| Literature DB >> 23828008 |
Aurélien Mercier1, Madougou Garba, Henri Bonnabau, Mamadou Kane, Jean-Pierre Rossi, Marie-Laure Dardé, Gauthier Dobigny.
Abstract
A serological survey of Toxoplasma gondii was conducted on 766 domestic and peridomestic rodents from 46 trapping sites throughout the city of Niamey, Niger. A low seroprevalence was found over the whole town with only 1.96% of the rodents found seropositive. However, differences between species were important, ranging from less than 2% in truly commensal Mastomys natalensis, Rattus rattus and Mus musculus, while garden-associated Arvicanthis niloticus displayed 9.1% of seropositive individuals. This is in line with previous studies on tropical rodents--that we reviewed here--which altogether show that Toxoplasma seroprevalence in rodent is highly variable, depending on many factors such as locality and/or species. Moreover, although we were not able to decipher statistically between habitat or species effect, such a contrast between Nile grass rats and the other rodent species points towards a potentially important role of environmental toxoplasmic infection. This would deserve to be further scrutinised since intra-city irrigated cultures are extending in Niamey, thus potentially increasing Toxoplasma circulation in this yet semi-arid region. As far as we are aware of, our study is one of the rare surveys of its kind performed in Sub-Saharan Africa and the first one ever conducted in the Sahel.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2013 PMID: 23828008 PMCID: PMC3970615 DOI: 10.1590/S0074-0276108042013002
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Mem Inst Oswaldo Cruz ISSN: 0074-0276 Impact factor: 2.743
Recapitulation of studies conducted in Niger and dealing with Toxoplasma seroprevalence in human
| Raw seroprevalence | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| References | Geographic level | Target population | NIT | (%) |
| Dumas et al. (1985) | NA | Infants | 14 | 42.9 |
| Their mother | 14 | 58.1 | ||
| Develoux et al. (1988) | Niamey and surroundings | General population | 400 | 18.2 |
| Urban population | 199 | 11.5 | ||
| Rural population | 201 | 24.8 | ||
| Develoux et al. (1989) | Niamey | Pregnant women | 218 | 15.1 |
| Delacroix & Laporte (1989) | Akokan (Arlit) | Women of reproductive age | 229 | 3.9 |
| Dumas et al. (1991) | Arlit | Pregnant women | 242 | 5.4 |
| Infants | 77 | 2.6 | ||
| Julvez et al. (1996) | Niamey and surroundings | General population | 371 | 18 |
NA: not available; NIT: number of individuals tested for toxoplasmosis.
Fig. 1Distribution map of the different trapping sites within Niamey with squares, circles and triangles corresponding to (i) fallow lands and gardens, (ii) habitations and (iii) other site types (industrial-like spots, public buildings, markets and transport stations), respectively (A). Respective parts of rodent species trapped at each trapping site. Circle sizes are proportional to the number of rodent captures (B). Respective parts of seropositive and seronegative rodents detected at each trapping sites. As for B, circle sizes are proportional to the number of rodents that were investigated for Toxoplasma serology. White and red colours indicate seronegative and seropositive rodents, respectively (C).
Rodent captures as well as number of seropositive individuals per species and habitat types
| Rodents (seropositive)n (n) | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Species | Total(n) | Industrial
| Gardens | Houses | Markets | Seropositiven (%) |
|
| 66 | 0 (0) | 66 (6) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | 6 (9.1) |
|
| 122
| 82 (0) | 3 (0) | 27 (2) | 10 (0) | 2 (1.6) |
|
| 61 | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | 61 (1) | 0 (0) | 1 (1.6) |
|
| 502 | 7 (0) | 9 (0) | 477 (4) | 9 (2) | 6 (1.2) |
|
| 2 | 0 (0) | 2 (0) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) |
|
| 12 | 0 (0) | 12 (0) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | 0 (0) |
| Total | 765 | 89 (0) | 92 (6) | 564 (7) | 19 (2) | 15 (1.96) |
a: firms, slaughter house, industrial storage houses and public buildings (Supplementary data); b: one seronegative rat has an ambiguous geographic origin (Supplementary data) and could not be included.
