ArticleVeterinary research communications2026
Application of LAMP and TaqMan qPCR for the rapid diagnosis of Anaplasma Capra (an emerging tick-borne zoonotic pathogen) and comparison with Nested-PCR.
Article in Veterinary research communications, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Anaplasma capra was first detected in goats from China in 2012, and in the process, its presence has been demonstrated in humans, domestic animals, wild animals, and ticks in three continents (Asia, Europe, and Africa). Although there is limited information, it is thought that the agent may cause clinical symptoms in humans and animals. This study aimed to develop two molecular diagnostic assays [Taqman real-time PCR (qPCR) and Loop-Mediated Isothermal Amplification (LAMP)] that can be used in the diagnosis of A. capra, including known genotypes, by targeting the groEL gene, and to compare the limit of detection (LoD) and the effectiveness in field samples with nested-PCR. The detection limits of groEL-nested-PCR, qPCR, and LAMP methods were also investigated. PCR, qPCR, and both colorimetric and conventional LAMP assays were able to identify 8.25 × 104, 8.25 × 103, and 8.25 × 102 copies of A. capra DNA/µL in the sample, respectively. According to this finding, qPCR and LAMP had detection limits that were 10 and 100 times greater than PCR’s, respectively. As a result of 150 field samples (sheep, goat, cattle, buffalo, dog, and cat) analyses, two (1.33%) positives in nested-PCR, four (2.66%) positives in qPCR, and five (3.33%) positives in LAMP were detected. The level of agreement between assays was evaluated using Cohen’s kappa test, and consistency was observed between the methods. In conclusion, this study has demonstrated that LAMP and qPCR, which are being used for the first time to diagnose A.capra by targeting the groEL gene, are more sensitive than nested-PCR. These tests, which have a high level of sensitivity, will be beneficial in understanding the pathogen’s epidemiology.
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.