Sensitivity of Methods to Determine Presence of Baylisascaris procyonis Eggs in Raccoon (Procyon lotor) Feces.

IF 1.1 4区 农林科学 Q3 VETERINARY SCIENCES
L Kristen Page, Andrew Loiacono, Sydney Edmunds, Benjamin Black, Sriveny Dangoudoubiyam, Chris Anchor
{"title":"Sensitivity of Methods to Determine Presence of Baylisascaris procyonis Eggs in Raccoon (Procyon lotor) Feces.","authors":"L Kristen Page, Andrew Loiacono, Sydney Edmunds, Benjamin Black, Sriveny Dangoudoubiyam, Chris Anchor","doi":"10.7589/JWD-D-24-00090","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Abstract: </strong>Baylisascaris procyonis, a nematode parasite of raccoons (Procyon lotor), has important implications for human health and ecological conservation. Several techniques are available for detecting B. procyonis, and it is important to consider their limitations for the specific question to be answered. The sensitivity of molecular tools to detect B. procyonis in comparison to traditional methods is unknown. We compared the sensitivity fecal flotation with PCR to identify raccoons infected with B. procyonis as determined by seeing worms at necropsy. We collected 2-6 g of fecal material from along the ascending, transverse, and descending colon of 31 raccoons, resulting in 48 fecal samples across 31 individuals. Samples were aliquoted into two sets to compare fecal flotation and PCR. Of the 31 raccoons, 7/31 (23%) were infected with B. procyonis, but fecal flotation analysis identified only 4/31 positive raccoons (13%). Using fecal flotations from known positive individuals, 4/10 (40%) were positive, but PCR did not discover any infected individuals. Our results demonstrate the importance of using multiple techniques to confirm B. procyonis presence or absence. Dissection of raccoon intestines is the most sensitive technique because it enables visualization of worms. Fecal flotations remain the most efficient method of determining environmental prevalence and positive individuals from fecal sampling. Although PCR is technically very sensitive, it is limited by the quality and quantity of DNA in a sample.</p>","PeriodicalId":17602,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Wildlife Diseases","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Wildlife Diseases","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7589/JWD-D-24-00090","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"VETERINARY SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract: Baylisascaris procyonis, a nematode parasite of raccoons (Procyon lotor), has important implications for human health and ecological conservation. Several techniques are available for detecting B. procyonis, and it is important to consider their limitations for the specific question to be answered. The sensitivity of molecular tools to detect B. procyonis in comparison to traditional methods is unknown. We compared the sensitivity fecal flotation with PCR to identify raccoons infected with B. procyonis as determined by seeing worms at necropsy. We collected 2-6 g of fecal material from along the ascending, transverse, and descending colon of 31 raccoons, resulting in 48 fecal samples across 31 individuals. Samples were aliquoted into two sets to compare fecal flotation and PCR. Of the 31 raccoons, 7/31 (23%) were infected with B. procyonis, but fecal flotation analysis identified only 4/31 positive raccoons (13%). Using fecal flotations from known positive individuals, 4/10 (40%) were positive, but PCR did not discover any infected individuals. Our results demonstrate the importance of using multiple techniques to confirm B. procyonis presence or absence. Dissection of raccoon intestines is the most sensitive technique because it enables visualization of worms. Fecal flotations remain the most efficient method of determining environmental prevalence and positive individuals from fecal sampling. Although PCR is technically very sensitive, it is limited by the quality and quantity of DNA in a sample.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Wildlife Diseases
Journal of Wildlife Diseases 农林科学-兽医学
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
213
审稿时长
6-16 weeks
期刊介绍: The JWD publishes reports of wildlife disease investigations, research papers, brief research notes, case and epizootic reports, review articles, and book reviews. The JWD publishes the results of original research and observations dealing with all aspects of infectious, parasitic, toxic, nutritional, physiologic, developmental and neoplastic diseases, environmental contamination, and other factors impinging on the health and survival of free-living or occasionally captive populations of wild animals, including fish, amphibians, reptiles, birds, and mammals. Papers on zoonoses involving wildlife and on chemical immobilization of wild animals are also published. Manuscripts dealing with surveys and case reports may be published in the Journal provided that they contain significant new information or have significance for better understanding health and disease in wild populations. Authors are encouraged to address the wildlife management implications of their studies, where appropriate.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信