Individual characteristics of all seropositive rodents identified in the present study
| Number of other rodentstrapped on the same site a (n) | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Species | Individual
| Sex | Age | Titres | Total | Seropositive | Remarks |
|
| NIA 125 | M | Ad | 1/640 | 5 Mn | 0 | - |
| NIA 143 | M | Ad | 1/640 | 10 Mn | 0 | - | |
| NIA 205 | F | Ad | 1/640 | 41 Mn | 0 | - | |
| NIA 217 | M | Ad | 1/640 | 21 Mn | 0 | - | |
| NIA 243 | F | Juv | 1/32 | 7 Mn + 7 Rr | 0 | Double capture | |
| NIA 243b | F | Juv | |||||
|
| NIA-GRM-31 | M | Ad | 1/16 | 59 Mm + 5 Rr | 0 | - |
|
| NIA-CGA-13 | F | Ad | 1/16 | 1 Mn + 18 Rr | 1 Rr | - |
| NIA-CGA-5a | F | Ad | 1/32 | 1 Mn + 18 Rr | 1 Rr | Double capture with a seronegative juvenile | |
|
| NIA-CYA-4 | F | Ad | 1/16 | 8 Rr | 0 | - |
| NIA-DAR-1 | F | Ad | 1/640 | 4 An | 0 | - | |
| NIA-LMO-2 | F | Ad | 1/16 | 18 An + 2 Cg | 3 | - | |
| NIA-LMO-7 | F | Ad | 1/32 | 18 An + 2 Cg | 3 | - | |
| NIA-LMO-20 | F | Juv | 1/16 | 17 An + 2 Cg | 2 | Triple capture with a third seronegative adult female | |
| NIA-LMO-21 | M | Juv | |||||
a: not necessarily at the same date; b: trapping sites: fallow lands (DAR), garden (CGA, CYA, LMO), market (GRM); Ad: adult; F: female; Juv: juvenile; M: male; NIA: Niamey.
Recapitulation of studies dealing with Toxoplasma seroprevalence in rodents within intertropical regions
| Species | Region | Seroprevalence % (n/n) | References |
|---|---|---|---|
| Rodents (not specified) | China | 0.9 (9/955) | Lin et al. (1990) |
| Wild rodents | Gabon | 2.7 (1/37) | Mercier (2010) |
|
| Thailand | 2.7 (1/37) | Jittapalapong et al. (2011) |
|
| Thailand | 0 (0/11) | Jittapalapong et al. (2011) |
|
| French Guiana | 60.9 (14/23) | Carme et al. (2002) |
| French Guiana | 60 (22/37) | de Thoisy et al. (2003) | |
|
| French Guiana | 23.3 (10/43) | Carme et al. (2002) |
| French Guiana | 18 (8/45) | de Thoisy et al. (2003) | |
|
| Brazil | 69.8 (104/149) | Canon-Franco et al. (2003) |
| Brazil | 75 (49/64) | Yai et al. (2008) | |
| Brazil | 61.5 (16/26) | Truppel et al. (2010) | |
| French Guiana | 6.7 (2/30) | Halos et al. (2007) | |
|
| Thailand | 12.5 (2/16) | Jittapalapong et al. (2011) |
|
| Thailand | 5.3 (2/38) | Jittapalapong et al. (2011) |
|
| Thailand | 7.7 (4/52) | Jittapalapong et al. (2011) |
|
| Brazil | 0 (0/19) | Araujo et al. (2010) |
| Costa Rica | 5 (5/100) | Chinchilla (1978) | |
| Mexico | 3.1 (4/127) | Dubey et al. (2009) | |
| Panama | 0.035 (2/571) | Frenkel et al. (1995) | |
|
| French Guiana | 4 (1/26) | de Thoisy et al. (2003) |
|
| Thailand | 0 (0/13) | Jittapalapong et al. (2011) |
|
| Costa Rica | 30 (7/23) | Chinchilla (1978) |
