Skip to main content

Advertisement

Springer Nature is making Coronavirus research free. View research | View latest news | Sign up for updates

Table 3 Distribution of Cryptosporidium species/genotypes amongst pigs worldwide

From: Molecular identification and epidemiological comparison of Cryptosporidium spp. among different pig breeds in Tibet and Henan, China

Collection site No. positive/sample size Prevalence (%) by microscopically or others (95% CI) No. positive/sample size Prevalence (%) by PCR (95% CI) Cryptosporidium species (no.) Reference
Japan 112/344 32.56 (27.58–37.53) 37/62 59.68 (47.12–72.24) C. suis (13), C. scrofarum (16), C. suis + C. scrofarum (8) Yui et al. (2014) [6]
central Vietnam 28/193 14.51 (9.49–19.52) 10/14 71.43 (44.36–98.50) C. suis (8), C. scrofarum (2) Nguyen et al. (2013) [28]
Danish 350/856 40.89 (37.59–44.19) 56/75 74.67 (64.59–84.74) C. suis (18), C. scrofarum (38) Petersen et al. (2015) [29]
Austria 2/44 4.55 (0–10.95) 8/44 18.18 (6.32–30.04) C. suis (2), C. scrofarum (3), C. suis + C. scrofarum (3) Němejc et al. (2013) [30]
Australia    45/289 15.57 (11.37–19.78) C. suis (13), C. scrofarum (32) Johnson et al. (2008) [31]
The Czech Republic 6/231 2.60 (0.53–4.66) 39/231 16.88 (12.02–21.75) C. suis (13), C. scrofarum (14), C. suis + C. scrofarum (12) Němejc et al. (2013) [30]
The Czech Republic 194/1620 11.98 (10.39–13.56) 353/1620 21.79 (19.78–23.80) C. suis (142), C. scrofarum (126), C. suis + C. scrofarum (82), C. parvum (1), C. muris (3) Němejc et al. (2013) [32]
The Czech Republica 0/193 0 32/193 16.58 (11.29–21.87) C. suis (13), C. scrofarum (7), C. suis + C. scrofarum (12) Němejc et al. (2012) [33]
The Czech Republic 87/413 21.07 (17.12–25.01) 69/413 16.71 (13.09–20.32) C. suis (45), C. scrofarum (22), C. muris (2) Kváč et al. (2009) [34]
The Czech Republic, South Bohemia 38/144 26.39 (19.10–33.67) 38/144 26.39 (19.10–33.67) C. suis (2), C. scrofarum (21), C. suis + C. scrofarum (15) Kváč et al. (2009) [35]
Poland 3/129 2.33 (0–4.96) 11/129 8.53 (3.64–13.41) C. suis (1), C. scrofarum (8), C. suis + C. scrofarum (2) Němejc et al. (2013) [30]
The Slovak Republic 0/56 0 3/56 5.36 (0–11.44) C. suis (2), C. scrofarum (1) Němejc et al. (2013) [30]
Canada, Prince Edward Island 163/633 25.75 (22.33–29.17) 113/633 17.85 (14.86–20.84) C. suis (41), C. scrofarum (69), C. parvum (2),
Mouse genotype (1)
Buduamoako et al. (2012) [36]
Canada, Ontario 54/122 44.26 (35.32–53.20) 68/122 55.74 (46.80–64.68) C. scrofarum (26), C. parvum (38) Farzan et al. (2011) [37]
Spain, Zaragoza 32/142 22.54 (15.58–29.49) 26/142 18.31 (11.87–24.75) C. suis (10), C. scrofarum (16) Suárezluengas et al. (2007) [38]
Spain, Galicia a    35/209 16.75 (11.64–21.85) C. suis (5), C. scrofarum (19), C. parvum (3) Garcíapresedo et al. (2013) [39]
Total 1069/5120 20.88 (19.77–21.99) 943/4376 21.55 (20.33–22.77) C. suis (328), C. scrofarum (420), C. suis + C. scrofarum (134), C. parvum (44), C.muris (5), Mouse genotype (1)  
  1. aThe samples from these two studies came from wild boars