ArticlePorcine health management2025
Assessment of sponge sampling for real-time PCR detection of Cystoisospora suis from environmental and faecal samples from piglet-producing farms.
Article in Porcine health management, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Adaptive recognition network for few-shot plant diseases and pests based on homeostatic neuromodulation and meta-plasticity.Frontiers in plant science · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCystoisospora suis (C. suis) infects piglets in their first week of life and can subsequently lead to diarrhoea and production losses. The detection of C. suis oocysts relies mostly on the collection of piglet faeces as sampling material and analysis through flotation and autofluorescence microscopy, which involves repeated sampling. The objective of the present study was to evaluate the use of sponges for environmental sampling for the detection of C. suis via real-time PCR and its suitability for surveillance programs applied on farms.
resultsAll farms included in the study were positive for C. suis according to qPCR, with positivity rates ranging from 20 to 100%. The frequency of positive cases was 68% for faecal samples and 67% for samples collected by sponges. The alignment between the different sampling protocols was 100% achieved at the farm level. In the case of the individual pair samples, a difference in 27 samples was observed (10.8%). Considering the faecal sampling strategy as the gold standard, the sensitivity of the sampling protocol with sponges was 91.2%, and the specificity was 84.8%. Compared with the sponge-collected samples, the faecal samples presented slightly greater DNA masses, with a correlation coefficient of r = 0.51, indicating a moderate positive relationship between the two sampling methods. An influence towards a higher DNA load with samples with a pasty and semiliquid consistency was observed, mainly in the case of the sponge technique.
conclusionsOur results indicate that the collection of faecal samples at the litter or farm level and comparisons with environmental samples yield similar detection rates when sampling is combined with qPCR. From that perspective, the use of sponges for the detection of C. suis in organic material from the farrowing crate environment can be considered a good alternative to the more laborious and time-consuming collection of faecal samples.
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.