Accessibility / Report Error

Trypanosoma (Herpetosoma) rangeli Tejera, 1920: an updated review


Trypanosoma rangeli, a parasite generally considered non-pathogenic for man, is the second species of human trypanosome to be reported from the New World. The geographical distribution of T. rangeli often overlaps with that of T. cruzi, the same vertebrate and invertebrate hosts being infected. Their differentiation thus becomes of real, practical importance, particularly as they share approximately half the antigenic determinants recognized by the humoral response. Little is known about the life cycle of T. rangeli in the vertebrate host, although thousands of human and wild animal infections have been reported. Recent studies have revealed 2 major phylogenetic lineages in T. rangeli having different characteristics, thus leading to better understanding of the epidemiology and interactions with this parasite's vertebrate hosts and triatomine vectors. Based on further genetic characterization analysis, the authors have proposed 2 alternative hypotheses and consider that T. rangeli could have had clonal evolution or have been subjected to speciation processes.

Trypanosoma rangeli; vectors; reservoirs; biochemistry; genetic characterization

Trypanosoma (Herpetosoma) rangeli Tejera, 1920 - an updated review

Felipe GuhlI; Gustavo Adolfo VallejoII

ICentro de Investigaciones en Microbiología y Parasitología Tropical, Universidad de los Andes, A.A. 4976, Bogotá, Colombia

IILaboratorio de Investigaciones en Parasitología Tropical, Departamento de Biología, Universidad del Tolima, Ibagué, Colombia

Correspondence Correspondence to Felipe Guhl Fax: +57-1-332.4540 E-mail:


Trypanosoma rangeli, a parasite generally considered non-pathogenic for man, is the second species of human trypanosome to be reported from the New World. The geographical distribution of T. rangeli often overlaps with that of T. cruzi, the same vertebrate and invertebrate hosts being infected. Their differentiation thus becomes of real, practical importance, particularly as they share approximately half the antigenic determinants recognized by the humoral response. Little is known about the life cycle of T. rangeli in the vertebrate host, although thousands of human and wild animal infections have been reported.

Recent studies have revealed 2 major phylogenetic lineages in T. rangeli having different characteristics, thus leading to better understanding of the epidemiology and interactions with this parasite's vertebrate hosts and triatomine vectors.

Based on further genetic characterization analysis, the authors have proposed 2 alternative hypotheses and consider that T. rangeli could have had clonal evolution or have been subjected to speciation processes.

Keywords: Trypanosoma rangeli - vectors - reservoirs - biochemistry - genetic characterization

Trypanosoma rangeli is the second trypanosome species frequently found to be infecting humans in Latin-American countries. Even though T. rangeli is apathogenic for the vertebrate host, its biological and epidemiological characteristics are studied within the context of the biology and epidemiology of T. cruzi (the causative agent for Chagas disease), as in some areas of America both species produce mixed infections in vectors making species' morphological differentiation difficult (Vallejo et al.1988) or producing mixed infections in vertebrates, generating crossed serological reactions complicating the specific diagnosis of Chagas' infection (Guhl & Marinkelle 1982, Guhl et al.1985, 1987). This parasite thus generates important practical consequences in the epidemiology of American trypanosomiasis, as the presence of T. rangeli in those areas which are endemic for T. cruzi poses the need for devolving methodologies guaranteeing the correct diagnosis of Chagas disease.

The parasite

T. rangeli is a trypanosome of man and other vertebrates, characterized by possessing a similar morphological structure to that of T. lewisi, the species belonging to the Herpetosoma subgenus that are transmitted by reduviid bite. The sanguineous form of T. rangeli is slender, being 26 to 34 µm in length, including the free flagellum. It has a small, round, subterminal kinetoplast; the nucleus is close to the middle of the body and the undulating membrane is well-developed. Triatomid vectors become infected on ingesting animals' blood with T. rangeli. The parasite subsequently develops within the insect's intestine, producing forms similar to amastigotes, short epimastigotes, large epimastigotes spheromastigotes and tripomastigotes (Vallejo et al. 1988). The most outstanding biological characteristics (regarding T. rangeli in a vector) are presented by flagellate penetration from the intestine towards the haemolymph and salivary gland invasion accompanied by metacyclic tripomastigote formation becoming infectious for the vertebrate host through an insect's bite. A trypanosome must show morphology in a vertebrate's blood compatible with the Herpetosoma subgenus' characteristics to become consideredsensu stricto as being T. rangeli and it must be able to infect triatomine vectors with concomitant infectious metacyclic tripomastigote formation in the salivary glands. Therefore, according to the foregoing, flagellates having Herpetosoma subgenus morphology isolated from triatomid intestine or vertebrate blood, capable of developing within the intestine, but having been biologically proved as being incapable of invading the haemolymph and producing metacyclic tripomastigotes in triatomid vector salivary glands, cannot be considered to be T. rangeli, thus being defined as being similar to T. rangeli or T. rangeli-like.

Biologically proven T. rangeli vectors

Triatomine insects represent the biologically proven vectors for T. rangeli, being capable of developing infectious metacyclic tripomastigotes in their salivary glands in natural or experimental conditions. The development of T. rangeli in salivary glands and its vectorial capacity through biting in natural or experimental conditions has been proved in 12 out of the 15 species of Rhodnius currently described (Table I). In addition to the aforementioned vectors, natural T. rangeli infection has only been reported in the salivary glands of T. dimidiata captured in human dwellings in Colombia, being transmitted to a vertebrate host via bite (Marinkelle 1968a); recent studies in our laboratory have shown that experimental intrafemoral infection with T. rangeli forms in T. dimidiata infect the salivary glands after 40 days in 4% of the studied insects (unpublished data). The simple presence of flagellates similar to those of T. rangeli in an insect's intestine does not constitute a test of the insect's vectorial capacity, as the definitive evidence consists of demonstrating the presence of metacyclic tripomastigote in salivary glands being infective for a vertebrate.

