Skip to main content
PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases logoLink to PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases
. 2021 Jan 25;15(1):e0009093. doi: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0009093

Are Melanoides tuberculata and Tarebia granifera (Gastropoda, Thiaridae), suitable first intermediate hosts of Clonorchis sinensis in Vietnam?

Hung Manh Nguyen 1,2,*, Hien Hoang Van 1, Loan Thi Ho 1, Yulia V Tatonova 3, Henry Madsen 4
Editor: Xiao-Nong Zhou5
PMCID: PMC7872296  PMID: 33493224

Abstract

Background

Two thiarid snail species, Melanoides tuberculata and Tarebia granifera have been reported as first intermediate hosts of the liver fluke Clonorchis sinensis; however, their role as true first intermediate hosts has not been verified. Thus, the present study aimed to clarify the suitability of these two snail species as first intermediate hosts of C. sinensis. This was accomplished by collecting snails from a highly endemic area for C. sinensis in Vietnam, the Thac Ba reservoir, and identifying shed cercariae using molecular techniques. We also conducted experimental infections of five snail species including M. tuberculata and T. granifera with eggs of C. sinensis.

Methodology/Principal findings

A total of 11,985 snails, representing 10 species were sampled. Five snail species, M. tuberculata, T. granifera, Lymnaea swinhoei, Parafossarulus manchouricus, and Bithynia fuchsiana were found shedding cercariae with an overall prevalence of infection ranging from 0.7% to 11.5%. Seven cercarial types were recorded. Cercariae of C. sinensis were only found in Parafossarulus manchouricus. Using a multiplex PCR approach for detecting C. sinensis infection, the prevalence in P. manchouricus was 4.2%. Additionally, all five snail species were experimentally exposed to C. sinensis eggs, however only P. manchouricus was successfully infected with an infection rate of 7.87%.

Conclusions/Significance

We confirmed that in the Thac Ba reservoir, Vietnam, the two thiarids, M. tuberculata and T. granifera are not suitable first intermediate hosts of C. sinensis. Only P. manchouricus was found infected by C. sinensis in nature, and was the only species that became infected experimentally.

Authors’ summary

Currently 13 snail species are reported as first intermediate hosts of Clonorchis sinensis, including two species of the Thiaridae, Melanoides tuberculata and Tarebia granifera. Both snail species have wide distributions in tropical and subtropical waters across the World, while the distribution of C. sinensis is much narrower and only occurs in endemic areas of East Asia. The role that these two thiarid snail species plays as successful hosts of C. sinensis, however, has been refuted in other studies. The present study was conducted to clarify this issue. Based on the results from field surveys in a newly discovered and highly endemic area for C. sinensis, as well as, data obtained under experimental conditions, we confirm that in Northern Vietnam, the two thiarid snail species are not successful first intermediate host of C. sinensis. C. sinensis was only detected in a single snail species, Parafossarulus manchouricus, through observation, molecular analyses and experimental infections.

Introduction

One of the most important fish-borne zoonotic trematodes is Clonorchis sinensis (Cobbold, 1875) (Opisthorchiidae), the small liver fluke that parasitizes humans and fish-eating mammals throughout Northeast Asia [1−5]. This trematode species causes serious disease in humans and animals, including; pericholangitis, pyelophlebitis, cholangiohepatitis and multiple abscesses [3,4].

Thirteen freshwater snail species have been reported as first intermediate hosts of C. sinensis (Table 1). A majority of these determinations, 10 of the 13, are based solely on morphological examination of cercariae (pleurolophocercous type). Only two species, Alocinma longicornis and Parafossarulus manchouricus, are confirmed first intermediate hosts through experimental infection and molecular diagnostics [6,7] and an additional snail species, Bithynia fuchsiana has been confirmed by molecular data alone [8].

Table 1. List of the first intermediate hosts for C. sinensis.

Snail species Locality [Reference]
Assimineidae
Assiminea lutea Adams, 1861 China [9,10]
Bithyniidae
Alocinma longicornis*, ** (Benson, 1842) (synonym: Bithynia longicornis) China [8,11−14]
Bithynia chaperi Morlet, 1886 Vietnam [1,12]
B. fuchsiana** Moellendorff, 1894 China [8,11−14]
B. misella Gredler, 1884~ China [11,13,14], Vietnam [15]
B. siamensis Lea, 1856 Vietnam [16]
Parafossarulus anomalospiralis Liu, Li & Liu, 1985 China [11,14,17]
P. manchouricus*, ** (Bourguignat, 1860) (synonym: P. striatulus) China [8,11,12,14], Japan [1,18], Korea [1,19], Russia Federation [1,2,7], Vietnam [20,21]
P. sinensis Faust, 1930 China [12,14]
Semisulcospiridae
Semisulcospira cancellata (Benson, 1833) China [14,22]
S. libertina (Gould, 1859) China [11]
Thiaridae
Melanoides tuberculata (Müller, 1774) China [23], Vietnam [20,21]
Thiara granifera (Lamarck, 1822) Taiwan [11]

Note

* Confirmed by experimental infection

** Confirmed by molecular data; ~ failed in an experimental infection.

Melanoides tuberculata and T. granifera are highly invasive species and are currently present in North (southern USA, Mexico), Central (Panama, Caribbean region) and South America (Venezuela, Brazil), Europe, Africa, Australia, Pacific islands and Asia [1,24,25]. Mas-Coma & Bargues [1] mentioned that their wide distribution potentially could result in the global spread of C. sinensis. However, the role of thiarid snails as first intermediate hosts of liver flukes has been questioned by Bui et al. [26] and Nguyen et al. [27], as they did not find cercariae of C. sinensis within thousands of specimens of thiarid snails collected from areas known to be highly endemic for clonorchiasis in Vietnam. In addition, Besprozvannykh et al. [28] experimentally exposed fish to all cercarial types shed from M. tuberculata collected from Northern Vietnam and found no C. sinensis metacercaria. Similarly, in China, Zhang et al. [12] found C. sinensis larvae within four snail species, i.e. P. manchouricus, P. sinensis, B. fuchsiana and A. longicornis, while M. tuberculata was not infected.

The present study aimed to verify the role of M. tuberculata and T. granifera as first intermediate hosts of C. sinensis through multiple approaches, i.e. field surveys, experimental infection, and molecular detection of C. sinensis.

Materials and methods

Ethics statement

All applicable international, national, and institutional guidelines for the care and use of animals were followed. Euthanasia of laboratory animals was carried out in accordance with the Committee on the Ethics of Animal Experiments of Federal Scientific Center of the East Asia Terrestrial Biodiversity, Russia (Permit Number: 3 of 02.06.2011).

Study area, snail sampling and examination

Thac Ba reservoir covers an area of 23,400 ha of Yen Bai Province in the mountainous region of Northern Vietnam. There are 12 ethnic groups living in communes around the reservoir, and local people usually prepare and eat raw fish from the reservoir [29]. According to recent studies, the Thac Ba reservoir is known as a highly endemic area for C. sinensis [29,30]. In this region, the sewage system of each household is very simple and domestic waste water and latrines flush directly into canals nearby which flow into the reservoir. Domestic animals (e.g. cattle, pigs, ducks, chicken, dogs, cats) are free roaming during the day and locked up during the evening and nights. Manure from domestic animals is likely to enter the reservoir. The coexistence of intermediate hosts (snails and fishes) and the habit of eating raw or insufficiently cooked fish explain the high prevalence of fish-borne zoonotic trematodes in this region.

Ten sites within the reservoir were selected for snail collection, including 2 sites at Gia Binh, 2 sites at Thac Ba, and 6 sites at Vu Linh commune (Fig 1). Snails were collected every four months from April 2015 to April 2019. During morning hours, snails were collected by hand for 30 minutes per site. Snails were transferred to plastic containers and transported alive to the laboratory where they were identified following the keys of Brandt [31] and Dang [32]. All snails were recorded and checked for trematode infection using the shedding method. Depending on the size of each snail, each individual was placed into a small plastic container with 5 or 10 ml of water each and left for 48 hours to shed cercariae. Snails were checked each day for shedding at 8:00 AM, 1:30 PM and 5:30 PM. Cercariae of C. sinensis were identified based on their morphological characters [7] and they were taken randomly from each infected snail to confirm their identity using molecular technique (see below). Cercariae of other trematode species were identified to major types according to the keys of Ginetsinskaja [33], Shell [34] and other available references.

