Skip to main content

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