T. rangeli-like trypanosomes being recorded in other triatomines

T. rangeli-like trypanosome have been observed in the intestine (but not in the haemolymph or salivary glands) of 16 species corresponding to 5 triatomid genera (Cavernicola, Eratyrus, Dipetalogaster, Panstrongylus and Triatoma), constituting a conclusive test that they are not T. rangeli vectors (D'Alessandro 1976, D'Alessandro-Bacigalupo & GoreSaravia 1992, 1999).

Reports of T. rangeli-like trypanosome in animal blood

Several species of trypanosome belonging to the Herpetosoma subgenus have been named and reported in sloths, anteater bear and non-human primates in several Latin-American countries (Table II). Due to these parasites being developed within the intestine but not in the haemolymph or salivary glands of triatomid vectors, different authors have considered this species as being T. rangeli-like (Hoare 1972, D'Alessandro 1976).


Herpetosoma subgenus species usually have specific hosts; however, T. rangeli presents a wide range of vertebrate reservoirs distributed among 5 orders: Edentata, Marsupialia, Carnivora, Rodentia and Primates (D'Alessandro 1976, D'Alessandro-Bacigalupo & Gore-Saravia,1992, 1999, Cuba Cuba 1998). Different species, including rats, mice, hamsters, rabbits, dogs, guinea-pigs, bat and primates have all been experimentally infected with T. rangeli.

Human infection

In spite of human infections by T. rangeli being frequently registered in different American countries, it is difficult to establish a global figure due to serologically crossed reactions with T. cruzi (Guhl & Marinkelle 1982, Guhl et al. 1985, 1987). However, several publications have demonstrated the presence of T. rangeli in humans by direct examination, haemoculture or xenodiagnosis leading to more than 2,600 cases of human infection being registered: 1,144 cases in Venezuela; 1,117 in Guatemala; 181 in Panama; 121 in Colombia; 61 in El Salvador; 4 in Costa Rica; and 2 cases in Peru (D'Alessandro 1976, D'Alessandro-Bucigalupo & Gore-Saravia 1992, Grisard et al. 1999). Coura et al. reported the first case of human infection by T. rangeli in Brazil(1996).

Biological characteristics

Biological characterization of T. rangeli has shown the existence of intra-specific variations. For example, the experimental transmission of T. rangeli to a vertebrate host by means of infected triatomid faeces was published by Coutinho and Nussennzweig (1952). Similar data was obtained by HerbigSandreuter (1955), who showed infection in 2 out of 20 lactating mice, and Grewal (1956) who described this parasite's transmission by the same route. On the other hand, other authors (Tobie 1964, Cuba-Cuba et al.1972, D'Alessandro 1976, Hecker et al.1990, Steindel et al. 1991) have not been able to link infection in mice with inoculating flagellates present in the faeces of T. rangeli infected triatomids.In addition to the mainnatural T. rangeli infection route (which is the inoculative route via an insect's saliva), experimental infection of mammals by inoculating forms of T. rangeli culture from different strains has been described (D'Alessandro 1976, Steindel etal. 1991).

The literature has shown heterogeneous results regarding T. rangeli persistencein vertebrate host blood. In this sense, Añez (1981) and Añez et al.(1985) could not prove the parasite's presence by xenodiagnosis or haemoculture in mice and Didelphis marsupialis following 50 or 60 days' infection with a T. rangeli strainoriginating from Venezuela. On the other hand, Steindel (1993) has shown the presence of T. rangeli by haemoculture in mice following a period of 7 months' infection. The parasite has been detected after 13 months' (Paredes & Paredes 1949) and after 18 months' infection (Groot et al.1950, Groot 1954) in natural and experimental human infection using the same technique.

Vector susceptibility to infection with T. rangeli

It has been observed that the triatomids (particularly from the Rhodnius genus) are susceptible to T. rangeli strains having the same geographical origin (Cuba Cuba et al. 1972, Cuba Cuba 1998, D'Alessandro1976, D'Alessandro-Bacigalupo & Gore-Saravia1992, 1999, Machado et al. 2001). Several T. rangeli strains have shown variable behaviour in different Rhodnius species; for example, strains from Colombia and Costa Rica do not produce metacyclic tripomastigotes in R. pallescens or R. ecuadoriensis. On the other hand, R. neglectus does not present salivary gland invasion when infected with strains from Panama or Costa Rica (D'Alessandro 1976). We have recently observed that T. rangeli strains isolated from R. colombiensis do not develop in the salivary glands of R. prolixus (Vallejo et al. 2002).

Pathogenicity to the insect vector

The pathological effect of T. rangeli on R. prolixus was first observed by Grewal (1956, 1957). The author observed an increased amount of haemolymph and moulting deformities leading to high mortality. Other workers have confirmed different degrees of pathogenicity of T. rangeli for its vectors (Tobie 1964, 1965, Gomez 1967, Marinkelle 1968b, Watkins 1971a, b).

