ArticleActa parasitologica2021
The Prevalence and Degree of Endoparasitic Infections in Wild Boars Using the Semi-quantitative Fecal Egg Count Method.
Article in Acta parasitologica, 2021. 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, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Epidemiological study and risk factors of internal parasite infections in wild boar (Parasite epidemiology and control · 2026Article
- Parasitological Examination of the Digestive System of Wild Boar from a Practical Point of View-Endoparasitological Sampling under Field Conditions.Methods and protocols · 2024Article
- Comparative Analysis ofAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
purposeBreeding of wild boars is a significant part of the hunting economy; however, hogs are associated with zoonotic infection. This study assessed the prevalence and degree of parasitic infections that exist in wild boars from two hunting grounds in the Autonomous Province of Vojvodina, Republic of Serbia.
methodsParasitological examinations were conducted from 2016 to 2019. In total 220 fecal samples and 13 lungs were collected from wild boars in two hunting grounds (an open and a closed habitat) on the territory of Vojvodina (Serbia). Assessment of the prevalence and degree of the detected endoparasitosis involved a semi-quantitative fecal egg count method.
resultsThe presence of protozoa-Eimeria spp./Isospora spp. (76.38%; 32.26%) and Balantidium coli (7.08%), nematodes-Ascaris suum (29.03%), Trichuris suis (31.49%; 19.35%), Hyostrongylus rubidus/Oesophagostomum spp. (55.12%; 48.39%), Metastrongylus pudendotectus (66.14%; 21.51%), Gnathostoma hispidum (3.94%; 2.15%) and Macracanthorhynchus hirudinaceus (9.45%; 7.53%) and trematodes-Fasciola hepatica (5.51%; 4.30%) and Dicrocoelium dendriticum (0.78%; 2.30%) were detected as single or mixed infections, via qualitative coprological examination. The total prevalence of the endoparasitosis was 92.91% in hunting ground I (closed habitat) and 73.12% in hunting ground II (open habitat). The most prevalent infection in hunting ground I was coccidiosis (76.38%), and hyostrongylosis/oesophagostomosis (48.39%) in hunting ground II. Adult forms of M. pudendotectus were identified in the lungs of 13 wild hogs with mild to severe bronchopneumonia from hunting ground II.
conclusionsThe semi-quantitative fecal egg count method demonstrated clinical and parasitological significance and revealed the risks associated with zoonotic infections in this game species population. Therefore, monitoring the etiology and epizootiology of parasitic infections in wild boars is essential for creating health care programs in hunting ground areas and planning control strategies that protect both the hunting economy and public health.
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.