| Mexico | 0.8 (2/249) | Dubey et al. (2009 | |
|
| Hawaii | 7 (5/85) | Wallace (1973a, b) |
| Thailand | 1.3 (1/79) | Jittapalapong et al. (2011) | |
|
| China | 3 (3/101) | Yin et al. (2010) |
| Thailand | 7.1 (11/156) | Jittapalapong et al. (2011) | |
|
| China | 3.4 (4/116) | Yin et al. (2010) |
| Costa Rica | 11.2 (12/107) | Ruiz & Frenkel (1980) | |
| Egypt | 26.7 (16/60) | El Nahal et al. (1982) | |
| Egypt | 34 (34/100) | Rifaat et al. (1971) | |
| United States of America | 12 (2/8) | Burridge et al. (1979) | |
| Grenada Island | 0.8 (2/238) | Dubey et al. (2006) | |
| Hawaii | 1.4 (1/73) | Wallace (1973a, b) | |
| India | 0 (0/186) | Mir et al. (1982) | |
| Panama | 23.3 (52/226) | Frenkel et al. (1995) | |
| Philippines | 60 (50/83) | Salibay & Claveria (2005) | |
| Thailand | 0 (0/34) | Jittapalapong et al. (2011) | |
|
| Africa | 8.2 (5/61) | de Roever-Bonnet (1972) |
| Brazil | 0 (0/24) | Araujo et al. (2010) | |
| Egypt | 42.7 (47/110) | Rifaat et al. (1973) | |
| Egypt | 16.7 (2/12) | El Nahal et al. (1982) | |
| Florida | 13.8 (5/38) | Burridge et al. (1979) | |
| Gabon | 2.3 (1/43) | Mercier (2010) | |
| Hawaï | 8 (36/476) | Wallace (1973a, b) | |
| Micronesia | 3 (7/238) | Wallace (1973a, b) | |
| Philippines | 50 (37/74) | Salibay & Claveria (2005) | |
|
| Mexico | 0 (0/69) | Dubey et al. (2009) |
|
| Nigeria | 100 (104/104) | Arene (1986) |
taxonomic nomenclature follows the last edition of the mammalian systematics reference book ( Wilson & Reeder 2005 ).
Nomenclature, type and Global Positioning System (GPS) coordinates of all 46 trapping sites
| GPS | Rodents | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Site | Description | Latitude(N) | Longitude(E) | Species | (n) | Identification | Seropositive(n) |
| NA | NA | NA |
| 1 | M | 0 | |
| ABA | Slaughter house | 13.48950 | 2.12275 |
| 59 | M, G | 0 |
| BAF2 | Habitations | 13.54401 | 2.13570 |
| 32 | PCR-RFLP (18) | 0 |
| BAN | Habitations | 13.52161 | 2.11670 |
| 1 | M | 0 |
| BOU | Habitations | 13.53742 | 2.11331 |
| 46 | PCR-RFLP (30), K (4) | 0 |
| CGA | Habitations | 13.50222 | 2.11235 |
| 1 | PCR-RFLP (1) | 0 |
|
| 19 | M, G | 2 | ||||
| COA | Habitations | 13.53571 | 2.07399 |
| 2 | PCR-RFLP (1) | 0 |
| CRA-1 | Fallow lands | 13.49235 | 2.09877 |
| 4 | M | 0 |
| CRA-2 | Fallow lands | 13.49655 | 2.10079 |
| 4 | M | 0 |
|
| 2 | K (2) | 0 | ||||
| CRA-3 | Fallow lands | 13.50060 | 2.10141 |
| 4 | M | 0 |
| CYA | Habitations | 13.51204 | 2.09884 |
| 49 | PCR-RFLP (26) | 0 |
|
| 2 | M, G | 0 | ||||
| DAR | Habitations | 13.54624 | 2.09594 |
| 39 | PCR-RFLP (39), K (2) | 0 |
| GAM | Habitations | 13.49392 | 2.12501 |
| 18 | PCR-RFLP (10) | 0 |
