2021
DOI: 10.1007/s00436-021-07195-8
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Molecular epidemiology and prevalence of babesial infections in dogs in two hyperendemic foci in Brazil

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
3

Relationship

1
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 26 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…This may be due to the shorter time of circulation of B. vogeli in the blood of infected animals. Epidemiological data from previous studies demonstrated that B. vogeli is highly prevalent in Brazil, with up to 8.2% molecularly positive dogs in Pernambuco (Ramos et al 2010 ; Dantas-Torres et al 2021 ), 8.0% in São Paulo (O’Dwyer et al 2009 ), 10.0% in Paraíba (Rotondano et al 2015 ), 15.0% in Ceará (Fonsêca et al 2022 ), 30.6% in Minas Gerais (Barbosa et al 2020 ) and 14.1% in Rio de Janeiro (Paulino et al 2018 ; Camilo et al 2021 ). Conversely, H. canis has been reported with lower prevalence (i.e., 0.4% to 5.4%) in Northeastern Brazil (Ramos et al 2010 ; Dantas-Torres et al 2021 ), differently from the Southeastern region, in which higher prevalence values (i.e., 58.7–79.2%) were reported (Miranda et al 2014 ; Spolidorio et al 2009 ).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This may be due to the shorter time of circulation of B. vogeli in the blood of infected animals. Epidemiological data from previous studies demonstrated that B. vogeli is highly prevalent in Brazil, with up to 8.2% molecularly positive dogs in Pernambuco (Ramos et al 2010 ; Dantas-Torres et al 2021 ), 8.0% in São Paulo (O’Dwyer et al 2009 ), 10.0% in Paraíba (Rotondano et al 2015 ), 15.0% in Ceará (Fonsêca et al 2022 ), 30.6% in Minas Gerais (Barbosa et al 2020 ) and 14.1% in Rio de Janeiro (Paulino et al 2018 ; Camilo et al 2021 ). Conversely, H. canis has been reported with lower prevalence (i.e., 0.4% to 5.4%) in Northeastern Brazil (Ramos et al 2010 ; Dantas-Torres et al 2021 ), differently from the Southeastern region, in which higher prevalence values (i.e., 58.7–79.2%) were reported (Miranda et al 2014 ; Spolidorio et al 2009 ).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%