Fig 1. Study sites (red dots) in the Thac Ba reservoir.

Fig 1

Experimental infection of snails

Five snail species were chosen for experimental infection, including 4 species from Vietnam: M. tuberculata, T. granifera, B. fuchsiana, P. manchouricus and 2 species from Russia Koreoleptoxis amurensis and P. manchouricus. For experimental infection, snails were collected from trematode-free locations of the suburb of Hanoi, Vietnam and Primorsky Region, Russia. Snails were acclimatized to laboratory conditions for seven days and fed dried lettuce leaves.

For maintenance of experimental snails, aquaria with a bottom layer of sand and small stones were filled (plastic boxes with 2L capacity) with decholorinated tap water. To mimic the natural habitat of these snails, a few pieces of brushwood (Terminalia catappa) and aquatic plants (Hygrophila difformis, Lemna minor) were added to each aquarium. Ten individuals of the same snail species were housed in each aquarium. The number of each snail species used in this experiment varied.

For collecting the C. sinensis samples from Vietnam, livers and gall bladders of 7 cats were purchased in a slaughter house in Nam Dinh province where restaurants serving cat meat are popular (even if it is technically illegal) [35]. After that, they were placed on ice and carried fresh to the laboratory, the duration for transporting samples were 1.5 hours. In the laboratory, samples were necropsied immediately to find trematodes. The C. sinensis samples from Russia were collected from experimentally infected rats. A total of 87 adult specimens of C. sinensis from Vietnam and 15 specimens from Russia, were kept alive in saline at 37 oC for egg release. After 6 hours, the uteri of all C. sinensis specimens were opened and eggs collected. Eggs were placed in 20 g of feces collected from parasite free domestic cats and 700 ml of tap water was added and shaken until the fecal matter disintegrated. A multichannel pipette (8 channels) with 1 mL tips was used to transfer 5 ml of fecal-egg suspension to each aquarium for experimental infection. When drawing up the suspension, the tip of the pipette reached to the bottom of the glass flask containing the suspension to make sure that eggs are present in the aquaria. After 3 weeks, living snails in each aquarium were recorded and fixed in absolute ethanol for molecular analyses.

Multiplex PCR for detecting C. sinensis larvae in snails

Snail specimens were individually crushed. Shell fragments and the muscular foot of the snail were removed, and only the hepatopancreas, which was easily freed from the remaining soft tissue, was kept for extracting genomic DNA. The DNA samples were extracted using the HotSHOT technique [36]. The ITS1 rDNA region of C. sinensis and the 28S rDNA gene of the snails were co-amplified using two sets of primers designed using the Oligo Calc. program (http://biotools.nubic.northwestern.edu/OligoCalc.html), including: CSF (5'−TGTTCTACATGTATGTTCCGC−3’, forward), CSR (5'−TAGCTCGAGACACATCATGC−3’, reverse), for ITS region; 28SF (5'−AGTAACGGCGAGTGAAGCG−3’, forward), 28SR (5−CTACCGAGCTGAATTCCGC−3’, reverse) for 28S region. The PCR reaction mixture (20μl of total volume) contained 1μl (5 pM) of each primer, 10 μl of Hot Start Green-Taq Master Mix (2 ×) (Promega Corporation, USA) and approximately 10 ng of total DNA. PCR was performed on an Eppendorf Mastercycler using the following cycling conditions: a 5 min initial denaturation step at 95°C, 38 cycles of 25 sec at 95°C, 25 sec at 57°C and 35 sec at 72°C, and a 5 min extension at 72°C. The PCR products were separated by electrophoresis using a 2% agarose gel stained with RedSafe (cat # 21141, iNtRON).

Negative controls (PCR mix with H2O instead of DNA) were included, along with positive controls (20 ng DNA of C. sinensis and 20 ng DNA of non-infected snails). The optimal concentration of DNA for both the snail and C. sinensis was evaluated using two different concentrations: 10 ng of snail DNA and 100 ng of C. sinensis DNA; 100 ng of snail DNA and 10 ng of C. sinensis DNA.

PCR products were purified by ExosapIT enzymatic cleanup and sequenced using Sanger sequencing method. The four primers CSF, CSR, 28SF and 28 SR mentioned above were used for sequencing.

Results

Natural trematode infections

A total of 11,985 snails, representing 10 species, were collected (Table 2). Among them, 11,237 snails were examined for cercarial shedding. Five snail species, including M. tuberculata, T. granifera (Thiaridae), P. manchouricus, B. fuchsiana (Bithyniidae) and L. swinhoei (Lymnaeidae), were found shedding cercariae. The prevalence of infection in snails ranged from 0.7% to 11.5%.

Table 2. Prevalence of infected snails from Thac Ba reservoir.

Snail species Examined for actively shedding Examined for C. sinensis by PCR
No. snails examined No. infected snails (%) No. snails examined No. snails infected (%)
Thiaridae
Melanoides tuberculata 2,013 151 (7.5) 265 0
Tarebia granifera 288 33 (11.5) 116 0
Thiara scabra 85 0 − −
Viviparidae
Angulyagra polyzonata 3,386 0 − −
Sinotaia aeruginosa 675 0 − −
Lymnaeidae
Lymnaea swinhoei 426 3 (0.7) − −
Ampullariidae
Pomacea canaliculata 107 0 − −
Bithyniidae
Parafossarulus manchouricus 2,376 131 (5.5) 120 5 (4.2)
Bithynia fuchsiana 1,663 103 (6.2) 120 0
Gabbia longicornis 318 0 − −
Total 11,237 421 721 5

A total of seven cercariae types were recorded. Cercariae of C. sinensis belong to the pleurolophocercous group and can be identified from others within the group by distinct morphological characteristics and their overall movement. In Table 3, we arranged separately C. sinensis from other species with pleurolophocercous cercariae. P. manchouricus released all 7 cercariae types, while the other 4 snail species released from 1 to 5 types of cercariae.

Table 3. Cercariae types released from the first intermediate hosts.

Cercariae type Snail species No. snails (%)
M. tuberculata T. granifera L. swinhoei P. manchouricus B. fuchsiana
Clonorchis sinensis* 12 12 (2.85)
Pleurolophocercous 72 59 35 156 (37.05)
Xiphidiocercous 48 1 41 33 123 (29.21)
Echinostome 29 33 2 12 31 107 (25.42)
Gymnocephalous 2 3 5 (1.19)
Furcocercous 5 4 9 (2.14)
Monostome 9 9 (2.14)
Total 151 33 3 131 103 421 (100)

Note

* Also Pleurolophocercous.

The most common cercarial type (37.05%) of all cercariae recorded were pleurolophocercous (excluding those of C. sinensis), this type was found in M. tuberculata, P. manchouricus and B. fuchsiana. The xiphidiocercous type was the second most common (29.21%) and was released from 4 snail species. All infected snail species released echinostome cercariae which was the third most common (25.42%) type. The cercariae of C. sinensis composed only 2.85% of the total infections and were found only in P. manchouricus. Two cercariae types, furcocercous and monostome, each constituted 2.14%. Notably, the monostome type was found only in P. manchouricus while the furcocercous type was shed from both bithyniid species. The gymnocephalous type was the least common with a percentage of 1.19%.

Four snail species, including M. tuberculata, T. granifera (Thiaridae), and P. manchouricus and B. fuchsiana (Bithyniidae) were examined using the multiplex PCR approach for detecting C. sinensis (Table 2). Only P. manchouricus was found to be infected with C. sinensis with an overall prevalence of 4.2%. The length of the ITS1-rDNA sequence of C. sinensis was 271 bp while the sequence of the 28S-rDNA fragment of P. manchouricus was 397 bp in length. Sequences of C. sinensis and P. manchouricus were deposited to the NCBI database under accession numbers MT497281 and MT487283, respectively. Samples of three other snail species, B. fuchsiana, M. tuberculata, and T. granifera, were C. sinensis PCR negative (primers CSF and CSR) but still amplified snail DNA (primers 28SF and 28SR). The GenBank accession numbers for B. fuchsiana, M. tuberculata, and T. granifera are MT497280, MT497282, and MT497284, respectively.

