LETTER TO EDITOR Year : 2022  |  Volume : 15  |  Issue : 11  |  Page : 522-524

Intestinal parasitic infections in Aetas and domesticated swine in Pampanga, Philippines

Jessica Joyce R De Guia1, Mary Jane C Flores2, Derick Erl P Sumalapao3, Eligio Santiago V Maghirang4, Vicente Y Belizario Jr.5
1 Department of Biology, College of Science, De La Salle University, Manila, Philippines
2 Department of Biology; Biological Control Research Unit (BCRU), Center for Natural Sciences and Environmental Research (CENSER), College of Science, Manila; Ehime University-De La Salle University International Collaborative Research Laboratory, De La Salle University, Laguna Campus, Laguna Province, Philippines
3 Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, College of Public Health, University of the Philippines, Manila, Philippines
4 Department of Biology, College of Science, De La Salle University; Department of Internal Medicine-Section of General Medicine; Department of Medical Education and Research, the Makati Medical Center; Department of Emergency Medicine, Asian Hospital and Medical Center, Metro Manila, Philippines
5 Department of Parasitology, College of Public Health, University of the Philippines, Manila, Philippines

Date of Submission26-Aug-2022Date of Decision14-Sep-2022Date of Acceptance15-Oct-2022Date of Web Publication30-Nov-2022

Correspondence Address:
Jessica Joyce R De Guia
Department of Biology, College of Science, De La Salle University, Manila
Philippines

Source of Support: Thesis grant from the Department of Science and Technology-Accelerated Science and Technology Human Resource Development Program (ASTHRDP)., Conflict of Interest: None

DOI: 10.4103/1995-7645.359792

How to cite this article:
De Guia JJ, Flores MJ, Sumalapao DE, Maghirang EV, Belizario Jr. VY. Intestinal parasitic infections in Aetas and domesticated swine in Pampanga, Philippines. Asian Pac J Trop Med 2022;15:522-4
How to cite this URL:
De Guia JJ, Flores MJ, Sumalapao DE, Maghirang EV, Belizario Jr. VY. Intestinal parasitic infections in Aetas and domesticated swine in Pampanga, Philippines. Asian Pac J Trop Med [serial online] 2022 [cited 2022 Dec 1];15:522-4. Available from: https://www.apjtm.org/text.asp?2022/15/11/522/359792
Indigenous peoples account for about 6% of the world’s population and are highly vulnerable to parasitic infections[1],[2]. Aetas, one of the indigenous people groups in the Philippines, rely on backyard swine production as their primary means of livelihood[3]. Literature indicated that zoonoses arise from close physical contact and the cohabitation of humans with domesticated animals[4]. Ascaris spp. and Trichuris spp. both infect humans and swine, and these intestinal parasites lack differences in their morphological characteristics. Cross infections and/or zoonotic potential of these parasites are highly suspected[5]. Limited studies are available on the prevalence of intestinal parasitic infections among IPs and their domesticated animals. Consequentially, this study aims to determine the prevalence of intestinal parasitic infections in Aetas and swine in Brgy. Villa Maria, Porac, Pampanga.

A combination of 223 fecal samples from Aetas (<65 years) and 27 fecal samples from swine were collected. These samples were processed using Formalin-Tween Concentration and Concentration McMaster techniques to qualitatively determine the intestinal parasite infections in Aetas and swine, respectively. The prevalence of intestinal parasites in Aetas and swine was calculated by dividing the number of infected Aetas/swine by the total number of assessed Aetas/swine.

The overall prevalence of intestinal parasitic infection in Aetas was 71.3%. The most prevalent intestinal helminth was Ascaris spp. at 65.4%, followed by Trichuris spp. at 54.7% and hookworm at 44.0%. The most common co-infection was with Ascaris spp.+Trichuris spp. with an overall prevalence of 19.5%; followed by co-infections with Ascaris spp.+Trichuris spp.+hookworm (13.8%), Ascaris spp.+hookworm (9.4%) and Trichuris spp.+hookworm (7.5%) [Table 1].

Table 1: Distribution of intestinal parasite infection in Aetas and swine in Brgy. Villa Maria, Porac, Pampanga [n (%)].

Click here to view

An overall prevalence of 96.3% was recorded from a total of 27 swine examined in the study. The most prevalent intestinal parasite was hookworm at 84.6% followed by Trichuris spp. at 61.5%, Ascaris spp. at 53.8%, and Coccidia spp. at 50.0%. The most common coinfection was with Ascaris spp.+Trichuris spp.+hookworm, with an overall prevalence of 30.8%; followed by co-infections with Ascaris spp.+Trichuris spp.+hookworm+Coccidia spp. (15.4%), Coccidia spp.+hookworm (11.5%), Coccidia spp.+Trichuris spp.+hookworm (7.7%), Trichuris spp.+hookworm (3.8%), and Ascaris spp.+Coccidia spp.+hookworm (3.8%) [Table 1].

