ArticlePloS one2016
Comparative Experimental Infection Study in Dogs with Ehrlichia canis, E. chaffeensis, Anaplasma platys and A. phagocytophilum.
Article in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 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
34 citing papers in PubMed, 84 citations in OpenAlex.
- A targeted mutational strategy aiding in generating antisense RNA to knockdown theJournal of bacteriology · 2026Article
- Cross-protective immunity from inactivated whole cellResearch square · 2026Article
- Article
- Review of Molecular Tools Used in Diagnosis ofAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2025Review
- Comprehensive study of ticks and tick-borne diseases in dogs in Nepal: molecular identification, risk analysis and hematological alterations.BMC veterinary research · 2025Article
- A comparison of diagnostic methods for canine Ehrlichiosis: Microscopy and RNases hybridization-assisted amplification technology compared with the quantitative polymerase chain reaction.Veterinary world · 2025Article
- Pet and Stray Dogs' Contribution to Zoonotic Transmission Pathways: A Bibliometric Review.Transboundary and emerging diseases · 2025Review
- Enhanced Production of IL-10 in PCR-Positive Dogs Infected withMicroorganisms · 2024Article
- First molecular evidence ofOpen veterinary journal · 2024Article
- Ehrlichiosis in Dogs: A Comprehensive Review about the Pathogen and Its Vectors with Emphasis on South and East Asian Countries.Veterinary sciences · 2022Review
- Article
- Vector-borne disease and its relationship to hematologic abnormalities and microalbuminuria in retired racing and show-bred greyhounds.Journal of veterinary internal medicine · 2022Article
- Review: Protective Immunity and Immunopathology of Ehrlichiosis.Zoonoses (Shannon, Ireland) · 2022Article
- Epidemiology, Diagnosis, and Control of Canine Infectious Cyclic Thrombocytopenia and Granulocytic Anaplasmosis: Emerging Diseases of Veterinary and Public Health Significance.Veterinary sciences · 2021Review
- Multiple vector-borne pathogens of domestic animals in Egypt.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2021Article
- Experimental Infection of North American Sheep withPathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Article
- Epidemiological and Clinicopathological Features ofFrontiers in veterinary science · 2021Review
- Hematological profile of blood parasitic infected dogs in Southern Thailand.Veterinary world · 2020Article
- An Entry-Triggering Protein ofmBio · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Dogs acquire infections with the Anaplasmataceae family pathogens, E. canis, E. chaffeensis, E. ewingii, A. platys and A. phagocytophilum mostly during summer months when ticks are actively feeding on animals. These pathogens are also identified as causing diseases in people. Despite the long history of tick-borne diseases in dogs, much remains to be defined pertaining to the clinical and pathological outcomes of infections with these pathogens. In the current study, we performed experimental infections in dogs with E. canis, E. chaffeensis, A. platys and A. phagocytophilum. Animals were monitored for 42 days to evaluate infection-specific clinical, hematological and pathological differences. All four pathogens caused systemic persistent infections detectible throughout the 6 weeks of infection assessment. Fever was frequently detected in animals infected with E. canis, E. chaffeensis, and A. platys, but not in dogs infected with A. phagocytophilum. Hematological differences were evident in all four infected groups, although significant overlap existed between the groups. A marked reduction in packed cell volume that correlated with reduced erythrocytes and hemoglobin was observed only in E. canis infected animals. A decline in platelet numbers was common with E. canis, A. platys and A. phagocytophilum infections. Histopathological lesions in lung, liver and spleen were observed in all four groups of infected dogs; infection with E. canis had the highest pathological scores, followed by E. chaffeensis, then A. platys and A. phagocytophilum. All four pathogens induced IgG responses starting on day 7 post infection, which was predominantly comprised of IgG2 subclass antibodies. This is the first detailed investigation comparing the infection progression and host responses in dogs after inoculation with four pathogens belonging to the Anaplasmataceae family. The study revealed a significant overlap in clinical, hematological and pathological changes resulting from the infections.
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.