“…Several studies have assessed T. cruzi infection in C. l. familiaris and F. catus , which have shown a high variability, mainly depending on the diagnostic technique and, to a lesser extent, on the location of the populations prospected. The infection prevalence in C. l. familiaris ranges from 0 to 34.8% when assessed by optical microscopy, XD, and serology (IHA, IIF and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay; ELISA) [ 15 , 16 , 29 , 36 , 37 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 , 58 , 59 , 60 , 61 , 62 , 63 , 64 , 65 , 66 , 67 , 68 , 70 , 73 , 74 , 75 , 76 , 77 , 78 , 79 , 80 , 81 , 82 , 83 , 84 , 85 ], while few studies using cPCR, real-time PCR and nested PCR showed infection prevalence from 17.1 to 35.2% [ 19 , 86 , 87 ]. The infection prevalence in F. catus ranges from 0 to 23.4% when assessed by optical microscopy, XD, and serology (IHA) [ 15 , 16 , 29 , 36 , 37 , 39 ,…”