The Danube River crosses ten countries and flows into the Black Sea through a vast delta. The ichthyofauna of the river includes over 100 species, and 68 have been reported for the ichthyofauna of the Bulgarian section of the Danube (Zarev
The present study aims to provide new data on the helminths and helminth communities of the three species of gobies (
In 2019 – 2021, during the spring, summer, and autumn, an ecologohelminthological study was conducted on a total of 72 specimens of gobies (Gobiidae) of the species: racer goby,
Fig. 1.
Sampling sites, Danube River (

Collecting fish samples was carried out under the permit for fishing for scientific research purposes from the Executive Agency for Fisheries and Aquaculture, Ministry of Agriculture. Nine specimens of
The scientific names of the fish species are used according to Vassilev
Metric data (L – total length, H – maximum height, W – body weight) of the studied specimens of
8.8 – 16 | 1.2 – 2.5 | 4 – 37 | ||
10.83 ± 2.24 | 1.73 ± 0.46 | 12.78 ± 10.60 | ||
5.4 – 12 | 0.8 – 2.4 | 1 – 18 | ||
8.61 ± 1.39 | 1.39 ± 0.31 | 4.49 ± 3.23 | ||
6.3 – 11.6 | 1.1 – 2.4 | 2 – 13 | ||
8.23 ± 1.66 | 1.56 ± 0.34 | 6.07 ± 3.49 |
Fish were euthanized by being in a container with a drop of oil of cloves. A visual inspection of the fish's body's surface was performed, followed by dissection and fixation of the internal organs in ethyl alcohol for further processing. All caught specimens of gobies were examined for the presence of parasites according to standard methods (Zashev & Margaritov, 1966; Bauer (Ed), 1987; Moravec, 2013). The isolated parasites were fixed and preserved in 70 % ethyl alcohol until further processing. From the isolated helminths from class Trematoda, permanent microscope slides (by Georgiev
This research on fish has complied with all the relevant national regulations and institutional policies for the care and use of animals.
For
Distribution of established helminth species in
Kudelin | Novo selo | Kudelin | Koshava | Novo selo | Kutovo | Kudelin | Koshava | Novo selo | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
• | • | • | • | • | • | • | |||
• | |||||||||
• | • | • | • | • | • | ||||
• | • | • | • | ||||||
• | |||||||||
• |
In
Species diversity and ecological indices in the helminth community of
1 | 52 | 52.00 | 10.40 | 20.00 | 52 | |
2 | 33 | 16.50 | 6.60 | 40.00 | 3–30 | |
2 | 3 | 1.50 | 0.60 | 40.00 | 1–2 | |
3 | 292 | 97.33 | 73.00 | 75.00 | 15–237 | |
3 | 59 | 19.67 | 14.75 | 75.00 | 2–39 | |
1 | 9 | 9.00 | 2.25 | 25.00 | 9 |
As a result of the ecologohelminthological research of
Species diversity and ecological indices in the helminth community of
15 | 47 | 3.13 | 1.52 | 48.39 | 1–17 | |
10 | 55 | 5.50 | 1.77 | 32.26 | 1–38 | |
8 | 13 | 1.63 | 0.42 | 25.81 | 1–2 | |
6 | 9 | 1.50 | 0.82 | 54.55 | 1–2 | |
1 | 1 | 1.00 | 0.09 | 9.09 | 1 | |
1 | 1 | 1.00 | 0.09 | 9.09 | 1 | |
1 | 3 | 3.00 | 3.00 | 100.00 | 3 |
At the examination of
Species diversity and ecological indices in the helminth community of
5 | 16 | 3.20 | 2.00 | 62.50 | 1–8 | |
5 | 123 | 24.60 | 15.38 | 62.50 | 1–90 | |
1 | 1 | 1.00 | 0.13 | 12.50 | 1 | |
1 | 1 | 1.00 | 0.33 | 33.33 | 1 | |
1 | 38 | 38.00 | 12.67 | 33.33 | 38 | |
1 | 11 | 11.00 | 3.67 | 33.33 | 11 | |
1 | 1 | 1.00 | 0.25 | 25.00 | 1 |
Species composition of parasites of
Fish species | Authors | Sampling sites | Endohelminth species |
---|---|---|---|
