| Literature DB >> 35230588 |
Aparna M Thomas1, Harkirat Singh2, Harsh Panwar3, Ram S Sethi4, Nirbhay K Singh1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Microscopy is a routinely used technique for the diagnosis of canine tick-borne haemoparasitic diseases in various clinical laboratories worldwide. In an attempt to provide better diagnostic assay to the clients for effective management of these diseases duplex real-time PCR assays were applied. METHODS ANDEntities:
Keywords: Canine haemoparasites; Duplex real-time PCR assays; Molecular characterization; Risk factors
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35230588 PMCID: PMC8886702 DOI: 10.1007/s11033-022-07286-4
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Mol Biol Rep ISSN: 0301-4851 Impact factor: 2.742
Fig. 1a–d Field application of B. vogeli, E. canis and RPS 5 duplex real-time PCR assay
Fig. 2a–d Field application of B. gibsoni, H. canis and β-actin duplex real-time PCR assay
Prevalence of haemoparasites by microscopy and duplex real-time PCR assays
| Test | N | BV | BG | EC | HC | M1 | M2 | M3 | M4 | M5 | M6 | M7 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Microscopy | 338 | 1 (0.3) | 24 (7.1) | 6 (1.8) | 5 (1.5) | 0 (0.0) | 0 (0.0) | 0 (0.0) | 0 (0.0) | 0 (0.0) | 0 (0.0) | 0 (0.0) |
| Duplex real-time PCR assays | 338 | 6 (1.8) | 55 (16.3) | 36 (10.7) | 86 (25.4) | 16 (4.7) | 8 (2.4) | 7 (2.1) | 2 (0.6) | 2 (0.6) | 2 (0.6) | 2 (0.6) |
Values in brackets indicate %; BV, Babesia vogeli; BG, Babesia gibsoni; EC, Ehrlichia canis; HC, Hepatozoon canis
M Mixed infection of BG & HC, M Mixed infection of EC & BG, M Mixed infection of EC & HC, M Mixed infection of BV, HC & BG, M Mixed infection of EC, BV & BG, M Mixed infection of BV & BG, M Mixed infection of EC, HC & BG
Fig. 3Phylogenetic tree showing genetic relationships of a various isolates of B. gibsoni. b various isolates of B. vogeli. c various isolates of E. canis. d various isolates of H. canis
Distribution of tick borne haemoparasitic infections of dogs in accordance with various risk factors
| Risk factor | Parameter | N | Microscopy (%) | Duplex real-time PCR assays (%) | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| BG | BV | EC | HC | BG | BV | EC | HC | |||
| Age | < 6 m | 39 | 1 (2.6) | 0 (0.0) | 0 (0.0) | 0 (0.0) | 6 (15.4) | 1 (2.6) | 6 (15.4) | 9 (23.1) |
| 6– 12 m | 35 | 2 (5.7) | 0 (0.0) | 1 (2.9) | 0 (0.0) | 4 (11.4) | 0 (0.0) | 3 (8.6) | 10 (28.6) | |
| > 12 m | 264 | 21 (8.0) | 1 (0.4) | 5 (1.9) | 5 (1.9) | 45 (17.0) | 5 (1.9) | 27(10.2) | 67 (25.4) | |
| Pearson’s χ2 value | - | 1.611 | 0.281 | 0.961 | 1.423 | 0.741 | 0.793 | 1.127 | 0.296 | |
| Sex | Female | 116 | 3 (2.6) | 0 (0.0) | 1 (0.9) | 1 (0.9) | 14 (12.1) | 4 (3.4) | 14(12.1) | 26 (22.4) |
| Male | 222 | 21 (9.5) | 1 (0.5) | 5 (2.3) | 4 (1.8) | 41 (18.5) | 2 (0.9) | 22 (9.9) | 60 (27.0) | |
| Pearson’s χ2 value | - | 5.456* | 0.524 | 0.844 | 0.462 | 2.290 | 2.835 | 0.373 | 0.855 | |