Experimental infection of snails by C. sinensis

A total of 1,450 snails of 5 species were used for experimental infection (Table 4). After 21 days post egg exposure, only P. manchouricus was found infected. The overall prevalence of infection was 7.87%. Additionally, cross-infected snails using eggs of C. sinensis from Russia and Vietnam were found. Also, of note, one multiplex PCR sample only amplified C. sinensis DNA and not snail DNA.

Table 4. The snails’ survival, infection after 21 days of exposure to C. sinensis eggs.

Snail species Snail source Eggs of C. sinensis from naturally infected cats (Vietnam) Eggs of C. sinensis from experimentally infected rats (Russia)
No. snails exposed No. snail surviving No. snails infected (%) No. snails exposed No. snail surviving No. snails infected (%)
Bithyniidae
B. fuchsiana Vietnam 310 236 0 90 49 0
P. manchouricus Vietnam 200 156 17 (10.9%) 60 44 4 (9.10%)
Russia 100 77 3 (3.90%) 40 28 0
Semisulcospiridae
Koreoleptoxis amurensis Russia 100 26 0 50 15 0
Thiaridae
M. tuberculata Vietnam 400 211 0 50 3 0
T. granifera Vietnam 150 118 0

Discussion

The presence of mollusk first intermediate hosts is the major limiting factor for the distribution of all digenean species including, C. sinensis. Species of Bithyniidae, which are listed as the first intermediate host of C. sinensis, are widely distributed [37]. Likewise, the potential second intermediate (fish) and definitive (mammals) hosts are geographically widespread, but C. sinensis occupies only a limited territory of South and South-East Asia. The northernmost boundary (51−52°N latitude) of C. sinensis distribution coincides with that of P. manchouricus [38]. Due to the importance of first intermediate hosts, it is necessary to know which snail species can serve as intermediate hosts in a given area in order to implement measures to control the potential of spread of C. sinensis. The southernmost border of the distribution of C. sinensis is in the northern part of Vietnam [1,2,5] although bithyniid species, other than P. manchouricus are widespread throughout the whole country [39].

The successful experimental infection of P. manchouricus with C. sinensis, as well as the finding of cercariae of C. sinensis in this snail species in Thac Ba reservoir confirm that P. manchouricus is the most important first intermediate host of the Chinese liver fluke. In this study, the experimental infection rate (7.87%) was lower than that (12.5%) reported by Liang et al. [6]. The difference may be due to differences in the experimental conditions such as snail density, time of maintenance of snails in aquaria before experimental exposure, the maturation of miracidia in eggs, experimental duration, etc. P. manchouricus is a host to numerous digenean species, and experimental infections have shown it to host at least 5 trematode species in Hanoi, Vietnam, i.e. Cyathocotyle orientalis (furcocercous), Echinochasmus beleocephalus (echinostome), Notocotylus intestinalis (monostome), Gymnocephala sp. (gymnocephalous), and Prosthogonimus sp. (xiphidiocercous) [40]. Besprozvannykh et al. [28] also found 5 cercariae types from P. manchouricus in North Vietnam, namely Echinochasmus japonicus (echinostome), N. intestinalis (monostome), Sphaeridiotrema monorchis (gymnocephalous), Holostephanus sp. (furcocercous), Pleurogenidae gen. sp. (xiphidiocercous). This study only identified cercariae to major groups, but at least 7 trematode species use P. manchouricus as a first intermediate host. Thus, the diversity of digenean within P. manchouricus in this area should be studied further.

In addition, for C. sinensis, a cross-infection of snails from different countries (Vietnam and Russia) was obtained in this experiment. In spite of the fact that statistically significant differences were not found between parasites from Russia and Vietnam using both mitochondrial and nuclear markers [41,42], adaptations and some peculiarities are formed due to the geographic remoteness of the regions, including at the host-parasite level. Worms interacting with the hosts on a common territory are less pathogenic for them, while mollusks from another region might not have developed protective mechanisms. Thus, accidental transfer of the parasite to other regions may contribute to its rapid uncontrolled spread, since the first intermediate hosts will be more sensitive to infection.

Other bithyniid snail species such as B. fuchsiana, which has been confirmed as a first intermediate host of C. sinensis in China by the LAMP technique [8], was found uninfected with C. sinensis in this study. Although the LAMP technique is quite sensitive, Chen et al. [8] did not use DNA sequencing to verify their results, and only indicated that they “are able to confirm the correct products by sequencing”. Moreover, as a control, they used only one representative of the family Opisthorchiidae, Opisthorchis viverrini, which usually does not co-occur with C. sinensis [1,2]. It is possible that these primers may be sensitive to other parasites occurring in the same area, for example, representatives of the genus Metorchis. Chung [43] also failed to infect Bithynia misella and B. tentaculata with C. sinensis experimentally and suggested that both species do not need to be emphasized in snail survey for clonorchiasis even though B. misella was reported as an intermediate host of C. sinensis in China [13]. The prevalence of infection of B. fuchsiana by trematode larvae in Thac Ba reservoir was higher than that recorded for P. manchouricus (6.2% vs. 5.5%). However, the prevalence of infections by cercariae of C. sinensis was contrasting, 9.16% (12/131) in P. manchouricus and 0% in B. fuchsiana. Multiplex PCR also did not detect C. sinensis from 120 specimens of B. fuchsiana, which suggests that the prevalence of infection of B. fuchsiana in the wild is very low or B. fuchsiana is not a suitable host of C. sinensis in this region.

In Vietnam, the first report of M. tuberculata as the first intermediate host of C. sinensis was published by Kino et al. [20], and the prevalence of infection was 13.3% in Ninh Binh province. De [21] reported a prevalence of C. sinensis infections in M. tuberculata of 10.2% in the Red River Delta. Bui et al. [26] did not find any cercariae of C. sinensis from 3,335 specimens of M. tuberculata and 34 specimens of T. granifera in Nam Dinh province while prevalence of infection with small intestinal trematode larvae was high. Similarly, Nguyen et al. [27] also did not find any C. sinensis cercariae from 758 specimens of M. tuberculata in Ninh Binh province which is the most important endemic area for clonorchiasis in Vietnam [21]. The contrasting results may be based on misidentification of cercariae. Cercariae of C. sinensis belong to “pleurolophocercous” type. This type is found within three families, i. e. Opisthorchiidae, Cryptogonimidae, and Heterophyidae [44,45]. Bui et al. [26] found that parapleurolophocercous (cercariae of the subfamily Haplorchiinae) constituted 40.3% of all infections found in snails while pleurolophocerca only constituted 0.3% in Nam Dinh province, an endemic area of C. sinensis. Pinto [45] suggested that of the term “parapleurolophocercous” should no longer be used and these cercariae should be referred to as pleurolophocercous. Moreover, if M. tuberculata was the first intermediate host of C. sinensis, it would be difficult to explain why C. sinensis only occurs in northern Vietnam while its intermediate host, M. tuberculata, is distributed throughout the entire country. The failure to infect M. tuberculata and T. granifera by C. sinensis in this study suggests that these two snail species should be removed from the list of first intermediate hosts of C. sinensis.

Koreoleptoxis amurensis is distributed throughout the endemic areas of C. sinensis in Russia [7,46]. This snail species has not been reported to be infected with C. sinensis, however it has been found shedding cercariae of many trematode species, e.g. Nanophyetus salmincola (Nanophyetidae), Plagioporus sp. (Opecoelidae), Sanguinicola sp. (Sanguinicolidae), Echinochasmus sp., Microparyphyim sp. (Echinostomatidae), Metagonimus spp., Pygidiopsis sp., and Centrocestus (Heterophyidae), and xiphidiocercous cercariae [44]. In addition, this snail belongs to the family Semisulcospiridae, representatives of which were also listed as first intermediate hosts of C. sinensis in China [14,22]. The failure to infect K. amurensis by C. sinensis in this study confirms that this snail species is not a suitable host for C. sinensis.

The multiplex PCR approach has been used for the detection or the differential diagnosis of C. sinensis and other trematodes [47,48]. This method, however, has not been reported to detect C. sinensis DNA from within its host snail. The present study provides a novel multiplex PCR for amplification of multiple genes of both snail and C. sinensis DNA. This is the first report of using a multiplex PCR approach to detect larvae of C. sinensis within their snail first intermediate host. Prevalence of infection by C. sinensis within P. manchouricus in Thac Ba reservoir, detected by multiplex PCR, was 4.2%, which is nearly 1.5 times higher than the prevalence detected by observation for cercariae shedding (2.85%).