The presence of Ascaris spp., Trichuris spp., and hookworm in both Aetas and their domesticated swine may indicate a possible occurrence of zoonosis in the community. These intestinal parasites have zoonotic potential[6]. Majewska et al.[7] claimed that there are limited studies about the definite transmission modes of most zoonotic helminths, including those with high zoonotic potential. Therefore, it is essential to consider the factors that may facilitate its transmission, such as poor hygiene and sanitary practices, close contact with infected animals, and exposure to water and soil contaminated with animal feces[4],[8],[9]. Morphological characterization of intestinal parasites in Aetas and swine limits the identification of the parasites up to species level. Thus, comprehensive molecular techniques and in-depth studies on the factors triggering the zoonotic potential of these parasites are necessary to ascertain possible zoonotic infections between humans and swine, particularly in indigenous’ communities.

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical considerations

The protocol of this study was reviewed and approved following the existing institutional guidelines and by the appropriate authorities from the National Commission for Indigenous Peoples-Region 3 and the Local Government Unit of Porac. Before data collection, the objectives and procedures of the study were explained to the officers of the Rural Health Unit (Porac), Department of Agriculture-Municipality of Porac and Brgy. Villa Maria. The consent letter was well-understood and signed by the parents/guardians for the children’s (lower than 18 years old) participation. Likewise, consent from the owners of the swine was obtained. All Aetas and swine found positive with intestinal parasites were referred to the local health and agricultural units of Porac, respectively, for appropriate management and treatment. The results and recommendations of this study were communicated to the concerned authorities.

Funding

Thesis grant from the Department of Science and Technology-Accelerated Science and Technology Human Resource Development Program (ASTHRDP).

Acknowledgements

We wish to thank the community of Brgy. Villa Maria, Porac, Pampanga for their involvement and support during the conduction of the study. Our sincerest gratitude to officers of the National Commission of Indigenous Peoples (Region 3) and the Local Government Unit of Porac, Pampanga, for their approval and assistance. Special thanks to the Department of Science and Technology-Accelerated Science and Technology Human Resource Development Program (ASTHRDP) thesis grant for providing the funding for this study.

Authors’ contributions

J.J.R.D. and M.J.C.F. designed the study and conducted a literature search. J.J.R.D. and M.J.C.F. performed the data collection and laboratory analysis. Also, both J.J.R.D. and M.J.C.F. wrote and drafted the manuscript. All authors worked on the interpretation and analysis of the data and results. M.J.C.F., D.E.P.S., E.S.V.M., and V.Y.B. Jr critically examined and commented on the manuscript. All authors revised and reviewed the final version of the manuscript before submission.

 

  References 
1.The World Bank. Indigenous peoples. 2022. [Online]. Available from: https://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/indigenouspeoples. [Accessed on 13 September 2022].  
    2.WHO. Neglected tropical diseases: Neglected tropical diseases, hidden success, emerging opportunities. 2009. [Online]. Available from: http://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/44214/9789241598705_eng.pdf. [Accessed on 2 October 2018].  
    3.Tindowen T. The Economic life of the Aetas of Northern Philippines. KJHSS 2016; 19(4): 97-109.  
    4.Barnes A, Davaasuren A, Baasandagva U, Gray, G. A systematic review of zoonotic enteric parasitic diseases among nomadic and pastoral people. PLoS One 2017; 12(11): 1-22.  
    5.Nejsum P, Betson M, Bendall R, Thamsborg S, Stothard J. Assessing the zoonotic potential of Ascaris suum and Trichuris suis: Looking to the future from an analysis of the past. J Helminthol 2012; 86(2): 148-155.  
    6.Schar F, Inpankaew T, Traub R, Khieu V, Dalsgaard A, Chimnoi W, et al. The prevalence and diversity of intestinal parasitic infections in humans and domestic animals in a rural Cambodian village. Parasitol Int 2014; 63(4): 597-603.  
    7.Majewska A, Huang T, Han B, Drake, J. Predictors of zoonotic potential in helminths. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 2021; 376(1837): 20200356.  
    8.Holt H, Inthavong P, Khamlome B, Blaszak K, Keokamphe C, Somoulay V, et al. Endemicity of zoonotic diseases in pigs and humans in lowland and upland Lao PDR: Identification of socio-cultural risk factors. PLoS Negl Trop Dis 2016; 10(4): 1-16.  
    9.Chu DT, Ngoc TU, Chu-Dinh T, Ngoc VTN, Van Nhon B, Pham VH, et al. The possible zoonotic diseases transferring from pig to human in Vietnam. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis 2019; 38(6): 1003-1014.  
    

Publisher’s note The Publisher of the Journal remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

 
 

  [Table 1]