Ondračková | Danube River, Bulgaria – Vidin town, Koshava and Gomotartsi villages | * | |
Margaritov (1966) | Danube River, Bulgaria – between the mouth of the Timok River and Novo Selo village | * | |
Kakacheva-Avramova (1977) | Danube River, Bulgaria | * | |
Kakacheva-Avramova | Danube River, Bulgaria – Vidin and Lom towns | * | |
Molnár & Székely (1995) | Lake Balaton, Hungary | ||
Ondračková | Hron River, Slovakia | * | |
Molnár (2006) | Danube River, Hungary | * | |
Kosuthova | Danube River, Slovakia | * | |
Ondračková | Danube River, Bulgaria – Koshava and Gomotartsi villages | * | |
Kirin | Danube River, Bulgaria – Vetren village | ||
Ondračková | Danube River, Slovakia | * | |
Molnár (2006) | Danube River, Hungary | * | |
Kosuthova | Danube River, Slovakia | * | |
Mühlegger | Danube River, Austria | * | |
Ondračková | Danube River, Austria – Orth an der Donau | * | |
Danube River, Bulgaria – Vidin town | * | ||
Francová | Danube River, Austria – Orth an der Donau | * | |
Danube River, Slovakia – Gabčíkovo | * | ||
Danube River, Bulgaria – Vidin and Ruse towns | * | ||
Atanasov (2012) | Danube River, Bulgaria – Archar, Dobri Dol and Gomotartsi villages | ||
Ondračková | Danube River, Austria – Orth an der Donau | * | |
Danube River, Bulgaria – Vidin town | * | ||
Ondračková | Morava River, the Czech Republic |
Fig. 2.
Comparative examination of the ecological indices (MI, MA, and P%) of

During the ecologohelminthological research of the three species of gobies, 6 endohelminth species, of which 3 pathogenic species were found.
The ecological indices of helminths of the three fish species from the present study were compared with those from previous helminthological studies of the same fish species from the Bulgarian section of the Danube River. The helminths of
More recent studies on the helminths of
Studies on the helminths of
Due to the place of localization of the helminths and the inclusion of the three species of gobies in the human diet, it is recommended to perform a visual inspection of the abdominal cavity and the muscles of the three species of gobies; to remove the internal organs, especially of the smaller specimens of fish and to cook to a sufficiently high internal temperature. Due to the presence of pathogenic helminth species, not only for fish but also for humans, it is desirable to conduct systematic studies on the parasite fauna of the three species of gobies, not only from the freshwater ecosystem of the Danube River but also from other aquatic ecosystems. It is important to carry out helminthological studies on predatory fish species that feed on the gobies and are consumed by humans. It is also desirable to monitor the ecological indices of the helminths.
Fig. 1.

Fig. 2.

Species diversity and ecological indices in the helminth community of Babka gymnotrachelus from the Danube River (N – number of investigated fish; n – number of infected fish; p – number of fish helminths; MI – mean intensity; MA – mean abundance; P% – prevalence; R – range)
1 | 52 | 52.00 | 10.40 | 20.00 | 52 | |
2 | 33 | 16.50 | 6.60 | 40.00 | 3–30 | |
2 | 3 | 1.50 | 0.60 | 40.00 | 1–2 | |
3 | 292 | 97.33 | 73.00 | 75.00 | 15–237 | |
3 | 59 | 19.67 | 14.75 | 75.00 | 2–39 | |
1 | 9 | 9.00 | 2.25 | 25.00 | 9 |
Distribution of established helminth species in B. gymnotrachelus, N. fluviatilis, and N. melanostomus from four biotopes located in the upper section of the Danube River in Bulgaria.