Multiplication in a vertebrate host

A question which continues to be the object of controversy is whether T. rangeli really does present some form of reproduction in a vertebrate host. In this sense, UrdanetaMorales and Tejero (1985) have described parasitaemia 7 times greater than that of the inoculum applied experimentally in lactating mice. A significant increase in the number of sanguineous tripomastigotes, following inoculation with a defined number of flagellates, suggests that T. rangeli probably multiplies within the vertebrate. Several researchers have sought in vain for forms of this parasite in the tissue of experimentally infected animals. For example, each tissue of mice infected with T. rangeli were histologically cross-sectioned; no tissue lesion or intracellular form was found in the 150 mice examined (HerbigSandreuter 1955). Grisard et al. (1999) recently studied several T. rangeli strains' interaction with mouse peritoneal macrophages, VERO, L929 and J77413 murine promonocyte cells, observing that less than 10% of such cells presented intracellular forms similar to those of amastigotes. These parasites disappeared 2 to 5 days after being infected without new free flagellates appearing in culture. Contrary to the forgoing, there are reports in the literature indicating the presence of reproductive T. rangeli forms in vertebrates (Grogl & Kuhn 1984, Scorza et al. 1986, Urdaneta Morales & Tejero 1986, Osorio et al. 1995). UrdanetaMorales and Tejero (1986) have described finding T. rangeli amastigote forms in cross-sections of heart, liver and spleen taken from NMRI lactating mice inoculated with forms of Venezuelan Perro82 strain culture. Osorio et al. (1995) demonstrated the presence of T. rangeli amastigotes in human U937 fibroblast culture. Such reports present the possibility that T. rangeli reproduction in a vertebrate host could depend on the characteristics of that strain being used. The reproductive phase of T. rangeli in the vertebrate host is currently not known and the mentioned observations need to be confirmed using cloned strains of T. rangeli to eliminate any possibility of contamination with T. cruzi.

It has been observed that failure to experimentally infect susceptible mammals with T. rangeli has been related to the loss of flagellates' infectivity when they are kept in vitro for a long time. This phenomenon has been observed even when flagellates are formed in proven triatomid vectors' salivary glands, but (for as yet unknown reasons) the metatripomastigotes become non-infective (D'Alessandro 1976). According to the foregoing, it has thus become considered that T. rangeli strains must be studied as soon as possible after their isolation, before some of their main biological characteristics can become modified. Alternatively, several researchers have designed mechanisms for cyclically maintaining T. rangeli in a laboratory, by means of mousetriatomineculture, serial passages (Tobie 1964, 1968, D'Alessandro 1972, Cuba Cuba 1975). Vallejo et al. (1986) developed a maintenance system for maintaining T. rangeli strain infectivity, having serial passages each three months in culturetriatomine-mouseculture by means of which several strains have been kept for 20 years without losing their infectivity for vertebrate hosts.

Biochemical characteristics

Several biochemical methods have been used for characterizing T. rangeli. The most promising have been: sensitivity to lysis mediated by the complement; characterizing surface sugars by using lectins; neuraminidase production; antigenic characterization; and isoenzyme analysis.

By contrast with T. cruzi culture epimastigotes, T. rangeli culture epimastigotes are resistant to complement lysis activated by alternate pathway. This difference in susceptibility to lysis mediated by the complement has been used to differentiate the 2 species in culture or at vector intestine level (Schottelius & Muller 1984, Marinkelle et al. 1985).

Several researchers have characterized T. cruzi and T. rangeli surface sugars (Schottelius & Muller 1984, Miranda Santos & Pereira 1984, Schottelius et al. 1986, Marinkelle et al. 1986, Schottelius 1989). The results of this body of research have shown several lectins' specific affinity for Dgalactose, Nacetylgalactosamine, N-acetylglucosamine and Nacetylneuraminic acid sugars on the surface of T. cruzi epimastigotes. The same researchers have found that T. cruzi and T. rangeli culture epimastigotes present mannose and glucose on their cell surface, presenting common agglutination with Canavalia ensiformis, Pisum sativum and Lens culinaris lectins. Miranda Santos and Pereira (1984) have reported specific Vicia villosa affinity (N-acetylgalactosamine affinity) for T. rangeli culture epimastigotes. Ongoing research indicates that T. cruzi has greater surface sugar abundance and diversity than that reported for T. rangeli. González et al. (1996) assayed extracts from 176 species of Colombian plant seeds and haemolymph from 16 native invertebrate species; they found that 7 seed extracts and 1 type of haemolymph agglutinated to T. cruzi and T. rangeli and 5 extracts agglutinated exclusively to T. cruzi, but none of the extracts agglutinated exclusively to T. rangeli.

Neuraminidase production

Pereira and Moss (1985) reported that T. rangeli culture epimastigotes produced neuraminidase in easily detectable quantities (compared to T. cruzi culture epi-mastigotes). This enzyme thus becomes an important biochemical marker leading to the 2 species of flagellates being able to be differentiated. Vallejo and Marinkelle (1992) used 3 methods for detecting the presence of neuraminidase in the promesenteron, postmesenteron, rectal ampulla, haemolymph and salivary glands of 600 R. prolixus experimentally infected with T. rangeli San Agustín. Haemoglutination methods using peanut lectin (Arachis hypogaea), fluorescence reaction with peanut lectin conjugated with fluorescein isothiocyanate and fluorescence emitted by 4methyl-umbeliferone showed neuraminidase presence in all cases in T. rangeli culture supernatant in Tobie medium having 8 to 15 days growth. None of the 3 methods detected neuraminidase presence in R. prolixus infected with T. rangeli, indicating that this enzyme is probably not produced in vivo or was produced in non-detectable quantities by the methods used.

Antigenic characterization

Different studies have shown that T. rangeli presents a crossed antigenic reaction with T. cruzi. This crossed reaction has been shown by immunoelectrophoresis, ELISA, indirect immunofluorescence, immunoblotting, double immunodiffusion (Afchain et al. 1979, Antony et al. 1979, Guhl & Marinkelle 1982, Grogl & Kuhn 1984, Basso et al. 1989, O' Daly et al. 1994, Saldaña & Sousa 1996). These studies have generally shown that the 2 parasite species share at least 60% of their antigens. Other studies have also pointed to an apparent diminution of the severity of Chagas disease symptomatology when there is mixed infection by the 2 parasite species (Guhl et al. 1985, Hudson et al. 1988).

