ArticleScientific reports2021
Identification of Bacillus anthracis, Brucella spp., and Coxiella burnetii DNA signatures from bushmeat.
Article in Scientific reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Systematic review of health risk assessment in Africa's bushmeat trade: Are there any risks assessed?PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2026Pooled it
- A systematic review and meta-analysis of population-based anthrax prevalence in Africa with a one health narrative synthesis of outbreak surveillance.Frontiers in public health · 2026Pooled it
- A wide diversity of viruses detected in African mammals involved in the wild meat supply chain.PLoS pathogens · 2025Article
- Epidemiological baseline of Brucella spp. in South African wildlife.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2025Article
- Prevalence of bacterial contamination on wild meat processing and cooking surfaces in rural Cameroon.One health (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2025Article
- Toxin and capsule production by Bacillus cereus biovar anthracis influence pathogenicity in macrophages and animal models.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2024Article
- Seroprevalence and risk factors for brucellosis amongst livestock and humans in a multi-herd ranch system in Kagera, Tanzania.Frontiers in public health · 2024Article
- A systematic mapping review of links between handling wild meat and zoonotic diseases.One health (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2023Article
- Weaponising microbes for peace.Microbial biotechnology · 2023Article
- Investigating Infectious Organisms of Public Health Concern Associated with Wild Meat.Transboundary and emerging diseases · 2023Review
- Spatiotemporal Patterns of Anthrax, Vietnam, 1990-2015.Emerging infectious diseases · 2022Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
20 authors at 9 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Meat from wildlife species (bushmeat) represents a major source of dietary protein in low- and middle-income countries where humans and wildlife live in close proximity. Despite the occurrence of zoonotic pathogens in wildlife, their prevalence in bushmeat remains unknown. To assess the risk of exposure to major pathogens in bushmeat, a total of 3784 samples, both fresh and processed, were collected from three major regions in Tanzania during both rainy and dry seasons, and were screened by real-time PCR for the presence of DNA signatures of Bacillus anthracis (B. anthracis), Brucella spp. (Brucella) and Coxiella burnetii (Coxiella). The analysis identified DNA signatures of B. anthracis (0.48%), Brucella (0.9%), and Coxiella (0.66%) in a total of 77 samples. Highest prevalence rates of B. anthracis, Brucella, and Coxiella were observed in wildebeest (56%), dik-dik (50%), and impala (24%), respectively. Fresh samples, those collected during the rainy season, and samples from Selous or Serengeti had a greater relative risk of being positive. Microbiome characterization identified Firmicutes and Proteobacteria as the most abundant phyla. The results highlight and define potential risks of exposure to endemic wildlife diseases from bushmeat and the need for future investigations to address the public health and emerging infectious disease risks associated with bushmeat harvesting, trade, and consumption.
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.