The results obtained can be used to clarify the list of the first intermediate hosts for C. sinensis throughout its range and show that in the case of studying any aspect related to trematodes, it is necessary to correctly identify not only the parasite species but also their hosts. Since wrong data incorrectly indicate the epidemiological potential of any parasite, which can lead to sudden unpredictable outbreaks of diseases in the regions. In addition, other situations possible when the spread of trematodes may be expected in the region due to erroneous identification of the parasite. For example, parasites that were previously recorded in the mollusks M. tuberculata and T. granifera, not being C. sinensis, in the presence of all conditions for life cycle, can continue to spread in the region without control until they reach a critical threshold. In both cases, it affects the wrong investment in the development of preventive, diagnostic and therapeutic measures that contribute to the health of the population.

In conclusion, we have shown, through both examination of naturally infected snails, as well as experimental infections, that in Northern Vietnam the two thiarids, M. tuberculata and T. granifera are not suitable first intermediate hosts of C. sinensis. Other snail species, which were reported as the first intermediate host of C. sinensis, should be reconfirmed by molecular data and/or experimental infection.

Acknowledgments

The authors are most grateful to Dr. Stephen E. Greiman, Georgia Southern University, for his careful proof reading of this manuscript.

Data Availability

All data underlying the findings are fully available without restriction. All relevant data are within the paper and its Supporting Information files.

Funding Statement

This research is funded by Vietnam National Foundation for Science and Technology Development (NAFOSTED) under grant number 106.05-2018.17. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

References

  • 1.Mas-Coma S, Bargues MD. Human liver flukes: a review. Research and Reviews in Parasitology. 1997;57:145–218. [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Nguyen MH, Madsen H, Fried B. Global status of fish-borne zoonotic trematodiasis in humans. Acta Parasitologica. 2013;58:231–258. 10.2478/s11686-013-0155-5 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Rim HJ, Farag HF, Sornmani S, Cross JH. Food-borne Trematodes: Ignored or Emerging? Parasitology Today. 1994;10:207–209. [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Markell EK, Goldsmith R. Trematode infections exclusive of Schistosomiasis. Diseases caused by liver flukes: Clonorchiasis. In: GT Strickland (ed.) Hunter’s Tropical Medicine. 6th Edition, Philadelphia, Saunders; 1984;740–755. [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Qian MB, Chen YD, Liang S, Yang GJ, Zhou XN. The global epidemiology of clonorchiasis and its relation with cholangiocarcinoma. Infectious Diseases of Poverty. 2012;1:4 10.1186/2049-9957-1-4 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Liang C, Hu XC, Lv ZY, Wu ZD. Experimental establishment of life cycle of Clonorchis sinensis. Chinese Journal of Parasitology and Parasitic Diseases. 2009;27:148–150. (In Chinese). [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Besprozvannykh VV, Ermolenko AV, Rumiantseva EE, Voronok VM, Bartkova AD. Clonorchis sinensis and Clonorchiasis in the Primorye Territory. Dalnauka Press, Vladivostok; 2013:82 p. (In Russian). 10.14411/fp.2013.017 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Chen Y, Wen T, Lai DH, Wen YZ, Wu ZD, Yang TB, et al. Development and evaluation of loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP) for rapid detection of Clonorchis sinensis from its first intermediate hosts, freshwater snails. Parasitology. 2013;140:1377–1383. 10.1017/S0031182013000498 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Gibson JB, Sun T. Clonorchiasis In: Marcial-Rojas RA (ed.) Pathology of protozoal and helminthic diseases with clinical correlation. Baltimore, Williams & Wilkins; 1971;546–566. [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Rim HJ. Clonorchiasis: an update. Journal of Helminthology. 1995;79:269–281. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.WHO. Control of foodborne trematode infections. Report of a WHO Study Group. WHO Technical Report Series. 1995;849:1–157. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Zhang R, Gao S, Geng Y, Huang D, Yu L, Zhang S, et al. Epidemiological study on Clonorchis sinensis infection in Shenzhen area of Zhujiang delta in China. Parasitology Research. 2007;101:179–183. 10.1007/s00436-006-0441-3 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Guo YH, Wang CM, Luo J, He HX. Intermediate host of main parasites: molluscs distributed in Beijing region. Chinese Journal of Vector Biology and Control. 2009;20:449–453. (In Chinese). [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Lu XT, Gu QY, Limpanont Y, Song LG, Wu ZD, Okanurak K, et al. Snail-borne parasitic diseases: and update on lobal epidemiological distribution, transmission interruption and control methods. Infectious Diseases of Poverty. 2018;7:28 10.1186/s40249-018-0414-7 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Tran VQ, Nguyen VT, Nguyen THY, Nguyen THC, Nguyen VP, Hoang MD. Study on some biological and pathological features of Clonorchis sinensis infection. Journal of Science and Development. 2012;10:444–450. (In Vietnamese). [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Doanh PN, Nawa Y. Clonorchis sinensis and Opisthorchis spp. in Vietnam: current status and prospects. Transactions of the Royal Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene. 2016;110:13–20. 10.1093/trstmh/trv103 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Lu YX, Yang LD, Hu M, Gui AF, Zuo SL. Parafossarulus anomalospiralis: first intermediate host of Clonorchis sinensis: a first report in Hubei Province, China. Chinese Journal of Parasitology and Parasitic Diseases. 1994;12: 290. (In Chinese). [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Yoshida Y. Clonorchiasis- a historical review of contributions of Japanese parasitologists. Parasitology International. 2012;61:5–9. 10.1016/j.parint.2011.06.003 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Chai JY, Murrell KD, Lymbery AJ. Fish-borne parasitic zoonoses: status and issues. International Journal for Parasitology. 2005;35:1233–1254. 10.1016/j.ijpara.2005.07.013 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Kino H, Inaba H, Nguyen VD, Le VC, Dang TS, Hoan TH, et al. Epidemiology of clonorchiasis in Ninh Binh province, Vietnam. The Southeast Asian Journal of Tropical Medicine and Public Health. 1998;29:250–254. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.De NV. Fish-borne trematodes in Vietnam. The Southeast Asian Journal of Tropical Medicine and Public Health. 2004;35:229–231. [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Liu YY, Zhang WZ, Wang YX. First intermediate hosts of lung fluke in China. Chinese Journal of Zoology. 1984;2:1–5. (In Chinese). [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Lun ZR, Gasser RB, Lai DH, Li AX, Zhu XQ, Yu XB, et al. Clonorchiasis: a key foodborne zoonosis in China. The Lancet Infectious Diseases. 2005;5:31–41. 10.1016/S1473-3099(04)01252-6 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Madsen H, Frandsen F. The spread of freshwater snails including those of medical and veterinary importance. Acta Tropica. 1989;46:139–146. 10.1016/0001-706x(89)90030-2 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Madsen H., Nguyen MH. An overview of freshwater snails in Asia with main focus on Vietnam. Acta Tropica. 2014;140:105–117. 10.1016/j.actatropica.2014.08.005 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Bui TD, Madsen H, Dang TT. Distribution of freshwater snails in family-based VAC ponds and associated water bodies with special reference to intermediate hosts of fish-borne zoonotic trematodes in Nam Dinh province, Vietnam. Acta Tropica. 2010;116:15–23. 10.1016/j.actatropica.2010.04.016 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Nguyen MH, Do TD, Nguyen TLA, Phan TV, Bui NT, Nguyen VH, et al. Current status of fish-borne zoonotic trematode infections in Gia Vien district, Ninh Binh province, Vietnam. Parasites & Vectors. 2015;8:21. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Besprozvannykh VV, Ermolenko AV, Ngo HD, Ha NV, Hung NM, Rozhkovan KV Descriptions of digenean parasites from three snail species, Bithynia fuchsiana (Morelet), Parafossarulus striatulus Benson and Melanoides tuberculata Müller, in North Vietnam. Helmintologia. 2013;50:190–204. [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Bui NT, Pham TT, Nguyen TN, Nguyen VH, Murrell D, Phan TV. The importance of wild fish in the epidemiology of Clonorchis sinensis in Vietnam. Parasitology Research. 2016;115:3401–3408. 10.1007/s00436-016-5100-8 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Phan TV, Bui NT, Nguyen VH, Murrell D. Comparative risk of liver and intestinal fluke infection from either wild-caught or culture fish in Vietnam. Vector-Borne and Zoonotic Diseases. 2016;16:790–796. 10.1089/vbz.2016.1997 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Brandt RAM (1974) The non-marine aquatic mollusca of Thailand. Archiv für Molluskenkunde 105: 1–423. [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Dang NT (1980) Identification of freshwater invertebrates in Northern Vietnam. Hanoi, Science and Technical Press 440–490. (In Vietnamese). [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Ginetsinskaya TA. Trematodes, their life cycles, biology and evolution. NewDelhi: Amerind Publishing Company (Translation of the original Russian edition, 1968); 1988. [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Schell SC. Handbook of Trematodes of North America (North of Mexico). Idaho: University Press of Idaho; 1985. [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Nguyen MH, Tatonova YV, Madsen H. Infections by hepatic trematodes in cats from slaughterhouses in Vietnam. Journal of Parasitology. 2018;104:306–309. 10.1645/18-5 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Truett GE, Heeger P, Mynatt AA, Walker JA, Warman ML. Preparation of PCR-quality mouse genomic DNA with hot sodium hydroxide and tris (HotSHOT). BioTechniques. 2000;29:52–54. 10.2144/00291bm09 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Lydeard C, Cummings KS. Freshwater Mollusks of the World: A Distribution Atlas. JHU Press; 2019. [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Prozorova LA, Rasshepkina AV. Reproductive morphology of the genus Parafossarulus Annandale, 1924 (Caenogastropoda: Rissooidea: Bithyniidae) with comments on its taxonomy and distribution. The Bulletin of the Russian Far East Malacological Society. 2017;21:178–187. [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Thanh DN, Hai HN. Freshwater Mollusca: Gastropoda and Bivalvia In: Fauna of Vietnam. Vietnam Science and Technology Publisher; 2010. (In Vietnamese). [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Le NT, Doanh PN, The DT. Trematode larvae in the snail Parafossarulus striatulus (Bithyniidae) collected from Ba Vi and Ngoc Tao areas of Ha Tay. Journal of Biology. 2000;22:15–21. (In Vietnamese). [Google Scholar]
  • 41.Chelomina GN, Tatonova YV, Hung NM, Ngo HD. Genetic diversity of the Chinese liver fluke Clonorchis sinensis from Russia and Vietnam. International Journal for Parasitology. 2014;44:795–810. 10.1016/j.ijpara.2014.06.009 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42.Tatonova YV, Chelomina G, Nguyen HM. Inter-individual and intragenomic variations in the ITS region of Clonorchis sinensis (Trematoda: Opisthorchiidae) from Russia and Vietnam. Infection, Genetics and Evolution. 2017;55:350–357. 10.1016/j.meegid.2017.10.008 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 43.Chung PR. A. comparative study of three species of Bithyniidae (Mollusca: Prosobranchia): Parafossarulus manchouricus, Gabbia misella and Bithynia tentaculata. Malacology Review. 1984;17:1–66. [Google Scholar]
  • 44.Sewell RBS. Cercariae indicae. Indian Journal of Medical Research. 1922;10:1–370. [Google Scholar]
  • 45.Pinto HA. Pleurolophocercous and parapleurolophocercous types of cercariae: Revisiting concepts. Parasitology International. 2019;68:92–94. 10.1016/j.parint.2018.09.001 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 46.Tatonova YV, Solodovnik DA, Nguyen MH. Human parasites in the Amur River: the results of 2017–2018 field studies. Regional Problems. 2018;3:34–36. [Google Scholar]
  • 47.Le TH, Nguyen VD, Blair D, Sithithaworn P, McManus D. Clonorchis sinensis and Opisthorchis viverrini: Development of a mitochondrial-based multiplex PCR for their identification and discrimination. Experimental Parasitology. 2006;112:109–114. 10.1016/j.exppara.2005.09.012 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 48.Kaewkong W, Intapan PM, Sanpool O, Janwan P, Thanchomnang T, Laumaunwai P, et al. Molecular differentiation of Opisthorchis viverrini and Clonorchis sinensis eggs by multiplex real-time PCR with high resolution melting analysis. The Korean Journal of Parasitology. 2013;51:689–694. 10.3347/kjp.2013.51.6.689 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
PLoS Negl Trop Dis. doi: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0009093.r001

