Next Article in Journal
Potential Therapeutic Effect of ZnO/CuO Nanocomposite as an Acaricidal, Immunostimulant, and Antioxidant in Rabbits
Previous Article in Journal
Computed Tomography and a Dental Intraoral Scanner to Generate Three-Dimensional Models of the Beaks of Three Bird Species
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Prevalence of Potentially Zoonotic Endoparasites in Domestic Dog Puppies

by
Gisele Moraes dos Santos Reginaldo
1,
Giovanni Widmer
2,
Sandra Valéria Inácio
3,
Jancarlo Ferreira Gomes
4,
Walter Bertequini Nagata
3,
Gabriela Pinheiro Tirado Moreno
5,
João Alfredo Biagi Camargo Neto
3,
Wagner Luis Ferreira
3,
Felipe Augusto Soares
4 and
Katia Denise Saraiva Bresciani
3,*
1
Faculdade de Ciências Agrárias e Veterinárias, Universidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp), Jaboticabal 13083-887, Brazil
2
Department of Infectious Diseases and Global Health, Cummings School of Veterinary Medicine, Tufts University, Medford, MA 01536, USA
3
Faculdade de Medicina Veterinária de Araçatuba, Universidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp), 793 Clóvis Pestana Street, Araçatuba 16050-680, Brazil
4
School of Medical Sciences, University of Campinas, Campinas 13083-887, Brazil
5
School of Veterinary Medicine and Zootechnics, São Paulo State University, São Paulo 05508-220, Brazil
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Vet. Sci. 2025, 12(4), 332; https://doi.org/10.3390/vetsci12040332
Submission received: 20 January 2025 / Revised: 21 March 2025 / Accepted: 22 March 2025 / Published: 3 April 2025

Simple Summary

Gastrointestinal parasites are common in domestic dogs around the world. Many of these parasites are potentially zoonotic and are important pathogenic agents in public health. This is the first study of the occurrence of gastrointestinal parasites in domesticated puppies under six months of age. Samples were collected from 100 randomized animals of both sexes and occurrence of Toxocara spp., Cystoisospora spp., the Ancylostomatidae family and Giardia spp. was found. Toxocariasis in asymptomatic dogs highlights the risk of zoonotic transmission.

Abstract

Despite the existence of therapeutic and prophylactic measures, gastrointestinal parasites are common in pets. Due to the zoonotic potential of some species, parasitic protozoa and helminths are of great importance to public health. In this study, we investigated the occurrence of the main gastrointestinal parasites in domestic dog puppies in the city of Araçatuba, São Paulo, Brazil. One hundred fecal samples were collected from dogs up to six months of age. Parasites were diagnosed using Willis’, Faust’s and malachite green coproparasitological techniques. Parasite prevalence as determined by Willis and/or Faust diagnostic techniques was as follows: Toxocara spp. 34%, Cystoisospora spp. 28%, Ancylostomatidae 22% and Giardia spp. 8%. These prevalence rates were calculated by considering an animal to be positive if Willis’ or Faust’s or both tests returned a positive result. Cryptosporidium diagnosis with malachite green was negative for all samples. Infection with Toxocara spp., the most prevalent pathogen in this survey, was not limited to dogs with abnormal fecal consistency. The occurrence of asymptomatic parasitized dogs increases the risk of zoonotic transmission.

1. Introduction

Some gastrointestinal parasites are of interest from a One Health perspective because of their veterinary and public health relevance. Visceral Larva Migrans and Cutaneous Larva Migrans caused by Toxocara spp. and the Ancylostomatidae family, respectively, are examples of such parasites as well as Giardiasis which is caused by Giardia spp. assemblages [1,2,3,4]. Helminth eggs and protozoan cysts excreted in the environment by domestic animals should be a matter of concern to their owners due to the importance that animals can have for emotional support and their role in social and physical development of people, particularly children and the elderly [5,6,7,8]. Close co-habitation of humans and domestic animals, which are sometimes view as members of the family, favors zoonotic transmission [9,10,11]. In this context, it is particularly important to investigate the occurrence of parasites in domiciled dogs.
Various parasite species are diagnosed with moderate to high frequency in companion animals despite the existence of therapeutic and prophylactic measures [8,12]. Diarrhea resulting from parasitic infections and from other causes is one of the most frequent disorders in canine puppies and negatively interferes with their growth [8,13]. Thus, it is essential to prevent or minimize parasite transmission. Screening for the presence of gastrointestinal parasites [2,14] informs treatment options and the adoption of environmental management practices for infection control [10,13,15]. In contrast with surveys, which include a wide age range, we investigated the occurrence of gastrointestinal parasites exclusively in domiciled dogs up to six months of age in Araçatuba, Brazil.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Study Population

