| Literature DB >> 24667065 |
Lanjing Wei, Patrick Kelly, Kate Ackerson, Jilei Zhang, Heba S El-Mahallawy, Bernhard Kaltenboeck, Chengming Wang1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Although many vector-borne diseases are important causes of morbidity and mortality in dogs in tropical areas and potential zoonoses, there is little information on these conditions in Central America.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2014 PMID: 24667065 PMCID: PMC3987057 DOI: 10.1186/1756-3305-7-126
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Parasit Vectors ISSN: 1756-3305 Impact factor: 3.876
Figure 1Gene copy number of five vector-borne pathogens in canine whole blood samples. Quantitative FRET-PCRs determined the gene copy number of five tick-borne pathogens. The rRNA copy numbers for E. canis (84 ± 71 /per ml whole blood; range 50 ~ 313) were significantly lower than those for H. canis (72,120 ± 260,148), A. platys (370472 ± 659438; range 651 ~ 1534409), and B. canis (35161 ± 61,335; range 72 ~ 199,552). The gltA copy number for R. felis (204 ± 125; range 116 and 292) was not significantly different from the rRNA copy number of the other four tick-borne agents. The Y-axis is shown as logarithmic scale, and the data were shown as average gene copy number (-), mean ± SD (□) and mean ±1.96 × SD (Ι).
Prevalences of vector-borne agents in dogs determined by quantitative PCRs
| 1 | - | ||||
| 2 | - | - | - | - | |
| 3 | - | - | - | - | - |
| 4 | - | - | |||
| 5 | - | - | - | - | |
| 6 | - | - | - | ||
| 7 | - | - | - | ||
| 8 | - | - | - | - | - |
| 9 | - | - | - | - | |
| 10 | - | - | - | - | |
| 11 | - | - | - | ||
| 12 | - | - | - | ||
| 13 | - | - | - | ||
| 14 | - | - | - | - | |
| 15 | - | - | - | - | - |
| 16 | - | - | - | ||
| 17 | - | - | - | - | - |
| 18 | - | - | - | - | |
| 19 | - | - | - | - | - |
| 20 | - | ||||
| 21 | - | - | - | ||
| 22 | - | - | - | - | |
| 23 | - | - | - | - | - |
| 24 | - | ||||
| 25 | - | - | |||
| 26 | - | - | - | - | - |
| 27 | - | - | - | - | - |
| 28 | - | - | - | ||
| 29 | - | - | - | - | |
| 30 | - | - | - | - | |
| 31 | - | - | - | ||
| 32 | - | - | - | - | |
| 33 | - | - | - | ||
| 34 | - | - | - | - | - |
| 35 | - | - | |||
| 36 | - | - | - | - | |
| 37 | - | ||||
| 38 | - | - | - | - | |
| 39 | - | - | - | ||
“-”denotes the absence of examined DNA in the whole blood of the designated dog.