ArticleVector borne and zoonotic diseases (Larchmont, N.Y.)2015
Ectoparasite Infestations and Canine Infection by Rickettsiae and Ehrlichiae in a Semi-Arid Region of Northeastern Brazil.
Article in Vector borne and zoonotic diseases (Larchmont, N.Y.), 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Trial
- Efficacy of afoxolaner or a combination of afoxolaner and milbemycin oxime against fleas, ticks, lice and/or intestinal nematodes in dogs naturally infested in two urban areas in Brazil.Parasites & vectors · 2026Article
- Efficacy of a short-acting oral fluralaner formulation (WellPet™) against fleas and brown dog ticks in controlled and field conditions.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2026Article
- Ehrlichia spp. infection in rural dogs from remote indigenous villages in north-eastern Brazil.Parasites & vectors · 2018Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study investigated the prevalence of Rickettsia spp. and Ehrlichia canis infection in dogs and their ectoparasites from rural and urban areas of two municipalities, Petrolina and Juazeiro, within a semiarid region (Caatinga biome) of northeastern Brazil, by immunofluorescence assay (IFA) and polymerase chain reaction (PCR). Overall, 12.1% (61/504) and 23.0% (116/504) of canine plasma samples had antibodies reactive to Rickettsia spp. and E. canis. E. canis DNA was detected by PCR in 8.3% (42/504) of canine blood samples, whereas no blood sample was positive for Rickettsia spp. The infection by E. canis was determined by PCR in 4.9% (14/285) Rhipicephalus sanguineus sensu lato (s.l.) ticks and by Rickettsia felis in 1.1% (3/285) and 40.6% (74/182) ticks and fleas, respectively. Multivariate regression analyses revealed that canine seropositivity to Rickettsia spp. was associated statistically with the variables "to reside in Petrolina" and "presence of ectoparasites." Our results indicate that canine infection by E. canis might be endemic in the Caatinga biome as it is in other Brazilian biomes. Although no previous serosurvey for Rickettsia spp. has been conducted on dogs from the Caatinga biome, our values are much lower than the ones reported for rural dogs from other Brazilian biomes. These differences are likely related to the semiarid climate of the aatinga biome, which minimizes the exposure of rural dogs to Amblyomma spp. ticks, the most common vectors of Rickettsia spp. in Brazil. Considering that dogs are excellent sentinels for human exposure to Rickettsia spp., we can infer that the risks of human acquiring tick-borne rickettsiosis in the Caatinga region of the present study are low. The rickettsial infection rates in fleas and ticks were not related to canine seropositivity; i.e., areas with higher Rickettsia infection rates in fleas had the lowest canine seroreactivity to Rickettsia spp.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.