The minimum sampling required for the execution of this project, at the 95% confidence level and with absolute precision of 10%, was determined to be 96 samples, based on a prevalence of 50% [16]. Thus, we collected fecal samples from 100 randomly selected dogs, 60 males and 40 females, that were all domiciled and of mixed breed, all aged less than six months and all from Araçatuba region, Brazil. Within this age range, 20 animals were one to two months old, 44 animals were three to four months old and 36 animals were five to six months old. Puppies aged between 2 and 3 months and between 4 and 5 months were not represented in the sample. This study was approved by the animal use ethics committee of the Faculty of Dentistry of Araçatuba, São Paulo State University, under protocol number FOA-00312-2016.

2.2. Degree of Dehydration and Fecal Consistency

The degree of dehydration was assessed as not apparent, mild, moderate, severe and shock [17]. Fecal consistency was assessed visually and defined as liquefied, pasty, semi-solid and solid, according to Coelho et al., 2012 [18].

2.3. Collection of Fecal Material and Parasite Detection

With the aid of a urethral catheter (n° 6-8-10) and a 10 mL syringe, feces were collected directly from the rectal ampulla. Samples were stored in sterile vials and refrigerated between 4 °C and 8 °C until processed. Subsequently, Faust’s flotation technique in saturated sodium chloride solution [19] and Willis’ centrifuge–flotation technique in zinc sulfate [20] were applied. The presence of parasites eggs and cysts was also examined by negative malachite green staining [21]. All samples were examined with the three diagnostic techniques.

3. Results

Based on at least one positive test, 34% of dogs were positive for Toxocara spp., 28% for Cystoisospora spp., 22% for the Ancylostomatidae family and 8% for Giardia spp. In 21% of the animals, mixed infections were detected. One or more parasite species were detected in 62% of dogs with at least one technique. Among the 100 dogs evaluated in the study, with the Willis technique we detected 32% animals positive for Toxocara spp., 19% the Ancylostomatidae family and 16% for Cystoisospora spp., including 16% that presented mixed infections with the Ancylostomatidae family, Cystoisospora spp. and Toxocara spp. Faust’s technique identified 30% of dogs with Toxocara spp., 26% with Cystoisospora spp., 10% with the Ancylostomatidae family and 8% with Giardia spp. Based on this technique, 21% of the animals were infected with more than one parasite. For 82% of the samples, Faust and Willis gave concordant results in the sense that both tests were negative or both were positive. Of the 18 (18%) discordant results, 12 were positive according to Willis and negative according to Faust. For six samples, the results were reversed (chi-square = 39.0, p < 0.001). Six of six Willis-negative/Faust-positive samples were Faust-positive for Cystoisospora spp., indicating that the Willis technique may underestimate the prevalence of this parasite. Conversely, of the 12 samples positive by Willis and negative by Faust, Ancylostomatidae was detected by itself or in combination with a second parasite in 10 samples. Of the 44 double-positive samples, 12 were diagnosed with different parasites or a different combination of parasites where more than one pathogen was detected. The diagnosis for the remaining 32 samples was fully concordant.
Dehydration was not apparent in 50 dogs while the same number of dogs were found to be mildly dehydrated. Regarding the consistency of fecal samples, 43 samples were scored as liquefied, 7 as pasty, 8 as semi-solid and 42 as solid. Dogs excreting liquefied and solid feces presented more positive than dogs with pasty and semi-solid feces. In particular, it is important to note that 40 of 53 puppies excreting solid feces were positive for gastrointestinal parasites (Table 1). There was no significant association between fecal consistency and presence of parasite (Fisher’s exact test, p = 0.8589).
No association between age and parasite prevalence was observed using linear regression (r = 0.05, p = 0.56). Similarly, sex and infection were not significantly associated. A total of 65% of males and 57.5% of females were positive by at least one diagnostic technique (chi-square = 0.30, p = 0.58). The percentage prevalence for the oldest age group is 29.4% for Toxocara, 45.5% for Ancylostomatidae, and 35.7% for Cystoisospora. However, the number of positive animals at age 5-6 months is 10 for each of the 3 parasites (Table 2). An opposite trend was observed for Ancylostomatidae which increased in prevalence with age from 5% to 45%.

