2021
DOI: 10.1016/j.crpvbd.2021.100057
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Neospora caninum and Toxoplasma gondii as causes of reproductive losses in commercial sheep flocks from Argentina

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
7
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 7 publications
(7 citation statements)
references
References 41 publications
0
7
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The absence of N. caninum DNA in all the tested samples is consistent with a serological survey conducted in 2008 in 10 randomly-selected sheep flocks in three departments of Uruguay (Artigas, Salto, Canelones), which indicates a low N. caninum seroprevalence in this species ( 26 ). These findings are surprising for several reasons: (1) neosporosis is widely distributed in cattle herds in Uruguay, and is the main infectious cause of abortion identified at the laboratory level ( 31 , 74 ); (2) N. caninum was recently reported to be a cause of abortion in flocks in the central region of Argentina, which shares similar productive, geographical, and climatic conditions with Uruguay ( 75 ); and (3) the common utilization of shepherd and/or guardian dogs in sheep flocks in Uruguay, which warrants a close contact between the protozoan's definitive hosts (canids) and the susceptible intermediate hosts (ruminants). The extensive conditions sheep are usually reared under ( 76 ), the low number of animals per flock ( 77 ) or the pasture-based instead of concentrate-based diets ( 78 ), could account for the low prevalence of neosporosis.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The absence of N. caninum DNA in all the tested samples is consistent with a serological survey conducted in 2008 in 10 randomly-selected sheep flocks in three departments of Uruguay (Artigas, Salto, Canelones), which indicates a low N. caninum seroprevalence in this species ( 26 ). These findings are surprising for several reasons: (1) neosporosis is widely distributed in cattle herds in Uruguay, and is the main infectious cause of abortion identified at the laboratory level ( 31 , 74 ); (2) N. caninum was recently reported to be a cause of abortion in flocks in the central region of Argentina, which shares similar productive, geographical, and climatic conditions with Uruguay ( 75 ); and (3) the common utilization of shepherd and/or guardian dogs in sheep flocks in Uruguay, which warrants a close contact between the protozoan's definitive hosts (canids) and the susceptible intermediate hosts (ruminants). The extensive conditions sheep are usually reared under ( 76 ), the low number of animals per flock ( 77 ) or the pasture-based instead of concentrate-based diets ( 78 ), could account for the low prevalence of neosporosis.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The economic losses of ruminant's reproductive failure caused by N. caninum infection worldwide are estimated at 1.3 billion dollars annually ( 22 ); therefore, its role in the abortion of sheep and goats should not be ignored. To diagnose N. caninum infection in aborted fetuses, the researchers have worked on diagnostic methods with different sensitivities and specificities, such as histopathology ( 23 ), immunohistochemistry (IHC) ( 24 ), serology ( 25 ), and polymerase chain reaction (PCR) ( 26 ). There are limited studies on the prevalence of N. caninum infection in the aborted fetuses of sheep and goats.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Neospora caninum is well recognised as a major abortifacient in cattle ( Dubey et al, 2017 ) and although it seems to have a lower clinical and economic importance in small ruminants, there is increasing evidence of its involvement in cases of abortion and reproductive failure both in sheep and goats worldwide ( Moreno et al, 2012 ; Della Rosa et al, 2021 ; Sánchez-Sánchez et al, 2021a , Sánchez-Sánchez et al, 2021b ; Unzaga et al, 2014 ; Dubey et al, 2017 ; Hässig et al, 2003 ).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%