ArticleParasites & vectors2016
Are humans the initial source of canine mange?
Article in Parasites & vectors, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- FatalJournal of veterinary research · 2024Article
- Canine and Feline Parasitology: Analogies, Differences, and Relevance for Human Health.Clinical microbiology reviews · 2021Review
- Mitochondrial genome sequencing reveals potential origins of the scabies mite Sarcoptes scabiei infesting two iconic Australian marsupials.BMC evolutionary biology · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 7 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundScabies, or mange as it is called in animals, is an ectoparasitic contagious infestation caused by the mite Sarcoptes scabiei. Sarcoptic mange is an important veterinary disease leading to significant morbidity and mortality in wild and domestic animals. A widely accepted hypothesis, though never substantiated by factual data, suggests that humans were the initial source of the animal contamination. In this study we performed phylogenetic analyses of populations of S. scabiei from humans and from canids to validate or not the hypothesis of a human origin of the mites infecting domestic dogs.
methodsMites from dogs and foxes were obtained from three French sites and from other countries. A part of cytochrome c oxidase subunit 1 (cox1) gene was amplified and directly sequenced. Other sequences corresponding to mites from humans, raccoon dogs, foxes, jackal and dogs from various geographical areas were retrieved from GenBank. Phylogenetic analyses were performed using the Otodectes cynotis cox1 sequence as outgroup. Maximum Likelihood and Bayesian Inference analysis approaches were used. To visualize the relationship between the haplotypes, a median joining haplotype network was constructed using Network v4.6 according to host.
resultsTwenty-one haplotypes were observed among mites collected from five different host species, including humans and canids from nine geographical areas. The phylogenetic trees based on Maximum Likelihood and Bayesian Inference analyses showed similar topologies with few differences in node support values. The results were not consistent with a human origin of S. scabiei mites in dogs and, on the contrary, did not exclude the opposite hypothesis of a host switch from dogs to humans.
conclusionsPhylogenetic relatedness may have an impact in terms of epidemiological control strategy. Our results and other recent studies suggest to re-evaluate the level of transmission between domestic dogs and humans.
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.