3.9 Article

Epidemiology of equine pythiosis in southern of Rio Grande do Sul State, Brazil

期刊

PESQUISA VETERINARIA BRASILEIRA
卷 32, 期 9, 页码 865-868

出版社

REVISTA PESQUISA VETERINARIA BRASILEIRA
DOI: 10.1590/S0100-736X2012000900009

关键词

Pythium insidiosum; epidemiology; pythiosis; horses

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Marcolongo-Pereira C., Sallis E.S.V., Raffi M.B., Pereira D.I.B., Hinnah F.L., Coelho A.C.B. & Schild A.L. 2012. [Epidemiology of equine pythiosis in southern of Rio Grande do Sul State, Brazil.] Epidemiologia da pitiose equina na Regiao Sul do Rio Grande do Sul. Pesquisa Veterinaria Brasileira 32(9):865-868. Laboratorio Regional de Diagnostico, Faculdade de Veterinaria, Universidade Federal de Pelotas, Campus Universitario s/n, Pelotas, RS 96010-900, Brazil. E-mail: alschild@terra.com.br A survey of cases of equine pythiosis received by the Laboratorio Regional de Diagnostico, Faculdade de Veterinaria, Universidade Federal de Pelotas, from January 1979 to July 2011, was made to determine the epidemiological conditions in which the disease occurs in southern Rio Grande do Sul. Samples from 1888 horses were received; 435 samples were from the integumentary system, of which 63 (14.5%) corresponded to pythiosis. The affected animals were of both sexes and their age ranged from 8 months to 22 years. Crioulo was the most prevalent breed. Most cases of pythiosis were sent to the laboratory between March and June. The evolution of the lesions due to pythiosis ranged from 2 weeks to 1 year. The municipalities with the greatest number of cases were Pelotas (22/63), Santa Vitoria do Palmar (15/63) and Rio Grande (8/63). With respect to the climatic data, in most cases the maximum temperature in the probable month of infection was above or close to 30 C during at least one day. The observation of cases in the colder seasons of the year could be due to the stagnant water temperature higher than the temperature of the air, which allows the development of infective structures of Pythium insidiosum.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

3.9
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据