Analysis of isoenzymes in T. rangeli

Analysis of several hundred T. cruzi strains isolated in different Latin-American countries has led to information being obtained regarding this parasite's genetic structure. On the contrary, few isoenzyme studies have been done on T. rangeli; also, only a small number of strains have been used in each study. A first approach using enzymes for studying T. rangeli was reported by Kreutzer and Sousa (1981); they described differences in isoenzyme profiles for strains from Panama. Ebert (1986) studied T. rangeli isoenzymes and their relationship to other trypanosomes transmitted by triatomids. This author found that 3 out of the 9 enzymes examined showed T. rangeli-specific profiles (NSE, PGM and GP1). He also found little enzymatic variation for the 14 strains examined. Holguin et al. (1987) later analyzed T. rangeli strains from wild and domestic cycles in Colombia. When the above authors were studying 14 enzymes (GP1, PEP, MPI, PGM, ALAT, ASAT, ACON, MDH, KP: kinase piruvate, ICD, G6PD, LDH, KGP: kinase phosphoglycerate, ME) they found that only the ICD enzyme showed some variation, indicating that the isoenzymes did not manage to differentiate domestic strains from the wild ones, contrary to that found for T. cruzi. Acosta et al.(1991) differentiated T. cruzi from T. rangeli from Honduras by using 4 methodologies (lysis susceptibility by complement, lectin reactivity, reactivity to monoclonal T. cruzi-specific antibodies and isoenzyme electrophoretic patterns).

An important contribution was made towards the isoenzymatic characterization of T. rangeli by Steindel et al. (1994) who used 16 T. rangeli strains; 8 of these were isolated from R. prolixus and patients from Honduras, Colombia and Venezuela, whilst another 8 came from P. megistus or rodents (Echimys dasythrix) from the state of Santa Catarina in Southern Brazil. These authors studied 5 enzymes (ALAT, ASAT, GP1, PGM, ME), finding that all the Santa Catarina strains were isoenzymatically identical. Those strains from Honduras, Colombia and Venezuela also formed a highly homogeneous group. The 2 groups showed different patterns for all enzymes, except for the malic enzyme. This suggested the existence of 2 different groups of T. rangeli strains.

Triana et al. (1999) recently studied the genetic variability of T. cruzi and T. rangeli strains isolated from different hosts. They found low variability in 3 T. rangeli strains when using electrophoresis on 15 systems' enzymatic and analyzed DNA (kDNA) digested with endonucleases.

Molecular karyotypes

Analysis of several T. rangeli strains' molecular karyotypes has shown variation in the size of the chromosomic bands ranging from 400 Kb to 2,900 Kb, revealing chromosomic polymorphism between strains isolated from El Salvador, Honduras, Venezuela, Colombia and Panama and strains from Southern Brazil (Henriksson et al. 1996, Toaldo et al. 2001).

Kinetoplast DNA (kDNA)

During the last 20 years, kDNA sequences have been used for tripanosomatid diagnosis and characterization. This extranuclear DNA forms a compact network within a mitochondrial complex. kDNA represents these parasites' mitochondrial genome, constituting between 10% and 20% of cellular DNA. The kDNA network has between 5,000 and 10,000 minicircles whose size varies from 0.5 Kb (Trypanosoma vivax) to 2.5 Kb (Crithidia fasciculata) and has 25 to 50 maxicircle copies varying between 19 Kb (Bodo caudatus) and 39 Kb (Phytomonas davidii) (Vallejo 1998). The maxicircles are similar to higher eukaryote mitochondrial DNA, codifying ribosomal RNAs and proteins involved in translating energy in the mitochondria (Simpson 1987). The presence of large quantities of minicircles reflects these organisms' ability to revise mitochondrial transcripts' nucleotide sequences by a new process called RNA editing, in which several uracil residues are inserted or eliminated at specific sites in the sequence (Stuart & Feagin 1992).

Linearized minicircles can be easily observed when tripanosomatid total DNA or kDNA is digested with some restriction enzymes. For example, regarding T. rangeli, total DNA digestion with Hae III allows bands corresponding to 1.8 and 1.6 Kb to be visualized in agarose gels (Vallejo et al. 1994). All minicircles present at least one conserved or minirepeat region varying between 100 and 200 bp. Each tripanosomatid specie has the same number of conserved regions. Only one conserved region has been observed in C. oncopelti, T. brucei and Leishmania tarentolae. There are 2 copies of the conserved region in C. fasciculata, T. lewisi and Phytomonas serpens organized as direct repetitions, located at 1,800 bp from each other. There are 4 copies of the conserved region in T. cruzi organized as direct repetitions, located at 90o. It is worth stating that minicircles have been observed in the same T. rangeli strain or clone having 1, 2 and 4 conserved regions (Recinos et al. 1994, Vallejo et al. 1994). Comparing T. cruzi and T. rangeli minicircle conserved regions reveals high homology in conserved sequence block (CSB1, CSB2 and CSB3) sequence, order and distance. Primers have been designed on these blocks for detecting T. cruzi or T. rangeli by using PCR. The S35 and S36 primers have amplified a 330 bp fragment with high sensitivity leading to 0.015 fg or 10 parasite minicircles (Sturm et al.1989) or a parasite in 20 ml of blood being detected. These same primers were used recently to detect T. cruzi in mummified tissue from Northern Chile (Guhl et al.1997). These primers also react with T. rangeli minicircles, allowing amplification of a 760 bp fragment derived from 1,600 bp minicircles having two conserved regions and a heterogeneous set of fragments from 300 to 450 bp derived from 1,600 bp minicircles from 4 conserved regions (Vallejo et al. 1999).