Decision Letter 0

Banchob Sripa, Xiao-Nong Zhou

17 Sep 2020

Dear Mr. Nguyen,

Thank you very much for submitting your manuscript "Are the thiarids, Melanoides tuberculata and Tarebia granifera, first intermediate hosts for Clonorchis sinensis?" for consideration at PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases. As with all papers reviewed by the journal, your manuscript was reviewed by members of the editorial board and by several independent reviewers. In light of the reviews (below this email), we would like to invite the resubmission of a significantly-revised version that takes into account the reviewers' comments.

We cannot make any decision about publication until we have seen the revised manuscript and your response to the reviewers' comments. Your revised manuscript is also likely to be sent to reviewers for further evaluation.

When you are ready to resubmit, please upload the following:

[1] A letter containing a detailed list of your responses to the review comments and a description of the changes you have made in the manuscript. Please note while forming your response, if your article is accepted, you may have the opportunity to make the peer review history publicly available. The record will include editor decision letters (with reviews) and your responses to reviewer comments. If eligible, we will contact you to opt in or out.

[2] Two versions of the revised manuscript: one with either highlights or tracked changes denoting where the text has been changed; the other a clean version (uploaded as the manuscript file).

Important additional instructions are given below your reviewer comments.

Please prepare and submit your revised manuscript within 60 days. If you anticipate any delay, please let us know the expected resubmission date by replying to this email. Please note that revised manuscripts received after the 60-day due date may require evaluation and peer review similar to newly submitted manuscripts.

Thank you again for your submission. We hope that our editorial process has been constructive so far, and we welcome your feedback at any time. Please don't hesitate to contact us if you have any questions or comments.

Sincerely,

Xiao-Nong Zhou

Associate Editor

PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases

Banchob Sripa

Deputy Editor

PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases

***********************

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Key Review Criteria Required for Acceptance?

As you describe the new analyses required for acceptance, please consider the following:

Methods

-Are the objectives of the study clearly articulated with a clear testable hypothesis stated?

-Is the study design appropriate to address the stated objectives?

-Is the population clearly described and appropriate for the hypothesis being tested?

-Is the sample size sufficient to ensure adequate power to address the hypothesis being tested?

-Were correct statistical analysis used to support conclusions?

-Are there concerns about ethical or regulatory requirements being met?

Reviewer #1: the method section is good. All the criteria were met. I just suggest to add more experiments to the paper.

Reviewer #2: The objectives and study design are appropriate for the study objectives, however, more details on certain aspects of the study design are needed to assess if the experimental infections were conducted in a manner that gives accurate results. Please see the method section comments in the attached Reviewer's Comments document.

Reviewer #3: The Methods are clear, I only have one question:

why were the snails fixed and not dissected alive for the trematodes? it is easier to dissect live snails

--------------------

Results

-Does the analysis presented match the analysis plan?

-Are the results clearly and completely presented?

-Are the figures (Tables, Images) of sufficient quality for clarity?

Reviewer #1: The tables are fine but the figure needs better resolution

Reviewer #2: The analysis match the descriptions in the methods. The manuscript has a lot of tables and the authors may want to consider making one or two of these tables into graphs to add the reads in understanding the data.

Reviewer #3: Concerning the Figure, it would be helpful to accompany it with a map of whole Vietnam and to indicate where the region under study is.

--------------------

Conclusions

-Are the conclusions supported by the data presented?

-Are the limitations of analysis clearly described?

-Do the authors discuss how these data can be helpful to advance our understanding of the topic under study?

-Is public health relevance addressed?

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Overall the discussion needs major revisions to better explain the findings and their importance as well as make the comparisons to other research more informative (instead of reading like a list of previous paper's findings). The conclusions are supported by the data, but are extended to a wider geographic area than the data support. Thus, the authors need to make revisions to the language to suggest that their finding may apply to a broader area instead of being definitive that their results are true for all locations. The discussion would be improved with a few paragraphs that explain the implications both ecologically and on human health.

