ArticleBMC microbiology2026
First isolation and molecular confirmation of Brucella canis in dogs from Egypt.
Article in BMC microbiology, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundBrucellosis, a disease of major veterinary and public health concern, remains widespread in several regions, including Egypt. This study reports the isolation and molecular confirmation of Brucella canis from dogs in Egypt and provides genetic relatedness of Brucella melitensis and Brucella canis in dogs to evaluate their public health significance.
methodsA total of 785 dogs (both stray and owned) in Cairo and Giza (Feb–Dec 2024) were examined for Brucella spp.; all blood samples were examined using serological tests only (RBPT, SAT with 2-ME) however, 365 reproductive tissue samples including 215 and 150 from testicular and uterine samples respectively were collected from animals undergoing surgical procedures and were used for bacteriological isolation. Molecular confirmation was achieved via AMOS-PCR and Suis-ladder multiplex PCR for B. canis. Genetic relatedness was assessed by ERIC-PCR fingerprinting and cluster analysis, with Simpson’s diversity index used to evaluate typing discrimination.
resultsTwelve Brucella spp. isolates (3.28%) recovered, comprising 8 isolates for B. melitensis biovar 3 and 4 for B. canis. B. melitensis occurred in both stray and owned dogs while B. canis was found only in strays marking its first isolation in Egypt. Suis-ladder PCR reliably distinguished B. canis from B. suis, and ERIC-PCR showed moderate genetic diversity. Temporal–spatial data revealed low, but the detection occurred across several districts in both owned and stray dog populations.
conclusionMolecular tools like Suis-ladder PCR and ERIC-PCR proved effective for precise characterization of isolates in addition, this study documents the first isolation of B. canis from dogs in Egypt emphasizing their role as potential public health relevance of canine brucellosis.
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.