maryland, USA. Epidemiology and Infection, 135(7), 1192–1199. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0950268806007746
10. Garedaghi, Y., & Afshin, K. A. (2014). Prevalence of gastrointestinal and blood parasites of rodents in Tabriz, Iran, with emphasis on parasitic zoonoses. Crescent Journal of Medical and Biological Sciences, 1(1), 9–12.
11. Gálvez, E., Torrel, S., Vargas-Rocha, L., & Rojas-Moncada, J. (2022). Morphoidentification of intestinal nematodes in guinea pigs (Cavia porcellus) from Cajamarca City, Peru. Tissue and Cell, 79, 101972. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tice.2022.101972
12. Gürler, A. T., & Bakan, N. (2017). Helminths of laboratory animals in Turkey: Review. Turkiye Klinikleri Journal of Laboratory Animals, 1(1), 41–48. https://doi.org/10.5336/jlabanim.2016-51547
13. Hendrix, C. M., & Robinson, E. D. (2006). Diagnostic parasitology for veterinary technicians (3rd ed.). Mosby Elsevier
14. Hubbert, C. C., McConnell, W. F., & Danner, R. P. (1975). Parasites of laboratory animals. Iowa State University Press.
15. Kaplan, M., Özavcı, H., Şahin, Z., & Keleştemur, N. (2013). Deney hayvanlarında intestinal helmintlerin dağılımı. 18. Ulusal Parazitoloji Kongresi Bildiri Kitabı, 243. Denizli, Türkiye.
16. Kim, D. G., Park, J. H., Kim, J. L., Jung, B. K., Jeon, S. J., Lim, H., Lee, M. Y., Shin, E. H., Klein, T. A., Kim, H. C., Chong, S. T., Song, J. W., Baek, L. J., & Chai, J. Y. (2015). Intestinal nematodes from small mammals captured near the demilitarized zone, Gyeonggi Province, Republic of Korea. Korean Journal of Parasitology, 53(2), 135–139. https://doi.org/10.3347/kjp.2015.53.2.135
17. Mähler, M., Berard, M., Feinstein, R., Gallagher, A., Illgen-Wilcke, B., Pritchett-Corning, K., & Raspa, M. (2014). FELASA Working Group on Revision of Guidelines for Health Monitoring of Rodents and Rabbits, FELASA recommendations for the health monitoring of mouse, rat, hamster, guinea pig and rabbit colonies in breeding and experimental units. Laboratory Animals, 48(3), 178–192. https://doi.org/10.1177/0023677213516312
18. Manivannan, R., Chidambaram, T., Gopal, R., & Ebenezer, K. S. (2024). Microbial diseases of laboratory animals and its monitoring tools. Journal of Advances in Microbiology, 24(2), 31–46. https://doi.org/10.9734/jamb/2024/v24i2794
19. Medeiros, V. B. (2012). Endo and ectoparasites in conventionally maintained rodents laboratory animals. Journal of Surgical and Clinical Research, 3(1), 27–40. https://doi.org/10.20398/jscr.v3i1.3144
20. Nicklas, W., Hornberger, F. R., Illgen-Wilcke, B., Jacobi, K., Kraft, V., Kunstyr, I., Mahler, M., Meyer, H., & Pohlmeyer-Esch, G. (1999). Implications of infectious agents on results of animal experiments: Report of the Working Group on Hygiene of the Gesellschaft für Versuchstierkunde – Society for Laboratory Animal Science (GV-SOLAS). Laboratory Animals, 33(4), 39–87. https://doi.org/10.1258/002367799780639987
21. Nicklas, W. (2007). Infections in laboratory animals: Importance and control. In E. Kaliste (Eds.), The Welfare of Laboratory Animals (pp. 23–37). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-2271-5_3
22. Nicklas, W., Deeny, A., Diercks, P., Gobbi, A., Illgen-Wilcke, B., & Seidelin, M. (2010). FELASA guidelines for the accreditation of health monitoring programs and testing laboratories involved in health monitoring. Laboratuary Animal, 39(2), 43–48. https://doi.org/10.1038/laban0210-43
23. Ofori, S. A., Amissah-Reynolds, P. K., Addo, A. K., Kyeremeh, O., Dwomoh, J., & Gyasi, D. T. (2025). Hematological, biochemical, and histopathological changes in laboratory rats naturally infected with gastrointestinal parasites. Discovery Animals, 2(1), 19. https://doi.org/10.1007/s44338-025-00064-z
24. Percy, D. H., & Barthold, S. W. (2016). Pathology of laboratory rodents and rabbits (4th ed.). Wiley Blackwell. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118924051
25. Polat, E., Bostan Yörü, H., Kalay, Y., & Akça, S. (2024). The importance of screening programs in laboratory animals and investigation of several important viral agents. Journal of Laboratory Animal Science and Practice, 4(2), 91–100. https://doi.org/10.62425/jlasp.1484805
26. Pritchett-Corning, K. R., & Johnston, N. A. (2002). A review of treatments for the eradication of pinworm infections from laboratory rodent colonies. Contemporary Topics in Laboratory Animal Science, 41(1), 31–41. https://doi.org/10.5555/20023073499
27. Republic of Türkiye Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry. (n.d.). Ruhsatlı Kuruluşlar. HADMEK. https://hadmek.tarimorman.gov.tr/Sayfa/Detay/1477
28. Soulsby, E. J. L. (1982). Helminths, arthropods and protozoa of domesticated animals (7th ed.). Baillière Tindall. Şenlik, B., Diker, A. İ., & Küçükyıldız, F. (2005). Bazı laboratuvar hayvanlarında dışkı muayenesi ile saptanan helmintler. Türkiye Parazitoloji Dergisi, 29(3), 123–125.
29. Tanideh, N., Sadjjadi, S., Mohammadzadeh, T., & Mehrabani, D. (2010). Helminthic infections of laboratory animals in animal house of Shiraz University of Medical Sciences and the potential risks of zoonotic infections for researchers. Iranian Red Crescent Medical Journal, 12(2), 151–157. https://doi.org/10.5812/ircmj.204426
30. Tijjani, M., Abd Majid, R., Abdullahi, S. A., & Unyah, N. Z. (2020). Detection of rodent-borne parasitic pathogens of wild rats in Serdang, Selangor, Malaysia: A potential threat to human health. International Journal for Parasitology: Parasites and Wildlife, 11, 174–182. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijppaw.2020.01.013
31. Van der Giessen, J. W. B., & Ruitenberg, E. J. (1981). Helminth infections in laboratory rodents. Zentralblatt für Bakteriologie Mikrobiologie und Hygiene A, 250(2), 227–234. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0176-6724(81)80048-5
32. Wagner, J. E., & Manning, P. J. (1984). The biology of the laboratory guinea pig. Academic Press.