Reviewer #3: The conclusions are supported by the data, however, the authors should more emphasise the need of correct identification of parasites and hosts.

--------------------

Editorial and Data Presentation Modifications?

Use this section for editorial suggestions as well as relatively minor modifications of existing data that would enhance clarity. If the only modifications needed are minor and/or editorial, you may wish to recommend “Minor Revision” or “Accept”.

Reviewer #1: Please check the uploaded revised version of the manuscript.

Reviewer #2: (No Response)

Reviewer #3: The text needs a native English speaker for language checking, also, please check your text for spelling errors:

In the affiliation (line 10) please spell Vladivostok correctly

Running title – please reformulate the title, it is not understandable

In the Introduction (line 56) for Clonorchis sinensis in the first sentence, please add the nomenclatural author

line 59

please correct ‘multipleabscesses’ to ‘multiple abscesses’

Table 1

it would be very helpful to provide the snail species names with nomenclatural authors and spell out in full the generic names

please correct ‘Semisulcospira libertine’ to ‘Semisulcospira libertina’

line 112

please correct to ‘Experimental infection of snails’

line 123

please correct ‘sisnenis’ to ‘sinensis’

line 129

please correct ‘tape’ to ‘tap’

line 174

please correct ‘from 4 snail’ to ‘in 4 snail’

lines 175-176

please reformulate the sentence ‘The cercariae of C. sinensis possessed only 2.85% of total

176 infected snails.‘

line 176

please correct ‘This cercariae’ to ‘These cercariae’

line 193

please correct ‘infection for snails’ to ‘infection of snails’

line 198

please correct ‘survive snails’ to ‘survived snails’

there are several more things to be corrected in the Discussion

--------------------

Summary and General Comments

Use this section to provide overall comments, discuss strengths/weaknesses of the study, novelty, significance, general execution and scholarship. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. If requesting major revision, please articulate the new experiments that are needed.

Reviewer #1: PNTD-D-20-00929

Title

Are the thiarids, Melanoides tuberculata and Tarebia granifera, first intermediate hosts for Clonorchis sinensis?

This manuscript by Nguyen et al. study the potential of two thiarid snails; Melanoides tuberculata and Tarebia granifera as intermediate hosts for the Chinese liver fluke Clonorchis sinensis. They collect the snails from a parasite endemic area in Vietnam and checked it for natural infection using traditional and molecular techniques. In addition, they tried to infect the same snails from parasite free areas with C. sinensis. Based on their field data and laboratory infection experiments they concluded that these two thiarids are not potential hosts for C. sinensis and Parafossarulus manchouricus is the only molluscan intermediate host for this trematode.

General comments:

The authors did not consider that these two thiarid snails might be incompatible due to some environmental factors because they were collected from the field. Generally, it is difficult to infect field captured snails? May be they can try with their lab-bred snails.

More experimental work can be done to detect the fate of the parasite within resistant snails such as by using histopathological sectioning of the head-foot.

A better resolution of the map is needed.

The language of the manuscript needs some improvement.

Please revise the scientific names of the snails and trematode species.

More comments and edits are included in the uploaded version of the manuscript.

Reviewer #2: The comments in this section can also be accessed in the Reviewer's Comments document.

Dear Authors,

Overall, I found your research interesting and the multiple approaches to assess the hosts for C. sinensis quite sufficient. However, I do have a few concerns regarding the manuscript which are explained below.

Overall

• All parts of the manuscript would be improved by changing at least half the sentences in the paragraphs to the active voice. I will provides some examples of sentences I would change to the active voice in the comments for each section.

• Some of the paragraphs throughout the manuscript are not indented. If this is required for the journal than nothing needs to be done, but please check to ensure that you are consistent in the use of indenting for the start of paragraphs.

• In multiple places in the manuscript, the authors assert that their findings for a single reservoir are applicable to a larger geographic area. Although their finding may suggest that the two snails are not hosts in a larger area, the wording needs to be less certain to accurately portray the research. I will provide specific comments in the section this needs to be applied, but the authors should check the entire manuscript to ensure that they are not overstating their findings.

Title

• The word “Precise” in the Running Title should be replaced with a verb. For example, “Assessing” or “Evaluating” would make the Running Title easy to understand.

Abstract

• Lines 22-23:Please rewrite the second sentence to increase clarity. One possibility would be to change the sentence to read: “However, theses snails’ role as intermediate hosts has not been confirmed.” This simplifies the sentence and increases clarity.

• Lines 23-27: In the third sentence that begins: “Here we present” change “Here” to “Thus,” as a better transition. Also in this sentence change “firstly” to “first” and end the sentence after the word reservoir The new sentence that begins on line 27 would then read “ Next, we attempted to infect these snails with eggs of C. sinensis in laboratory experiments.”

• Lines 32-34: The information on the accession numbers is out of place in the abstract. Unless required to be in the abstract by the journal, move this information to the methods and delete from the abstract.

• Line 38: add “in the Thac Ba reservoir” before “in Vietnam” to make this statement more accurate as your findings only apply to this area and not the entire country.

Authors’ Summary

• Lines 46-47: rewrite the sentence for clarity to read “Both snail species have wide distributions in tropical and subtropical waters across the world, but C. sinensis only occurs in East Asia.”

• Line 48: in the second half of the sentence change “we confirmed that in Vietnam” to “confirms that in Northern Vietnam”

• Line 50: change “detected in Parafossarulus manchouricus by observation, molecular analyses and experimental infection” to “detected in a single snail species, Parafossarulus manchouricus, through observations, molecular analyses, and experimental infections.”

Introduction

• Line 58-60:first change “e.g.” to “including”; then remove “it from the sentence; then add “a” before “high number of human” and finally add “of infection” to the end of the sentence.

• Line 70: change the sentence to read “Melanoides tuberculate and T. granifera are highly invasive species and are currently present . . .”

• Lines 83-84: remove “e.g.” and use colon after the word “approaches” then add a comma after “experimental infection”

Materials and Methods

• Line 92: add an “s” to latrine

• Lines 93-94: place “e.g. cattle, pig, ducks, chickens, dogs, cats in parentheses

• Line 98: change “collecting” to “collection”

• Line 99: change “each four” to “every four”

• Line 112: change “for” to “of snails”

• Lines 115-116: I rewrote this sentence to be in the active voice: “We collected snails from trematode-free locations and acclimatized them to laboratory conditions for seven days.” In the rest of the methods section change roughly half of the sentences to the active voice to increase readability of the manuscript.

• Lines 118-122: The information in this paragraph is difficult to follow. I attempted to rewrite it as follows: “For maintenance of experimental snails, we filled aquaria (plastic boxes with 2 L capacity) with dechlorinated tap water and a bottom layer of sand and small stones. To mimic the natural habitat of the snails, we add a few pieces of brushwood (Terminalia cattappa) and aquatic plants (Hygrophila difformis, Lemna minor) to each aquarium. We housed ten individuals of the same snail species in each aquarium. The number of each snail species used in this experiment varied (Table 4).

• Line 122: The reference to Table 4 places the tables out of order. Please check the journal guidelines to determine if you need to reorder the tables to make them sequential in the manuscript.

• Lines 123-131: The collection methods for C. sinsnesis adults and eggs need to be expanded to answer the following questions: How were cats sampled? How were eggs quantified or were large amounts just added to each aquarium? How did you ensure that eggs were present in all 5 mL allocates put into aquaria? These questions need to be addressed to better understand the experimental design and to ensure that all aquaria were actually infected with C. sinsnesis eggs.

• Lines 123-126: The sentences on adult flatworm collection are difficult to read – Rewrite to include answers to the previous comments’ questions.

• Lines 128-131: rewrite the sentence to “20 grams of feces from domestic cats (free from parasites) to 700 ml tap water which was shaken until the fecal matter disintegrated.”

• Lines 132-132: This sentence needs to be incorporated into the previous paragraph and not its own paragraph.

• Lines 151 and 156: Should these paragraphs be indented? Also, do these need to be new paragraphs?

Results

• Lines 171-172: This sentence needs to be rewritten to explicitly state the C. sinensis is a pleurolophocercous cercariae. As written, it took a lot of effort including looking at the tables and search for C. sinensis on Google to determine that C. sinensis is a part of pleurolophocercous cercariae and that the authors are grouping them separately.