| GAM-1 | Habitations | 13.49792 | 2.12705 |
| 2 | PCR-RFLP (1) | 0 |
| GAW | Habitations | 13.48970 | 2.10232 |
| 6 | PCR-RFLP (1) | 1 |
| GNA | Habitations | 13.47908 | 2.11402 |
| 23 | PCR-RFLP (16), K (2) | 1 |
| GOU | Habitations | 13.51856 | 2.10883 |
| 1 | M | 0 |
| GRM | Habitations | 13.51882 | 2.11500 |
| 60 | M, K (5) | 1 |
|
| 5 | M, G | 0 | ||||
| GRM-M | Market | 13.51527 | 2.11732 |
| 3 | M, G | 0 |
| J-CYA | Industrial store house | 13.52029 | 2.08104 |
| 8 | M, G | 0 |
| Gardens |
| 1 | M | 1 | |||
| J-DAR | Gardens | 13.54714 | 2.09238 |
| 5 | M | 1 |
| J-GAM | Gardens | 13.48473 | 2.12775 |
| 11 | M, K (2) | 0 |
| Houses within garden |
| 1 | PCR-RFLP (1) | 0 | |||
| J-KIR1 | Gardens | 13.49397 | 2.11170 |
| 4 | M | 0 |
| Houses within garden |
| 8 | PCR-RFLP (2) | 0 | |||
| J-KIR2 | Gardens | 13.47573 | 2.09936 |
| 2 | M | 0 |
| J-LMO | Gardens | 13.50880 | 2.07810 |
| 19 | M, K (2) | 4 |
|
| 2 | M | 0 | ||||
| J-NOG | Gardens | 13.50558 | 2.09723 |
| 22 | M | 0 |
| KAR | Habitations | 13.49366 | 2.09650 |
| 42 | PCR-RFLP (6), K (2) | 1 |
| KAR-1 | Habitations | 13.49143 | 2.08843 |
| 11 | K (5) | 1 |
| KAR-2 | Habitations | 13.49316 | 2.09262 |
| 9 | PCR-RFLP (1) | 0 |
| KIR | Industrial complex | 13.49489 | 2.10978 |
| 16 | M, G | 0 |
| KIR-1 | Habitations | 13.48022 | 2.09984 |
| 5 | PCR-RFLP (1) | 0 |
| KOT | Habitations | 13.58922 | 2.10928 |
| 10 | PCR-RFLP (8) | 0 |
| KOU-1 | Habitations | 13.56106 | 2.04155 |
| 3 | PCR-RFLP (1) | 0 |
| LMO | Habitations | 13.50696 | 2.07653 |
| 34 | PCR-RFLP (22), K (4) | 0 |
| PEM | Market | 13.51396 | 2.10997 |
| 9 | PCR-RFLP (3) | 2 |
|
| 7 | M, G | 0 | ||||
| PGP | Public building | 13.52093 | 2.09161 |
| 1 | M | 0 |
| PKE | Habitations | 13.48536 | 2.10164 |
| 40 | PCR-RFLP (23), K (2) | 0 |
| REC | Habitations | 13.54157 | 2.08950 |
| 1 | PCR-RFLP (1) | 0 |
| ROF | Habitations | 13.52081 | 2.15193 |
| 12 | PCR-RFLP (9), K (2) | 0 |
| ROF-1 | Habitations | 13.52358 | 2.14766 |
| 7 | PCR-RFLP (2) | 0 |
| RTO | Store house | 13.49539 | 2.07916 |
| 5 | PCR-RFLP (1) | 0 |
| TCH | Habitations | 13.58936 | 2.10137 |
| 16 | PCR-RFLP (16) | 0 |
| WAD | Habitations | 13.51820 | 2.14351 |
| 10 | PCR-RFLP (9), K (2) | 0 |
| WAD-1 | Coach station | 13.51186 | 2.14032 |
| 1 | M | 0 |
| YAB | Habitations | 13.52740 | 2.08175 |
| 23 | PCR-RFLP (10), K (1) | 0 |
| YAB-1 | Habitations | 13.52891 | 2.08186 |
| 10 | PCR-RFLP (1) | 0 |
| YAH | Habitations | 13.53435 | 2.08208 |
| 28 | PCR-RFLP (17), K (4) | 0 |
G: genotyping; K: karyotyping; M: morphology; NA: not available (individual from Niamey, but with no precise geographic origin); PCR-RFLP: polymerase chain reaction-restriction fragment length polymorphism.