Vallejo et al. (2002, 2003), designed a duplex polymerase chain reaction (PCR) reaction using 3 primers (S35/S36/KP1L) allowing amplification from minicircles with a conserved region (denoted as KP1), 2 conserved regions (denoted as KP2) and 4 conserved regions (denoted as KP3). Strains isolated from R. prolixus presented K1, KP2 and KP3 minicircle amplification products. On the other hand, strains isolated from R. colombiensis R. pallescens or P. megistus presented amplification products derived from KP2 and KP3 minicircles, but not from KP1. Vallejo et al. (2002), examined 150 R. colombiensis adults, finding T. rangeli KP1(+) and KP1(-) in the intestine of several specimens and T. rangeli KP1(-) in salivary glands in 15 individuals, indicating that in natural infections, KP1(+) strains can be found in the intestine but these strains do not invade R. colombiensis haemolymph and salivary glands. The authors observed a similar situation in 90 examined R. prolixus where it was possible to find T. rangeli KP1 (-) and KP1(+) in the intestine of several specimens, T. rangeli KP1(+) only being detected in the salivary glands of 12 individuals. The foregoing data suggests that some Rhodnius genus species are susceptible to T. rangeli KP1(+) strains and others to KP1(-), so that each Rhodnius species would select the sub-population to which it is susceptible in nature to transmit it by salivary inoculation to the vertebrate host.

Nuclear DNA

Macedo et al. (1993) carried out a minisatellite study (VNTR) using a 33.15 probe. The multiband pattern which they obtained allowed T. cruzi to be differentiated from T. rangeli. The dendrogram obtained revealed the existence of two groups, one formed by T. rangeli strains from Central America, Colombia and Venezuela and another formed by T. rangeli strains from Southeastern Brazil (Santa Catarina).

Randon Amplified Polymorphic DNA (RAPD)

Few studies have been done using APPCR for T. rangeli characterization. In a first study, analysis of 138 RAPD bands generated by 6 primers showed that 2 T. rangeli strains from Santa Catarina formed a group separated from another group of 8 T. rangeli strains isolated from Honduras, Colombia and Venezuela (Steindel et al. 1994).

Histone genes and other repetitive elements

The gene encoding H2A histone was isolated and characterized from the T. rangeli C23 strain (Puerta et al. 2000). It was observed that this gene was organized into tandem repetitions, located in a 1.9 Mb chromosome; it transcribed 0.7 kb mRNA.

At least 10 different nuclear DNA repetitive elements have been described in T. cruzi (Requena et al. 1996). On the contrary, few T. rangeli nuclear DNA repetitive elements have been reported in the literature. P542 is an element possessing 103 copies per haploid genome and is found to be distributed throughout several chromosomic bands. The element has been sequenced in an attempt to design primers for detecting the parasite's presence. Preliminary studies have shown that this element is very useful for detecting T. rangeli in the intestine of vectors naturally infected with mixed T. cruzi and T. rangeli infections (Vargas et al. 2000).

Genetic characterization of T. rangeli

Little is known about the genetic structure of T. rangeli; few studies have analyzed multiple loci (isoenzymes and RAPDs), thus limiting genetic studies regarding this parasite's populations. Vallejo et al. (2003), recently observed a non-random association between mitochondrial kDNA amplification and nuclear mini-exon gene, indicating dimorphism within both DNA sequences: KP1, KP2 and KP3 or KP2 and KP3 products for kDNA and 380 bp or 340 bp products for the mini-exon. Either KP1, KP2 and KP3 kDNA product association with the 340 bp mini-exon product or KP2 and KP3 kDNA product association with the 380 bp mini-exon product was observed within individual strains. On the other hand, several T. rangeli strains from distant geographical origins have been shown to have identical kDNA (KP2 and KP3) and mini-exon profiles (380 bp), indicating that kDNA and mini-exon genotypes are replicated as a unit, without recombination and that this strict correlation between the markers persists over distant localities. Based on these results, the authors propose two alternative hypotheses, considering that T. rangeli could have clonal evolution or have been subjected to speciation processes.

However, further work must be done with populations having different geographical origins, a greater number of strains must be used and population genetic analysis within each of the two groups, using a multi-locus approach, could lead to resolving the difference between the two hypotheses. Statistical tests of population genetic data should be done and if there is still a linkage disequilibrium after such analysis, then this favours clonal evolution rather than cryptic speciation.

