These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Epidemiology of bovine tick-borne diseases in southern Italy.
    Author: Cringoli G, Otranto D, Testini G, Buono V, Di Giulio G, Traversa D, Lia R, Rinaldi L, Veneziano V, Puccini V.
    Journal: Vet Res; 2002; 33(4):421-8. PubMed ID: 12199369.
    Abstract:
    This investigation was carried out in an area covering part of three southern Italian regions: Campania, Basilicata and Apulia. Eighty-one farms were involved using the formula suggested by Thrusfield; they were equally distributed over the area which was subdivided into 81 geo-referenced sub-areas. In May and June 1999 from a total of 506 cattle, older than 18 months, blood-samples were taken and ticks were collected and identified. Serum samples were tested for antibodies of Bahesia bigemina, Babesia bovis and Anaplasma marginale with an ELISA technique. Eight farms (9.8%) out of the 81 examined were positive for B. bigemina only, 3 (3.7%) for A. marginale only, and 70 (86.4%) for both. None of the animals of any farm was found to be positive for B. bovis. Out of the 506 sera tested, 117 (23.1 %) were positive for B. bigemina only, 58 (11.5%) forA. marginale only and 250 (49.4%) for both species; 81 (16.0%) were negative for all of them. Ticks were collected on animals on 62 (76.5%) out of the 81 farms. Adult ticks (1 410) were collected and identified; the highest number belonged to the Rhipicephalus bursa species (65.5%), followed by Rhipicephalus turanicus (8.6) and Haemaphysalis punctata (8.4). The results showed that B. bigemina, A. marginale and their potential vectors are common in the area examined and indicated that there is a risk for animals imported from tick-borne disease-free areas.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]