Serological detection of antibodies against Paracoccidioides brasiliensis in dogs with leishmaniasis

Abstract

The aim of this study was to detect antibodies against Paracoccidioides brasiliensis in dogs seropositive and seronegative for leishmaniasis. Sera from 836 dogs (449 positive and 387 negative to leishmaniasis) were analysed by ELISA and the immunodiffusion test using gp43 and exoantigen, respectively. The analysis of the 836 serum samples by ELISA and the immunodiffusion test showed a positivity of 67.8 % and 7.3%, respectively, for P. brasiliensis infection. The dogs positive to leishmaniasis showed a higher reactivity to gp43 (79.9%) and exoantigen (12.7%) than the negative ones (54.0% and 1.0%, respectively). The higher reactivity to P. brasiliensis antigens may be due to cross-reactivity or a co-infection of dogs by Leishmania and P. brasiliensis. The lower correlation (0.187) observed between reactivity to gp43 and Leishmania antigen reinforces the latter hypothesis.

Paracoccidioides brasiliensis Infection in Small Wild Mammals

“…presence in endemic areas. Infection by P. brasiliensis has been reported in domestic and wild animals such as dogs [5][6][7], horses in Uruguay and in Brazil [8,9], cows in Colombia and Brazil [10,11], sheep, goats and chickens in Brazil [12][13][14], and monkeys [15] and armadillos in Brazil [16]. P. brasiliensis isolates were obtained from soil samples in Argentina [17], Venezuela [18] and Brazil [19].…”

Paracoccidioides brasiliensis infection in dogs from Western Brazilian Amazon

“…No signiϐicant difference was observed in relation to sex as observed in other seroepidemiological studies carried out by our group to evaluate paracoccidioiomycosis infection in dogs, monkeys and chickens (Ono et al 2001, Silveira et al 2006, Corte et al 2007, Oliveira et al 2011.…”

“…In another study carried out by our group to evaluate infection by P. brasiliensis in urban dogs from Mato Grosso do Sul, a signiϐicantly lower positivity was observed in dogs under one year old (Silveira et al 2006). In studies on experimental paracoccidioidomycosis in dogs, puppies were more susceptible to developing paracocccidioidomycosis than adults (Ono et al 2003, Eisele et al 2004.…”

“…Epidemiological studies have shown that paracoccidioidomycosis occurs in several species of domestic and wild animals such as dogs (Mós & Fava-Netto 1974, Ono et al 2001, Silveira et al 2006, Canteros et al 2010, Fontana et al 2010, cows (Silveira et al 2008), horses (Conti Diaz et al 1972, Costa & Fava-Netto 1978, Corte et al 2009), armadillos (Fernandes et al 2004), sheep (Costa & Fava-Netto 1978, Oliveira et al 2011, monkeys (Corte et al 2007), guinea pigs, raccoons, grisons, porcupine (Richini-Pereira et al 2008) and chickens (Gonçalves et al 2011). The fungus was also isolated from armadillos (Naiff et al 1986, Bagagli et al 1998, Corredor et al 1999, Silva-Vergara et al 2000 penguin faeces (Gezuele 1989), and recently, natural paracoccidioidomycosis was reported in two dogs (Ricci et al 2004, Farias et al 2011), a cat (Gonzalez et al 2010) and a two-toed sloth (Trejo-Chávez et al 2010).…”

“…Several decades later the natural infection by P. brasiliensis was reported in dogs from São Paulo (74.3-78.2%), Paraná (14.8-89.5%), Mato Grosso do Sul (67.8%), Minas Gerais (53.7%), in Brazil (Mós & Fava-Netto 1974, Ono et al 2001, Silveira et al 2006, Fontana et al 2010 and Argentina (2.2%) (Canteros et al 2010).…”