• Lines 173-174: remove the comma after (29.21%)

• Lines 174-175: change “cercariae, and this type” to “which was the third most common (25.42) cercarial type.”

• Lines 175-176: change “infected snails. This cercariae” to “infected snails and were”

• Line 179: add “cercarial type” after gymnocephalous

• Line 185: table should be capitalized.

• Lines 196-197: The last two sentences in the results are difficult to read and do not make sense to me. Please rewrite these sentences for clarity.

Discussion

• Overall, the discussion reads like a list of others’ findings with minimal comparisons to the finding in this manuscript. The discussion needs to be re-written to focus on the findings of this manuscript and their importance and comparison to past studies. As currently written, it is difficult to follow the reasoning or main ideas of the discussion and the conclusions are overly confident and applied to quickly to larger regions considering the research in the manuscript comes from a single reservoir. I would except more discussion on alternative explanation for why others found evidence for these two snails being the host of C. sinsnesis.

• Given that substantial revisions of the discussion are needed, I will only point out a few other issues in this sections:

o Line 202: remove “the” from in front of Bithyniidae

o Line 205: add “distribution” after C. sinensis

o Line 229: change “being” to “as”

o Lines 231-233: this sentence is extremely difficult to understand.

o Line 273: C. sinensis needs to be italicized

o Lines 282-284: rewrite the sentence in the active voice: “In this study, we report the first use of 28S-rRNA gene of M. tuberculate, T. granifera, B. fuchsiana and P. machouricus form Vietnam.”

o Lines 285-287: This sentence is too strong of a conclusion. You did not sample locations throughout Vietnam and thus need to rewrite to be less assertive on your claims.

Tables and Figures

• Table 1 – In the first column, move the asterisks and ~ to after the names of the snail species to make these less distracting to the reader (unless this position in the table is required by the journal).

• Tables 3 and 4 --- You may want to consider making one or both of these tables into graphs to better show the data.

• Table 3 – in the footnote for this table there is a ) that seems out of place

Reviewer #3: The authors examine the ability of two snail species to host Clonorchis sinensis; it is a serious problem, as the snails are widely distributed, therefore, the paper is of importance and it is exactly within the scope of the Journal.

Most of the approach of the authors is logic, however, it is not clear already in the Abstract why they sampled also other snails and why they provide sequences of the snail hosts. This is an important addition to the topic, but it should be explained, as they did not examine only Tarebia granifera and Melanoides tuberculata. Also the title does not fully correspond to the contents, as it makes the reader expect that only the two snail species will be treated, however, the scope of the MS is wider.

It would be wise to emphasise in the text that it is important to correctly identify the snail species and also the parasite species, as C. sinensis has pleurolophocercariae which are quite uniform in most species and they are typical in other medically important trematode families. The authors treat this in the Discussion, but it would be good to emphasise the importance of correct identification already in the Abstract, also the use of Multiplex PCR.

--------------------

PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: No

Reviewer #3: No

Figure Files:

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email us at figures@plos.org.

Data Requirements:

Please note that, as a condition of publication, PLOS' data policy requires that you make available all data used to draw the conclusions outlined in your manuscript. Data must be deposited in an appropriate repository, included within the body of the manuscript, or uploaded as supporting information. This includes all numerical values that were used to generate graphs, histograms etc.. For an example see here: http://www.plosbiology.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pbio.1001908#s5.

Reproducibility:

To enhance the reproducibility of your results, PLOS recommends that you deposit laboratory protocols in protocols.io, where a protocol can be assigned its own identifier (DOI) such that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see https://journals.plos.org/plosntds/s/submission-guidelines#loc-methods

Attachment

Submitted filename: Verify the role of thiarid snails_2020_PLOS NTD_REVISED.doc

Attachment

Submitted filename: PNTD - D- 20-00929 Reviewer Comments.docx

PLoS Negl Trop Dis. doi: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0009093.r003

Decision Letter 1

Banchob Sripa, Xiao-Nong Zhou

15 Nov 2020

Dear Mr. Nguyen,

Thank you very much for submitting your manuscript "Are Melanoides tuberculata and Tarebia granifera (Gastropoda, Thiaridae), suitable first intermediate hosts of Clonorchis sinensis in Vietnam?" for consideration at PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases. As with all papers reviewed by the journal, your manuscript was reviewed by members of the editorial board and by several independent reviewers. The reviewers appreciated the attention to an important topic. Based on the reviews, we are likely to accept this manuscript for publication, providing that you modify the manuscript according to the review recommendations.

Please prepare and submit your revised manuscript within 30 days. If you anticipate any delay, please let us know the expected resubmission date by replying to this email.  

When you are ready to resubmit, please upload the following:

[1] A letter containing a detailed list of your responses to all review comments, and a description of the changes you have made in the manuscript. 

Please note while forming your response, if your article is accepted, you may have the opportunity to make the peer review history publicly available. The record will include editor decision letters (with reviews) and your responses to reviewer comments. If eligible, we will contact you to opt in or out

[2] Two versions of the revised manuscript: one with either highlights or tracked changes denoting where the text has been changed; the other a clean version (uploaded as the manuscript file).

Important additional instructions are given below your reviewer comments.

Thank you again for your submission to our journal. We hope that our editorial process has been constructive so far, and we welcome your feedback at any time. Please don't hesitate to contact us if you have any questions or comments.

Sincerely,

Xiao-Nong Zhou

Associate Editor

PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases

Banchob Sripa

Deputy Editor

PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases

***********************

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Key Review Criteria Required for Acceptance?

As you describe the new analyses required for acceptance, please consider the following:

Methods

-Are the objectives of the study clearly articulated with a clear testable hypothesis stated?

-Is the study design appropriate to address the stated objectives?

-Is the population clearly described and appropriate for the hypothesis being tested?

-Is the sample size sufficient to ensure adequate power to address the hypothesis being tested?

-Were correct statistical analysis used to support conclusions?

-Are there concerns about ethical or regulatory requirements being met?

Reviewer #1: The objectives are clear and the study design is appropriate.

Reviewer #2: Overall the study objectives and design are adequate, but a few questions still need to be addressed:

Why were snails from Russia included in this study? You need to explain the reasoning behind adding the Russian snails since the rest of the paper focuses on Northern Vietnam.

The collection methods for C. sinsnesis adults and eggs need to be expanded to answer the following questions: How were cats sampled? What permits if any were used for dealing with the cats? How were eggs quantified or were large amounts just added to each aquarium? How did you ensure that eggs were present in all 5 mL allocates put into aquaria? These questions need to be addressed to better understand the experimental design and to ensure that all aquaria were actually infected with C. sinsnesis eggs.

--------------------

Results

-Does the analysis presented match the analysis plan?

-Are the results clearly and completely presented?

-Are the figures (Tables, Images) of sufficient quality for clarity?

Reviewer #1: Yes. All the criteria were met.

Reviewer #2: The results are well described in the text, but the figure legends and table captions need more detailed explanations.

--------------------

Conclusions

-Are the conclusions supported by the data presented?

-Are the limitations of analysis clearly described?

-Do the authors discuss how these data can be helpful to advance our understanding of the topic under study?

-Is public health relevance addressed?

Reviewer #1: Yes the conclusion supported the data.

Reviewer #2: Overall, the discussion is much improved and easier to read, but the first paragraph of the discussion would work better as the second paragraph of the introduction.

You may want to add a sentence or two at the end of the discussion to explain the significance of the study to human health and preventing human disease due to the trematode.

--------------------

Editorial and Data Presentation Modifications?

Use this section for editorial suggestions as well as relatively minor modifications of existing data that would enhance clarity. If the only modifications needed are minor and/or editorial, you may wish to recommend “Minor Revision” or “Accept”.

Reviewer #1: PNTD-D-20-00929R1

Title

Line 2-3: for Clonorchis sinensis in Vietnam? – for instead of “of” - consider this in the entire manuscript - and in Vietnam is not italic

Abstract

Line 27-28: As well as, through experimental infections of five these snail species with eggs of C. sinensis. Remove five!

Line 30: Five snail species; …….. mention these species

Line 34: infective C. sinensis eggs…… remove infective

Line 35: infected, at an infection rate of 7.87%. with an infection rate.

