4.5 Article

Prevalence and molecular characterisation of Cryptosporidium and Giardia species in pre-weaned sheep in Australia

期刊

VETERINARY PARASITOLOGY
卷 161, 期 1-2, 页码 19-24

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.vetpar.2008.12.021

关键词

Cryptosporidium; Giardia; Pre-weaned sheep 18S rRNA; gdh; C. bovis; Cervid genotype; C. parvum; Genotype A; Genotype E

资金

  1. Water Corporation, Perth, Western Australia (www.watercorporation.com.au)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A total of 477 faecal samples from pre-weaned sheep from 5 different farms in the south west of Western Australia were screened for the presence of Cryptosporidium and Giardia using PCR. There were substantial differences in prevalence between the farms and overall prevalence was 24.5% and 11.1%, respectively for Cryptosporidium and Giardia. At the 18S locus, 66 Cryptosporidium positives were identified, the majority of which were C. bovis (n = 52), followed by the cervid genotype (n = 10) and C. parvum (n = 2). At a second diagnostic locus, using C. parvum and C. hominis-specific qPCR primers, 63 C parvum positives were identified, some of which were co-infections with C bovis. The C. parvum/C hominis qPCR was more sensitive than the nested 18S PCR at detecting C parvum. This may be due to the low numbers of oocysts present, as quantitation data indicated that all the C parvum detected were present in low numbers (1-10 oocysts). It may also be that using C parvum-specific primers is necessary to determine the true prevalence of C parvum. Amongst Giardia positive isolates, G. duodenalis genotype E (livestock) was the most prevalent (36/53), with G, duodenalis genotype A detected in five positive isolates. There were also 11 mixed A and E infections detected. The findings of the present study indicate that pre-weaned lambs are not an important source of zoonotic Giardia genotypes in Australia but may be an important source of zoonotic Cryptosporidium. (c) 2009 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

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

4.5
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