ArticleParasitology research2019
Helminth infections of wild European gray wolves (Canis lupus Linnaeus, 1758) in Lower Saxony, Germany, and comparison to captive wolves.
Article in Parasitology research, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- A Comprehensive Review ofPathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Pooled it
- Molecular characterization ofParasitology · 2021Pooled it
- First record ofInternational journal for parasitology. Parasites and wildlife · 2026Article
- Neurocysticercosis by Taenia sp. in a female alpaca (Vicugna pacos) from Germany.BMC veterinary research · 2026Article
- Monitoring the health of wolves (Canis lupus): Integrating conservation and public health.PloS one · 2026Article
- Tapeworms in an Apex Predator: First Molecular Identification ofPathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Parasite diversity in grey wolves (International journal for parasitology. Parasites and wildlife · 2025Article
- Cestodes in Eurasian wolves (International journal for parasitology. Parasites and wildlife · 2025Article
- Epizootiological monitoring of wolf helminths in Northern and Central Kazakhstan.Veterinary world · 2024Article
- Identification ofVeterinary sciences · 2024Article
- A walk on the wild side: A review of the epidemiology ofInternational journal for parasitology. Parasites and wildlife · 2023Review
- Gray Wolf (Veterinary sciences · 2023Article
- Gastrointestinal parasites in young dogs and risk factors associated with infection.Parasitology research · 2023Article
- Taeniid cestodes in a wolf pack living in a highly anthropic hilly agro-ecosystem.Parasite (Paris, France) · 2021Article
- The occurrence ofInternational journal for parasitology. Parasites and wildlife · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study aimed to investigate the endoparasite fauna of wild European gray wolves, which are currently recolonizing Germany. In total, 69 fecal samples of wild wolves were collected in Lower Saxony, Germany, from 2013 to 2015, analyzed by the sedimentation-flotation and McMaster techniques and compared to previous results on captive European Gray wolves living in zoological gardens in Germany. In addition to coproscopy, taeniid-positive samples from wild as well as captive wolves were differentiated by amplification and sequencing of small subunit ribosomal RNA (SSU rRNA) and NADH dehydrogenase 1 (nad1) gene fragments. Missing Taenia krabbei SSU rRNA reference sequences were generated from two T. krabbei specimens. Overall, 60.87% (42/69) of wild wolve samples were microscopically positive for at least one of seven egg types. Capillaria/Eucoleus spp. showed the highest frequency (31.88% [22/69]), followed by Taeniidae (21.74% [15/69]), Ancylostomatidae (20.29% [14/69]), Alaria alata (15.94% [11/69]), Toxocara canis (13.04% [9/69]), and Toxascaris leonina and Trichuris vulpis (each 5.80% [4/69]). Amplification of SSU rRNA was successful for 7/15 Taeniidae-positive samples from wild and 20/39 samples from captive wolves, revealing T. hydatigena in two and 14 samples, respectively. Taenia krabbei was detected in two further samples of wild and three samples of captive wolves, while for the remaining samples, no differentiation between T. serialis/T. krabbei was possible. Echinococcus spp. were not detected. Sequence comparisons revealed that the SSU rRNA gene fragment was not suitable to differentiate between T. serialis and T. krabbei. Therefore, the use of this fragment alone cannot be recommended for species identification in future studies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
30610365What 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.