ArticlePloS one2016
Intra-Species Diversity and Panmictic Structure of Cryptosporidium parvum Populations in Cattle Farms in Northern Spain.
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 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Molecular analysis of cryptosporidiosis on cattle farms in Gran Canaria, Canary Islands (Spain).International journal of veterinary science and medicine · 2025Article
- Occurrence and Molecular Characterization ofAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2022Article
- Challenges forGenes · 2021Review
- Population structure and geographical segregation of Cryptosporidium parvum IId subtypes in cattle in China.Parasites & vectors · 2020Article
- Direct Sequencing ofFrontiers in public health · 2019Review
- Article
- Molecular epidemiologic tools for waterborne pathogensFood and waterborne parasitologyReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The intra-herd and intra-host genetic variability of 123 Cryptosporidium parvum isolates was investigated using a multilocus fragment typing approach with eleven variable-number tandem-repeat (VNTR) loci and the GP60 gene. Isolates were collected from intensively farmed diarrheic pre-weaned calves originating from 31 dairy farms in three adjoining regions in northern Spain (País Vasco, Cantabria and Asturias). The multilocus tool demonstrated an acceptable typeability, with 104/123 samples amplifying at all twelve loci. The ML2, TP14, GP60 and the previously un-described minisatellite at locus cgd2_3850 were the most discriminatory markers, while others may be dismissed as monomorphic (MSB) or less informative (CP47, ML1 and the novel minisatellites at loci Cgd1_3670 and Cgd6_3940). The 12-satellite typing tool provided a Hunter-Gaston index (HGDI) of 0.987 (95% CI, 0.982-0.992), and differentiated a total of 70 multilocus subtypes (MLTs). The inclusion of only the four most discriminatory markers dramatically reduced the number of MLTs (n: 44) but hardly reduced the HGDI value. A total of 54 MLTs were distinctive for individual farms, indicating that cryptosporidiosis is an endemic condition on most cattle farms. However, a high rate of mixed infections was detected, suggesting frequent meiotic recombination. Namely, multiple MLTs were seen in most farms where several specimens were analyzed (90.5%), with up to 9 MLTs being found on one farm, and individual specimens with mixed populations being reported on 11/29 farms. Bayesian Structure analysis showed that over 35% of isolates had mixed ancestry and analysis of evolutionary descent using the eBURST algorithm detected a high rate (21.4%) of MLTs appearing as singletons, indicating a high degree of genetic divergence. Linkage analysis found evidence of linkage equilibrium and an overall panmictic structure within the C. parvum population in this discrete geographical area.
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.