Received 25 March 2003

Accepted 8 April 2003

  • Acosta L, Romanha AJ, Cosenza H, Krettli AU 1991. Trypanosomatid isolated from Honduras: Differentiation between Trypanosoma cruzi and Trypanosoma rangeli. Am J Trop Med Hyg 44: 676-683.
  • Afchain D, Le Ray D, Fruit J, Capron A 1979. Antigenic makeup of Trypanosoma cruzi culture forms: identification of a specific component. J Parasitol 65: 507-514.
  • Anthony RL, Johnson CM, Sousa OE 1979. Use of microELISA for quantitating antibody to Trypanosoma cruzi and Trypanosoma rangeli. Am J Trop Med Hyg 28: 969-973.
  • Añez N 1981. Studies on Trypanosoma rangeli Tejera, 1920. 1. Deposition, migration and growth of T. rangeli in two mammals. In Canning Parasitological Topics, Special Publication of the Society of Protozoologists, Alien Press, Kansas, USA, p. 19-25.
  • Añez N, Velandia J, Rodríguez AM 1985. Estudios sobre T. rangeli Tejera, 1920. VIII. Respuestas a las reinfecciones en los mamiféros. Mem Inst Oswaldo Cruz 80: 149-153.
  • Basso B, Morett ER, Dfontela S, VotteroCima E 1989. Trypanosoma (Schizotrypanum) cruzi and Trypanosoma (Herpetosoma) rangeli. II.Overlapping of antigenic spectrum. Rev Lat Microbiol 31: 141-146.
  • Coura JR, Fernández O, Arboleda M, Barret TV, Carrara N, Degrave W, Campbell DA 1996. Human infection by Trypanosoma rangeli in the Brazilian Amazon. Trans R Soc Trop Med Hyg 90: 278-279.
  • Coutinho JD, Nussenzweig V 1952. Infecção experimental de triatomids pelo Trypanosoma rangeli Tejera, 1920. Folia Clin Biol 18: 181-188.
  • Cuba-Cuba C 1975. Estudo de uma cepa peruana de Trypanosoma rangeli W. Observações sobre a evolução e morfogênese na hemocele e nas glândulas salivares de Rhodnius ecuadoriensis. Rev Inst Med Trop São Paulo 17: 283-297.
  • Cuba-Cuba C 1998. Revisión de los aspectos biológicos y diagnósticos del Trypanosoma (Herpetosoma) rangeli. Rev Soc Bras Med Trop 31: 207-220.
  • Cuba-Cuba C, Morales N, Fernandez E, Fernández W 1972. Hallazgo de Rhodnius ecuadoriensis Lent & León, 1958 infectado por tripanosomas similares a Trypanosoma rangeli Tejera, 1920 en caseríos del distrito de Cascas, Contumazá, Dpto de Cajamarca, Perú. Rev Inst Med Trop São Paulo 14: 191-202.
  • D'Alessandro A 1972. New experimental vectors of Colombian Trypanosoma rangeli. J Med Ent 9:187-195.
  • D'Alessandro A 1976. Biology of Trypanosoma (Herpetosoma) rangeli Tejera, 1920. In WHR Lumsden & DA Evans (eds), Biology of Kinetoplastida,Vol. 1, Academic Press, London, New York and San Francisco, p. 327-493.
  • D'Alessandro A, Hincapié O 1986. Rhodnius neivai: a new experimental vector of Trypanosoma rangeli. Am J Trop Med Hyg 35: 512-514.
  • D'AlessandroBacigalupo A, GoreSaravia N 1992. Trypanosoma rangeli In JP Kreier, Parasitic Protozoa VW, Academic Press, San Diego, New York, Boston, London, Sydney, Tokyo, Toronto, p. 154.
  • D'AlessandroBacigalupo A, GoreSaravia N 1999. Trypanosoma rangeli In HM Gilles, Protozoal Diseases, Oxford University Press, Oxford, p. 398-412.
  • Ebert F 1986. Isoenzymes of Trypanosoma rangeli stocks and their relation to other trypanosomes transmitted by triatomine bugs. Trop Med Parasitol 37: 251-254.
  • Gomez I 1967. Nuevas observaciones acerca de la acción patógena del Trypanosoma rangeli Tejera, 1920 sobre Rhodnius prolixus Stal, 1859. Rev Inst Med Trop São Paulo 9: 5-10.
  • González JE, Barrios LA, Vallejo GA, Marinkelle CJ, Guhl F 1996. Nuevas fuentes de lectinas para la diferenciación entre Trypanosoma cruzi y T rangeli. Rev Bras Biol 56: 627-637.
  • Grewal MS 1956. Trypanosoma rangeli Tejera, 1920 in its vertebrate and invertebrate hosts. Trans R Soc Trop Med Hyg 50: 301-302.
  • Grewal MS 1957. Pathogenicity of Trypanosoma rangeli Tejera, 1920 in the invertebrate host. Exp Parasitol 6: 123-130.
  • Grisard EC, Steindel M, Guamieri AA, Eger-Mangrich I, Campbell DA, Romahna AJ 1999. Characterization of Trypanosoma rangeli strains isolated in Central and South America: an overview. Mem Inst Oswaldo Cruz 94: 203-209.
  • Grogl M, Kuhn RE 1984. Identification of antigens of culture of Trypanosoma cruzi and Trypanosoma rangeli recognized by sera from patients with chronic Chagas disease. J Parasitol 70: 822-824.
  • Groot H 1954. Estudios sobre los tripanosomas humanos (T. rangeli y T. ariari). Ann Soc Biol Bog 6: 109-126.
  • Groot H, Renjifo S, Uribe C 1950. Nota preliminar sobre inoculación a un voluntario humano con Trypanosoma sp. (ariari). Ann Soc Biol Bog 4: 99-103.
  • Guhl F, Marinkelle CJ 1982. Antibodies against Trypanosoma cruzi in mice infected with T. rangeli. Ann Trop Med Parasi-tol 76: 361.
  • Guhl F, Vallejo GA 1999. Interruption of Chagas disease transmission in the Andean countries: Colombia. Mem Inst Oswaldo Cruz 94 (Suppl. 1): 413-415.
  • GuhI F, Hudson L, Marinkelle CJ, Morgan S, Jaramillo C 1985. Antibody response to experimental Trypanosoma rangeli infection and its implications for immunodiagnosis of South American trypanosomiasis. Acta Trop 42: 311-318.
  • Guhl F, Hudson L, Marinkelle CJ, Jaramillo CA, Bridge D 1987. Clinical Trypanosoma rangeli infection as a complication of Chagas' disease. Parasitology 94: 475-484.
