| Literature DB >> 24031825 |
Manuel Thomas1, K Abraham Samuel, Punnen Kurian.
Abstract
The past few decades have witnessed an overwhelming increase in the incidence of fungal infections, particularly in immunocompromised individuals. Consequently, zoonotic diseases, especially through rodents constitute a prominent group among the emerging diseases. Rodents are commensal to man and related health risks are common. Water rats (Rattus norvegicus) are typical to Vembanadu-Kol wetland agroecosystems, where they can act as a good carrier nexus for pathogens. The present study evaluates the carrier status of water rats with respect to fungal pathogens. A total of fifty two fungi covering eighteen families were isolated. Among the isolates, eight were dermaptophytes and Chrysosporium sp. (89.18%) was the frequent isolate. The source-wise analyses showed an increased isolation from ventral hair (67 isolates). Water rats of Vembanadu-Kol wetland agroecosystem are potent carrier of dermaptophytes and other opportunistic fungi, and strong carrier paths are existing too.Entities:
Keywords: Agroecosystem; Fungi; Rodents; Vembanadu-Kol wetland
Year: 2012 PMID: 24031825 PMCID: PMC3768984 DOI: 10.1590/S1517-838220120001000028
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Braz J Microbiol ISSN: 1517-8382 Impact factor: 2.476
Photo 1Live traps set in the field
Photo 2Study area
List of fungal pathogens isolated (n=37)
| Fungi isolated | Frequency of occurrence (%) | ||||
| I. Nectariaceae | |||||
| 1. | 18.91 | ||||
| 2. | 2.70 | ||||
| 3. | 2.70 | ||||
| 4. | 10.81 | ||||
| 5. | 5.40 | ||||
| 6. | 32.43 | ||||
| 7. | 16.21 | ||||
| 8. | 2.70 | ||||
| 9. | 2.70 | ||||
| II. Arthrodermataceae | |||||
| 1. | 16.21 | ||||
| 2. | 24.32 | ||||
| 3. | 5.40 | ||||
| 4. | 16.21 | ||||
| 5. | 2.70 | ||||
| 6. | 5.40 | ||||
| 7. | 2.70 | ||||
| 8. | 5.40 | ||||
| III. Trichomcnaceae | |||||
| 1. | 32.43 | ||||
| 2. | 13.51 | ||||
| 3. | 2.70 | ||||
| 4. | 21.62 | ||||
| 5. | 2.70 | ||||
| 6. | 10.81 | ||||
| 7. | 2.70 | ||||
| 8. | 16.21 | ||||
| IV. Pleosporaceae | |||||
| 1. | 2.70 | ||||
| 2. | 32.43 | ||||
| 3. | 10.81 | ||||
| 4. | 2.70 | ||||
| 5. | 2.70 | ||||
| V. Hypocreaceae | |||||
| 1. | 8.10 | ||||
| 2. | 2.70 | ||||
| 3. | 2.70 | ||||
| VI. Chaetoniaceae | |||||
| 1. | 2.70 | ||||
| 2. | 2.70 | ||||
| 3. | 2.70 | ||||
| VII Mucoraceae | |||||
| 1. | 24.32 | ||||
| 2. | 5.40 | ||||
| 3. | 2.70 | ||||
| VIII Microascaceae | |||||
| 1. | 5.40 | ||||
| 2. | 2.70 | ||||
| IX Dipodascaceae | |||||
| 1. | 10.81 | ||||
| 2. | 2.70 | ||||
| X. Cunninghamellaceae | |||||
| 1. | 5.40 | ||||
| XI. Onygenaceae | |||||
| 1. | 87.18 | ||||
| XII. Myxotrichaceae | |||||
| 1. | 2.70 | ||||
| XII. Clavicipitaceae | |||||
| 1. | 2.70 | ||||
| XIV. Sacharomycetaceae | |||||
| 1. | 2.70 | ||||
| XV. Sclerotiniaceae | |||||
| 1. | 8.10 | ||||
| XVI. Niessliaceae | |||||
| 1. | 2.70 | ||||
| XVII. Cephalothecaceae | |||||
| 1. | 13.51 | ||||
| XVIII. Trichosporonaceae | |||||
| 1. | 2.70 |