ArticleAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI2022
Molecular Characterization of
Article in Animals : an open access journal from MDPI, 2022. 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.
- Article
- A Case Study of Photosensitivity Associated withAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2022Article
- First Molecular Identification ofPathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Anaplasma spp. are important tick-borne pathogens endangering the health of humans and various animals. Although several studies have reported Anaplasma infection in livestock in China, little is known about the impact of production categories on the occurrence of Anaplasma species. In the present study, PCR tools targeting the 16S rRNA and msp4 genes were applied to investigate the prevalence of Anaplasma spp. in 509 blood samples of dairy (n = 249), cashmere (n = 139), and meat (n = 121) goats from Shaanxi province. The prevalence of Anaplasma spp. was 58.5% (298/509) in goats, and significant differences (p < 0.001) were identified in the prevalence among production categories, with the highest in meat goats (84.3%, 102/121), followed by cashmere goats (58.3%, 81/139) and dairy goats (46.2%, 115/249). Significant differences (p < 0.001) in prevalence were also found among sampling sites and age groups. Meanwhile, the prevalence was 36.9% (188/509) for A. phagocytophilum, 36.1% (184/509) for A. bovis, and 11.0% (56/509) for A. ovis, and significant differences (p < 0.001) in prevalence of A. phagocytophilum, A. bovis and A. ovis were recognized among production categories and sampling sites. A. phagocytophilum, A. bovis and A. ovis were dominant species in meat, dairy, and cashmere goats, respectively, and A. ovis was absent in meat goats. Co-infections were found in 124 (24.4%) investigated samples. Goats aged < 2, 3−6, and 7−12 months, and goats from Qingjian and Zhenba were risk factors associated with the occurrence of Anaplasma. Phylogenetic analysis indicated separate clades for the distribution of A. phagocytophilum from different ruminant, reflecting potential host adaption within this species. This study reported the colonization occurrence of Anaplasma spp. among production categories in goats in Shaanxi province and enriched our knowledge on the transmission of Anaplasma spp. in goats in China. Considering the existence of zoonotic A. phagocytophilum in goats in this study and previous reports, interventions based on One Health are needed to be developed to control the transmission of Anaplasma spp. between humans and animals.
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.