  • Guhl F, Jaramillo C, Yockteng R, Vallejo GA, CárdenasArroyo F 1997. Trypanosoma cruzi in human mummies. The Lancet 149 (9062): 1370.
  • Hecker H, Scharzenbach M, Rudin W 1990. Development and interactions of T. rangeli in with the reduviid bug Rhodnius prolixus. Parasitol Res 76: 311318.
  • Henríksson J, Solarj A, Rydaker M, Sousa OE, Pettersson U 1996. Karyotype variability in Trypanosoma rangeli. Parasitology 112: 385-391.
  • Herbig-Sandreuter A 1955. Untersuchungen uber den Cyclus von T. rangelí Tejera 1920 im Warmbluter und in Rhodnius prolixus. Acta Trop 12: 261-264.
  • Hoare CA 1972. Herpetosoma from man and other mammals. In The Trypanosomes of Mammals: A Zoological Monograph, Blackwell Scientific Publications, Oxford, p. 288-314.
  • Holguín AF, Saravia NG, D'Alessandro A 1987. Lack of enzyme polymorphism in Trypanosoma rangeli stocks from sylvatic and domiciliary transmission cycles in Colombia. Am Soc Trop Med Hyg 36: 53-58.
  • Hudson L, Guhl F, De Sánchez N, Bridge D, Jaramillo CA, Young A 1988. Longitudinal studies of the immune response of Colombian patients infected with Trypanosoma cruzi and T. rangeli. Parasitology 96: 449-460.
  • Kreutzer RD, Souza OE 1981. Biochemical characterization of Trypanosoma spp. by isoenzyme electrophoresis. Am J Trop Med Hyg 30: 308-317.
  • Macedo AM, Vallejo GA, Chiari E, Pena SDJ 1993. DNA fingerprinting reveals relationships between strains of Trypanosoma rangeli and Trypanosoma cruzi In SDJ Pena, R Chakraborty, JT Epplen, AJ Jeffreys (eds), DNA Fingerprinting: State of the Science, Birkhauser Verlag, Basel, Switzerland, p. 321-329
  • Machado PE, Eger-Mangrich I, Rosa G, Koerich LB, Grisard EC, Steindel M 2001. Differential susceptibility of triatominae of the genus Rhodnius to Trypanosoma rangeli strains from different geographical origins. Int J Parasitol 31: 631-633.
  • Marinkelle CJ 1968a. Triatoma dimidiata capitata, a natural vector of Trypanosoma rangeli in Colombia. Rev Biol Trop 15: 203-205.
  • Marinkelle CJ 1968b. Pathogenicity of Trypanosoma rangeli for Rhodnius prolixus Stal in nature. J Med Entomol 5: 497-499.
  • Marinkelle CJ, Vallejo GA, Guhl F, De Sánchez N 1985. Diferenciación entre Trypanosoma cruzi y T. rangeli en el intestino del vector Rhodnius prolixus, en base al comportamiento de estos flagelados frente a la actividad lítica del complemento. Rev Lat Microbiol (México) 27: 21-25.
  • Marinkelle CJ, Vallejo GA, Guhl F, De Sánchez N 1986. The affinity of the lectins Ricinus communis and GIycine maxima to carbohydrates of the cell surface of various forms of Trypanosoma cruzi and Trypanosoma rangeli, and the application of these lectins for the identification of T. cruzi in the faeces of Rhodnius prolixus. Acta Trop 43: 215-223.
  • Miranda Santos IKF, Pereira MEA 1984. Lectin discriminates between pathogenic and non-pathogenic South American trypanosomes. Am J Trop Med Hyg 33: 839-844.
  • O'Daly JA, Carrasco H, Fernandez V, Rodríguez MB 1994. Comparison of chagasic and nonchagasic myocardiopathies by ELISA and immunoblotting with antigens of Trypanosoma cruzi and Trypanosoma rangeli. Acta Trop 56: 265-287.
  • Osorio Y, Travi B, Palma GI, Saravia NG 1995. Infectivity of Trypanosoma rangeli in a promonocitic mammalian cell line. J Parasitol 81: 687-693.
  • Paredes CH, Paredes R 1949. Un caso de infección humana por Trypanosoma rangeli. Rev Fac Med Bog 18: 343-375.
  • Pereira EEA, Moss D 1985. Neuraminidase activity in Trypanosoma rangeli. Mol Biochem Parasitol 15: 95-103.
  • Puerta C, Cuervo P, Thomas MC, López MC 2000. Molecular characterization of the histone H2A gene from the parasite Trypanosoma rangeli. Parasitol Res 86: 916-922.
  • Recinos RF, Kirchhoff LV, Donelson JE 1994. Characterization of kinetoplast DNA minicircles in T. rangeli. Mol Biochem Parasitol 63: 59-67.
  • Requena JM, López MC, Alonso C 1996. Genomic repetitive DNA elements of Trypanosoma cruzi. Parasitol Today 12: 279-283.
  • Saldaña A, Sousa O 1996. Trypanosoma rangeli: epimastigote immunogenicity and cross reaction with Trypanosoma cruzi. J Parasitol 82: 363-366.
  • Scorza C, UrdanetaMorales S, Tejero F 1986. Trypanosoma (Herpetosoma) rangeli Tejera, 1920. Preliminary report on histopathology in experimentally infected mice. Rev Inst Med Trop São Paulo 28: 371-378.
  • Schottelius J 1989. Contribution to the characterization of South American Tripanosomatidae. I. The importance of lectins, neuraminic acid and neuraminidase for the differentiation of trypanosomes and leishmania from the New World. Zool Ariz 223 (172), 8: 67-81.
  • Schottelius J, Muller V 1984. Interspecific differentiation of Trypanosoma cruzi, Trypanosoma conorhini and Trypanosoma rangeli by lectins in combination with complement lysis. Acta Trop 41: 29-38.
  • Schottelius J, Marinkelle CJ, GomezLeiva MA 1986. Comparative investigations of Latin-American trypanosomes with lectins and complement lyses test. Trop Med Parasitol 37: 54-58.
  • Simpson L 1987. The mitochondrial genome of kinetoplast protozoa: genomic organization, transcription, replication, and evolution. Ann Rev Microbiol 41: 363-382.
