ArticleParasitology research2026
Epidemiological insights into bovine babesiosis in South African cattle.
Article in Parasitology research, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Bovine babesiosis, caused by Babesia bovis and Babesia bigemina, is a major cattle disease in South Africa. This study combined prospective (2022-2023) and archived (2016-2022) DNA samples to assess molecular prevalence and serological exposure to Babesia spp. across thirteen dip tanks in the Mnisi area (Mpumalanga), plus five additional high-risk areas: Manaleni and Boekenhouthoek (Mpumalanga), Phuthaditjaba and Harrismith (Free State), Bergville (KZN). TaqMan quantitative PCR (qPCR) and indirect fluorescent antibody testing (IFAT) were used to assess current parasitaemia and prior exposure. In Mnisi, 81/216 cattle tested positive for at least one Babesia spp. (38%, 95% CI: 0.31-0.44), comprising 41 single B. bovis infections (19%, 95% CI: 0.14-0.25), 12 single B. bigemina infections (6%, 95% CI: 0.03-0.09), and 28 mixed infections (13%, 95% CI: 0.09-0.18), while 135 animals were negative (63%, 95% CI: 0.56-0.69). In the remaining areas, 113/187 cattle were positive (60%, 95% CI: 0.53-0.67). The overall prevalence of B. bigemina was highest in the Free State (51%), while B. bovis was predominant in KZN (62%), with Mpumalanga showing a higher relative occurrence of B. bovis (32%) than B. bigemina (22%). Agreement analysis from Mnisi subset (n = 101, 2022) with paired IFAT and qPCR results revealed slight agreement for B. bovis (K = 0.12, 95% CI: -0.05-0.29), with McNemar's exact test confirming systematic rather than random discordance (χ2 = 12.26, p = 0.00046). This supports the complementary application of both assays, as qPCR and IFAT reflect active parasitaemia and historical exposure, respectively, informing enzootic stability monitoring and control strategies.
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.