Line 38: hosts

Keywords: small liver fluke

Author summary

Line 45: The role that these two thiarid snail species play.

Introduction

Table 1: sometimes you put the name of the one who first described the species between brackets and sometimes not. Please unify.

Line 73: Mas-Coma & Bargues [1] mentioned that their wide distribution potentially could result in the global.

Materials and Methods

Line 113: Five snail species were chosen for experimental infection. Based on what?

Line 130: Eggs were placed in 20 g of feces.

Results

Line 165: A total of 11,985 snails, representing 10 species, were collected (Table 2). You already mentioned that in the M&M.

Line 166: snails were examined for shed cercariae cercarial shedding

Line 187: Table 3. Cercariae

The last column on the right No snails (%). Do you mean No of Cercariae (%)?

Line 205: Table 4. Can you make the table legend more clear? The language is not clear.

You can transfer your data to describe the snails’ survival, infection and mortality rates after 21 days of exposure to C. sinensis eggs!

Discussion

Line 227: P. manchouricus is a host….

Line 286: muntiplex PCR

Reviewer #2: The captions for the tables and graphs only have single sentence titles and lack detailed explanations. These table captions and figure legend need to be expanded to be more accurate and provide more information about what is shown in the graph and tables.

Table 3 or 4 could be changed to figures to make the information in these tables easier to access for the reader.

--------------------

Summary and General Comments

Use this section to provide overall comments, discuss strengths/weaknesses of the study, novelty, significance, general execution and scholarship. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. If requesting major revision, please articulate the new experiments that are needed.

Reviewer #1: Thanks for addressing the previous comments on the first submission. I encourage the authors to further read and revise their manuscript to reach the optimum before publication.

Nice work and congratulations!

Reviewer #2: Overall, I found your manuscript much improved and easier to read, however, I still have a few concerns (see Reviewer Comments document).

--------------------

PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: No

Figure Files:

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email us at figures@plos.org.

Data Requirements:

Please note that, as a condition of publication, PLOS' data policy requires that you make available all data used to draw the conclusions outlined in your manuscript. Data must be deposited in an appropriate repository, included within the body of the manuscript, or uploaded as supporting information. This includes all numerical values that were used to generate graphs, histograms etc.. For an example see here: http://www.plosbiology.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pbio.1001908#s5.

Reproducibility:

To enhance the reproducibility of your results, PLOS recommends that you deposit laboratory protocols in protocols.io, where a protocol can be assigned its own identifier (DOI) such that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see http://journals.plos.org/plosntds/s/submission-guidelines#loc-materials-and-methods

Attachment

Submitted filename: PNTD - D- 20-00929_R1 Reviewer Comments.docx

Attachment

Submitted filename: PNTD-D-20-00929.docx

PLoS Negl Trop Dis. doi: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0009093.r005

Decision Letter 2

Banchob Sripa, Xiao-Nong Zhou

3 Jan 2021

Dear Mr. Nguyen,

We are pleased to inform you that your manuscript 'Are Melanoides tuberculata and Tarebia granifera (Gastropoda, Thiaridae), suitable first intermediate hosts of Clonorchis sinensis in Vietnam?' has been provisionally accepted for publication in PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases.

Before your manuscript can be formally accepted you will need to complete some formatting changes, which you will receive in a follow up email. A member of our team will be in touch with a set of requests.

Please note that your manuscript will not be scheduled for publication until you have made the required changes, so a swift response is appreciated.

IMPORTANT: The editorial review process is now complete. PLOS will only permit corrections to spelling, formatting or significant scientific errors from this point onwards. Requests for major changes, or any which affect the scientific understanding of your work, will cause delays to the publication date of your manuscript.

Should you, your institution's press office or the journal office choose to press release your paper, you will automatically be opted out of early publication. We ask that you notify us now if you or your institution is planning to press release the article. All press must be co-ordinated with PLOS.

Thank you again for supporting Open Access publishing; we are looking forward to publishing your work in PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases.

Best regards,

Xiao-Nong Zhou

Associate Editor

PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases

Banchob Sripa

Deputy Editor

PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases

***********************************************************

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Key Review Criteria Required for Acceptance?

As you describe the new analyses required for acceptance, please consider the following:

Methods

-Are the objectives of the study clearly articulated with a clear testable hypothesis stated?

-Is the study design appropriate to address the stated objectives?

-Is the population clearly described and appropriate for the hypothesis being tested?

-Is the sample size sufficient to ensure adequate power to address the hypothesis being tested?

-Were correct statistical analysis used to support conclusions?

-Are there concerns about ethical or regulatory requirements being met?

Reviewer #1: The methods section is appropriate and regulatory requirements were met.

Reviewer #2: The changes to the methods now incorporate the information on how adult parasites were collected and the permits required for IACUC or similar ethical care of animals.

**********

Results

-Does the analysis presented match the analysis plan?

-Are the results clearly and completely presented?

-Are the figures (Tables, Images) of sufficient quality for clarity?

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: The results and tables are adequate.

**********

Conclusions

-Are the conclusions supported by the data presented?

-Are the limitations of analysis clearly described?

-Do the authors discuss how these data can be helpful to advance our understanding of the topic under study?

-Is public health relevance addressed?

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: The rewritten discussion and conclusion are supported by the data and show improved clarity for the importance of this research.

**********

Editorial and Data Presentation Modifications?

Use this section for editorial suggestions as well as relatively minor modifications of existing data that would enhance clarity. If the only modifications needed are minor and/or editorial, you may wish to recommend “Minor Revision” or “Accept”.

Reviewer #1: There are a few minor edits in the attached doc version of the manuscript

Reviewer #2: Accept

**********

Summary and General Comments

Use this section to provide overall comments, discuss strengths/weaknesses of the study, novelty, significance, general execution and scholarship. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. If requesting major revision, please articulate the new experiments that are needed.

Reviewer #1: The authors addressed the issues raised by the reviewers and the publication merits manuscript in PLoS NTD.

Reviewer #2: Overall the manuscript is much improved from the original.

**********

PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: No

Attachment

Submitted filename: Verify the role of thiarid snails_R2 revised_23.11.20_clean.doc

PLoS Negl Trop Dis. doi: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0009093.r006

Acceptance letter

Banchob Sripa, Xiao-Nong Zhou

21 Jan 2021

Dear Mr. Nguyen,

We are delighted to inform you that your manuscript, "Are Melanoides tuberculata and Tarebia granifera (Gastropoda, Thiaridae), suitable first intermediate hosts of Clonorchis sinensis in Vietnam?," has been formally accepted for publication in PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases.

We have now passed your article onto the PLOS Production Department who will complete the rest of the publication process. All authors will receive a confirmation email upon publication.

The corresponding author will soon be receiving a typeset proof for review, to ensure errors have not been introduced during production. Please review the PDF proof of your manuscript carefully, as this is the last chance to correct any scientific or type-setting errors. Please note that major changes, or those which affect the scientific understanding of the work, will likely cause delays to the publication date of your manuscript. Note: Proofs for Front Matter articles (Editorial, Viewpoint, Symposium, Review, etc...) are generated on a different schedule and may not be made available as quickly.

Soon after your final files are uploaded, the early version of your manuscript will be published online unless you opted out of this process. The date of the early version will be your article's publication date. The final article will be published to the same URL, and all versions of the paper will be accessible to readers.

Thank you again for supporting open-access publishing; we are looking forward to publishing your work in PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases.

Best regards,

Shaden Kamhawi

co-Editor-in-Chief

PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases

Paul Brindley

co-Editor-in-Chief

PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases

Associated Data

    This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

    Supplementary Materials

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Verify the role of thiarid snails_2020_PLOS NTD_REVISED.doc

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: PNTD - D- 20-00929 Reviewer Comments.docx

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Response to reviewers (PLOS NTD)_5.10.20.docx

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: PNTD - D- 20-00929_R1 Reviewer Comments.docx

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: PNTD-D-20-00929.docx

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Response to reviewers_R2.docx

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Verify the role of thiarid snails_R2 revised_23.11.20_clean.doc

    Data Availability Statement

    All data underlying the findings are fully available without restriction. All relevant data are within the paper and its Supporting Information files.


    Articles from PLoS Neglected Tropical Diseases are provided here courtesy of PLOS

    RESOURCES