Kudelin |
Novo selo |
Kudelin |
Koshava |
Novo selo |
Kutovo |
Kudelin |
Koshava |
Novo selo |
|
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
• | • | • | • | • | • | • | |||
• | |||||||||
• | • | • | • | • | • | ||||
• | • | • | • | ||||||
• | |||||||||
• |
Species diversity and ecological indices in the helminth community of Neogobius fluviatilis from the Danube River (N – number of investigated fish; n – number of infected fish; p – number of fish parasites; MI – mean intensity; MA – mean abundance; P% – prevalence; R – range)
15 | 47 | 3.13 | 1.52 | 48.39 | 1–17 | |
10 | 55 | 5.50 | 1.77 | 32.26 | 1–38 | |
8 | 13 | 1.63 | 0.42 | 25.81 | 1–2 | |
6 | 9 | 1.50 | 0.82 | 54.55 | 1–2 | |
1 | 1 | 1.00 | 0.09 | 9.09 | 1 | |
1 | 1 | 1.00 | 0.09 | 9.09 | 1 | |
1 | 3 | 3.00 | 3.00 | 100.00 | 3 |
Metric data (L – total length, H – maximum height, W – body weight) of the studied specimens of Babka gymnotrachelus, Neogobius fluviatilis, Neogobius melanostomus.
8.8 – 16 | 1.2 – 2.5 | 4 – 37 | ||
10.83 ± 2.24 | 1.73 ± 0.46 | 12.78 ± 10.60 | ||
5.4 – 12 | 0.8 – 2.4 | 1 – 18 | ||
8.61 ± 1.39 | 1.39 ± 0.31 | 4.49 ± 3.23 | ||
6.3 – 11.6 | 1.1 – 2.4 | 2 – 13 | ||
8.23 ± 1.66 | 1.56 ± 0.34 | 6.07 ± 3.49 |
Species diversity and ecological indices in the helminth community of Neogobius melanostomus from the Danube River (N – number of investigated fish; n – number of infected fish; p – number of fish parasites; MI – mean intensity; MA – mean abundance; P% – prevalence; R – range)
5 | 16 | 3.20 | 2.00 | 62.50 | 1–8 | |
5 | 123 | 24.60 | 15.38 | 62.50 | 1–90 | |
1 | 1 | 1.00 | 0.13 | 12.50 | 1 | |
1 | 1 | 1.00 | 0.33 | 33.33 | 1 | |
1 | 38 | 38.00 | 12.67 | 33.33 | 38 | |
1 | 11 | 11.00 | 3.67 | 33.33 | 11 | |
1 | 1 | 1.00 | 0.25 | 25.00 | 1 |
Species composition of parasites of Babka gymnotrachelus, Neogobius fluviatilis, Neogobius melanostomus from the Danube River and its basin in different countries (* – endohelminths also found in the present study from the respective fish species)
Fish species | Authors | Sampling sites | Endohelminth species |
---|---|---|---|
Danube River, Bulgaria – Vidin town, Koshava and Gomotartsi villages | * |
||
Danube River, Bulgaria – between the mouth of the Timok River and Novo Selo village | * |
||
Danube River, Bulgaria | * |
||
Danube River, Bulgaria – Vidin and Lom towns | * |
||
Lake Balaton, Hungary | |||
Hron River, Slovakia | * |
||
Danube River, Hungary | * |
||
Danube River, Slovakia | * |
||
Danube River, Bulgaria – Koshava and Gomotartsi villages | * |
||
Danube River, Bulgaria – Vetren village | |||
Danube River, Slovakia | * |
||
Danube River, Hungary | * |
||
Danube River, Slovakia | * |
||
Danube River, Austria | * |
||
Danube River, Austria – Orth an der Donau | * |
||
Danube River, Bulgaria – Vidin town | * |
||
Danube River, Austria – Orth an der Donau | * |
||
Danube River, Slovakia – Gabčíkovo | * |
||
Danube River, Bulgaria – Vidin and Ruse towns | * |
||
Danube River, Bulgaria – Archar, Dobri Dol and Gomotartsi villages | |||
Danube River, Austria – Orth an der Donau | * |
||
Danube River, Bulgaria – Vidin town | * |
||
Morava River, the Czech Republic |