4.1 Article

Seroepidemiology of Sarcocystis neurona, Toxoplasma gondii and Neospora spp. among horses in the south of the state of Minas Gerais, Brazil

Journal

REVISTA BRASILEIRA DE PARASITOLOGIA VETERINARIA
Volume 25, Issue 2, Pages 142-150

Publisher

BRAZILIAN COLL VETERINARY PARASITOLOGY
DOI: 10.1590/S1984-29612016029

Keywords

Apicomplexa; Sarcocystidae; indirect immunofluorescence; risk factors

Funding

  1. Research Support Foundation of the State of Minas Gerais (Fundacao de Amparo a Pesquisa do Estado de Minas Gerais, FAPEMIG)
  2. Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Cientifico e Tecnologico

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The present study used the indirect fluorescent antibody test (IFAT) to determine the seroprevalence of Sarcocystis neurona, Toxoplasma gondii and Neospora spp., and evaluated the variables associated with these infections among 506 apparently healthy horses, reared in the south of the state of Minas Gerais, Brazil. This study was conducted between April 2012 and October 2013. Among the horses, the true prevalence of S. neurona was 26% (95% CI: 22.0-30.4%), T. gondii 19.9% (95% CI: 15.5-24.8%) and Neospora spp. 23.9% (95% CI: 19.9-28.1%); and among the farms, 88.3% (95% CI: 74.4-91.6%), 71.6% (95% CI: 41-92.8%) and 85% (95% CI: 70.7-96.1%), respectively. Regarding mixed infection, 17 horses (3.4%) were seropositive for both S. neurona and T. gondii, 16 (3.2%) for T. gondii and Neospora spp. and 14 (2.8%) for S. neurona and Neospora spp. The associations between seropositivity and variables relating to the structure of the farm, management and health were analyzed using the logistic regression analysis, through the generalized estimating equations (GEE). The results suggest that the south of Minas Gerais is an enzootic area for S. neurona, T. gondii and Neospora spp. among horses, with prevalence of asymptomatic subclinical or chronic infections.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available