  • Steindel M 1993. Caracterização de cepas de Trypanosoma cruzi e Trypanosoma rangeli isoladas de reservatórios e vetores silvestres naturalmente infectados de Santa Catarina, PhD Thesis, UFMG, Belo Horizonte, Brasil, 166 pp.
  • Steindel M, CarvalhoPinto JC, Toma HK, Mangia HR, Ribeiro-Rodrigues R, Romanha AJ 1991. Trypanosoma rangeli (Tejera, 1920) isolated from a sylvatic rodent Echimys dasythrix in Santa Catarina island, Santa Catarina state: first report of this trypanosome in Southern Brazil. Mem Inst Oswaldo Cruz 86: 73-79.
  • Steindel M, DiasNeto E, Carvalho CJ, Grisard E, Menezes C, Murta SM, Simpson AJ, Romanha AJ 1994. Randomly amplified polymorphic DNA (RAPD) and isoenzyme analysis of Trypanosoma rangeli strains. J Euk Microbiol 1: 261-267.
  • Stuart K, Feagin JE 1992. Mitochondrial DNA of kine-toplastids. Int Rev Cytol 141: 65-88.
  • Sturm NR, Degrave W, Morel C, Simpson L 1989. Sensitive detection and schizodeme classification of Trypanosoma cruzi cells by amplification of kinetoplast minicircle DNA sequences: use in diagnosis of Chagas' disease. Mol Biochem Parasitol 33: 205-214.
  • Toaldo CB, Steindel M, Sousa MA, Tavares CC 2001. Molecular karyotype and chromosomal localization of genes encoding Otubulin, Cisteine Proteinase, HSP 70 and Actin in Trypanosoma rangeli. Mem Inst Oswaldo Cruz 96: 113-121.
  • Tobie EJ 1964. Increased infectivity of a cyclically maintained strain of Trypanosoma rangeli to Rhodnius prolixus and mode of transmission by invertebrate host. J Parasitol 50: 593-598.
  • Tobie EJ 1965. Biological factors influencing transmission of Trypanosoma rangeli by Rhodnius prolixus. J Parasitol 51: 837-841.
  • Tobie EJ 1968. The relation of Trypanosoma rangeli to its vector. In A Anselmi, Medicina Tropical, Talleres gráficos de Editorial Fuornier, México, p. 291-395
  • Triana O, Jaramillo N, Moreno J 1999. Genetic variability of Colombian populations of Trypanosoma cruzi and T. ran-geli. Biol Res 32: 110.
  • UrdanetaMorales S, Tejero F 1985. Trypanosoma (Herpe-tosoma) rangeli Tejera, 1920: Mouse model for high, sustained parasitaemia. J Parasitol 71: 409-414.
  • UrdanetaMorales S, Tejero F 1986. Trypanosoma (Herpeto-soma) rangeli Tejera, 1920. Intracellular amastigote stages of reproduction in white mice. Rev Inst Med Trop São Paulo 28: 166-169.
  • Vallejo GA 1998. Estudios comparativos entre las secuencias de kADN en Trypanosoma cruzi y Trypanosoma rangeli y su aplicación en el diagnosis de la tripanosomiasis ameri-cana. Rev Actual Biol 20: 43-56.
  • Vallejo GA, Marinkelle CJ 1992. Estudio sobre la presencia de neuraminidasa en Rhodnius prolixus infectado con Trypanosoma rangeli. Rev Lat Microbiol 34: 91-94.
  • Vallejo GA, Guhl F, Chiari E, Macedo AM 1999. Speciespecific detection of Trypanosoma cruzi and Trypanosoma rangeli in vector and mammalian hosts by polymerase chain reaction amplification of kinetoplast minicircle DNA. Acta Trop 72: 203-212.
  • Vallejo GA, Guhl F,Carranza JC, Lozano LE, Sánchez JL, Jaramillo JC, Gualtero D, Castañeda N, Silva JC, Steindel M 2002. kDNA markers define two major Trypanosoma rangeli lineages in LatinAmerica. Acta Trop 81: 77-82.
  • Vallejo GA, Guhl F,Carranza JC, Moreno J, Triana O, Grisard CE 2003. Parity between kinetoplast: DNA and miniexon gene sequences supports either clonal evolution or speciation in Trypanosoma rangeli strains isolated from Rhodnius colombiensis, R. pallescens and R. prolixus in Colombia. Infec Gen Evol 3: 39-45.
  • Vallejo GA, Macedo AM, Chiari E, Pena SDJ 1994. Kinetoplast DNA from Trypanosoma rangeli contains two distinct classes of minicircle with different size and molecular organization. Mol Bioch Parasitol 67: 245-253.
  • Vallejo GA, Marinkelle CJ, Guhl F,SánchezN 1986. Mantenimiento en el laboratorio de Trypanosoma (Herpe-tosoma) rangeli Tejera, 1920. Rev Biol Trop 34: 75-81.
  • Vallejo GA, Marinkelle CJ, Guhl F, De Sánchez N 1988. Comportamiento de la infección y diferenciación morfológica entre Trypanosoma cruzi y T rangeli en el intestino del vector Rhodnius prolixus. Rev Bras Biol 48: 577-587.
  • Vargas N, Souto RP, Carranza JC, Vallejo GA, Zingales B 2000. Amplification of a specific repetitive DNA sequence for Trypanosoma rangeli identification and its potential application in epidemiological investigations. Exp Parasitol 96: 147-159.
  • Watkins R 1971a. Trypanosoma rangeli: effect on excretion in Rhodnius prolixus. J Invert Pathol 17: 59-66.
  • Watkins R 1971b. Histology of Rhodnius prolixus infected with Trypanosoma rangeli. J Invert Pathol 17: 67-71.
  • Correspondence to
    Felipe Guhl
    Fax: +57-1-332.4540
  • Publication Dates

    • Publication in this collection
      18 Aug 2003
    • Date of issue
      June 2003


    • Accepted
      08 Apr 2003
    • Received
      25 Mar 2003
    Instituto Oswaldo Cruz, Ministério da Saúde Av. Brasil, 4365 - Pavilhão Mourisco, Manguinhos, 21040-900 Rio de Janeiro RJ Brazil, Tel.: (55 21) 2562-1222, Fax: (55 21) 2562 1220 - Rio de Janeiro - RJ - Brazil