| Breed | German Shepherd | 49 | 3 (6.1) | 0 (0.0) | 1 (2.0) | 0 (0.0) | 7 (14.3) | 0 (0.0) | 8 (16.3) | 20 (40.8) |
| Labrador | 59 | 3 (5.1) | 0 (0.0) | 0 (0.0) | 2 (3.4) | 9 (15.3) | 1 (1.7) | 4 (6.8) | 12 (20.3) | |
| Non-descript | 58 | 4 (4.8) | 0 (0.0) | 2 (2.4) | 2 (2.4) | 11 (13.3) | 2 (2.4) | 10(12.0) | 27 (33.7) | |
| Pit bull | 23 | 1 (4.3) | 1 (4.3) | 0 (0.0) | 0 (0.0) | 4 (17.4) | 1 (4.3) | 1 (4.3) | 6 (26.1) | |
| Pomeranian | 15 | 2 (13.3) | 0 (0.0) | 1 (6.7) | 0 (0.0) | 4 (26.7) | 0 (0.0) | 3 (20.0 | 2 (13.3) | |
| Pug | 38 | 7 (18.4) | 0 (0.0) | 1 (2.6) | 0 (0.0) | 10 (26.3) | 2 (5.3) | 5 (13.2) | 4 (10.5) | |
| Rottweiler | 12 | 1(8.3) | 0 (0.0) | 1(8.3) | 0 (0.0) | 2 (16.7) | 0 (0.0) | 3 (25.0) | 3 (25.0) | |
| Others# | 59 | 3 (5.1) | 0 (0.0) | 0 (0.0) | 1 (1.7) | 8 (13.6) | 0 (0.0) | 2 (3.4) | 11 (18.6) | |
| Pearson’s χ2 value | - | 10.011 | 13.736 | 7.938 | 4.047 | 5.086 | 6.158 | 11.212 | 16.984* | |
| Season | Summer | 128 | 11 (8.6) | 0 (0.0) | 3 (2.3) | 0 (0.0) | 25 (19.5) | 5 (3.9) | 17(13.3) | 33 (25.8) |
| Monsoon | 113 | 9 (8.0) | 1 (0.9) | 2 (18) | 2 (1.8) | 20 (17.7) | 1 (0.9) | 15(13.3) | 28 (24.8) | |
| Winter | 97 | 4 (4.1) | 0 (0.0) | 1 (1.0) | 3 (3.1) | 10 (10.3) | 0 (0.0) | 4 (4.1) | 25 (25.8) | |
| Pearson’s χ2 value | - | 1.864 | 1.997 | 0.545 | 3.720 | 3.698 | 5.601 | 6.090* | 0.040 | |
| Location | Amritsar | 27 | 2 (7.4) | 0 (0.0) | 1 (3.7) | 0 (0.0) | 5 (18.5) | 1 (3.7) | 5 (18.5) | 8 (29.6) |
| Barnala | 25 | 0 (0.0) | 0 (0.0) | 0 (0.0) | 0 (0.0) | 2 (8.0) | 1 (4.0) | 4 (16.0) | 5 (20.0) | |
| Fathegarh Sahib | 30 | 1 (3.3) | 0 (0.0) | 1 (3.3) | 0 (0.0) | 4 (13.3) | 0 (0.0) | 2 (6.7) | 9 (30.0) | |
| Gurdaspur | 28 | 2 (7.1) | 0 (0.0) | 0 (0.0) | 0 (0.0) | 4 (14.3) | 0 (0.0) | 0 (0.0) | 9 (32.1) | |
| Jalandhar | 30 | 3 (10.0) | 0 (0.0) | 1 (3.3) | 1 (3.3) | 5 (16.7) | 1 (3.3) | 3 (10.0) | 9 (30.0) | |
| Kapurthala | 28 | 1 (3.6) | 0 (0.0) | 0 (0.0) | 1 (3.6) | 3(10.7) | 0 (0.0) | 1 (3.6) | 4 (14.3) | |
| Ludhiana | 64 | 7(10.9) | 1 (1.6) | 3 (4.7) | 1 (3.3) | 18 (28.1) | 3 (4.7) | 16(25.0) | 11 (17.2) | |
| Moga | 28 | 3(10.7) | 0 (0.0) | 0 (0.0) | 0 (0.0) | 5 (17.9) | 0 (0.0) | 1 (3.6) | 8 (28.6) | |
| Patiala | 31 | 4(12.9) | 0 (0.0) | 0 (0.0) | 2(6.5) | 6 (19.4) | 0 (0.0) | 1 (3.2) | 8 (25.8) | |
| Sangrur | 26 | 1(3.8) | 0 (0.0) | 0 (0.0) | 0 (0.0) | 2 (7.7) | 0 (0.0) | 3 (11.5) | 9 (34.6) | |
| Tarn Taran | 31 | 0 (0.0) | 0 (0.0) | 0 (0.0) | 0 (0.0) | 1 (4.8) | 0 (0.0) | 0 (0.0) | 6 (28.6) | |
| Pearson’s χ2 value | - | 9.059 | 4.294 | 7.904 | 9.588 | 12.579 | 8.287 | 27.476* | 7.504 | |
| Total | 338 | 24 (7.1) | 1 (0.3) | 6 (1.8) | 5 (1.5) | 55 (16.3) | 6 (1.8) | 36(10.7) | 86 (25.4) | |
N number of examined samples; #[Saint Bernard (5), Spitz (5), Tibetan Mastiff (1), American Bully (5), Cocker Spaniel (1), Dogo Argentino (1), Bull Dog (2), Golden Retriever (4), Husky (3), Bull Terrier (2), Dachshund (6), Beagle (5), Greyhound (9), French Bully (2), Gaddi (3), French Mastiff (1), Pakistan Bully (1), Dalmatian (1), Doberman (1), Bully Pointer (3)]; *P < 0.05