4. Discussion

Our results extend the epidemiological study of common gastrointestinal helminths and protozoa of dogs to puppies up to six months of age. Typically, coproparasitological surveys include animals of any age [2,14,22,23]. Other studies have reported the occurrence of gastrointestinal parasites, but they differ from this study since they frequently examine stray dogs regardless of age [15,24,25,26,27,28]. Therefore, a limitation observed in our study is the lack of information about the presence of older dogs sharing the same spaces of the puppies investigated.
The main finding of our survey is the frequent detection of Cystoisospora spp., Giardia spp., Toxocara spp. and the Ancylostomatidae family in puppies with varied fecal consistencies, including animals showing no symptoms typically associated with intestinal parasites. This observation is relevant to public health as the latter three species are zoonotic [3,4,25,26,27,28,29]. As puppies are more likely to excrete gastrointestinal parasites [24,29,30,31], deworming and other measures to reduce transmission are particularly important to reduce the risk of infection, which can have severe consequences in immunocompromised children and adults. Such measures are also expected to benefit the health of puppies [24,32]. Mixed infections with two, or even three, parasites were relatively common in our survey. This observation emphasizes the need for adequate medications to treat helminth and protozoan co-infections.
The use of two flotation techniques supports the conclusion that both methods have similar sensitivity. This observation is consistent with the fact that both methods concentrate parasite eggs and cysts by flotation in a high-density salt solution. The difference in Toxocara spp. and Cystoisospora spp. prevalence based on Faust and Willis raises interesting questions about the buoyant properties of these eggs and cysts and may justify the use of both methods where the presence of these parasites is suspected [2,14,33]. This recommendation should be easy to implement as fecal flotation is cheap and easy to perform [14]. Veterinarians should make owners aware of the importance of diagnosing these parasites, particularly given the high prevalence of Toxocara spp. and its potential for zoonotic transmission [11,34,35,36].
Malachite green staining did not reveal the presence of Cryptosporidium spp. oocysts. This stain has the advantage of being cheaper and easier to perform than immunological and molecular assays [37], but its disadvantage is low sensitivity, with the possibility of false negative results [38]. The oocysts have small dimensions and as such are hard to observe in fecal smears after staining, which requires more time and observational skill from an examiner [39].

5. Conclusions

We investigated, for the first time in Brazil, the occurrence of gastrointestinal parasites in domestic puppies less than six months of age. The detection of intestinal helminths as Toxocara spp. and the Ancylostomatidae family and the protozoa Giardia spp. in asymptomatic dogs highlights the risk of zoonotic transmission.

Author Contributions

G.M.d.S.R. and K.D.S.B. conceptualized the study; W.L.F. prepared the initial draft of the manuscript; G.M.d.S.R., K.D.S.B. and G.W. reviewed and edited the manuscript; G.M.d.S.R., K.D.S.B., W.L.F., S.V.I., J.F.G., W.B.N., G.P.T.M., J.A.B.C.N., W.B.N., G.W. and F.A.S. participated in compiling and analyzing the data. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP) Thematic Project Process Nº 2014/12236-1. G.W. was partially supported by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, grant R21AI144521-02S1.

Institutional Review Board Statement

The study was approved by the animal use ethics committee of the Faculty of Dentistry of Araçatuba, São Paulo State University, under protocol number FOA-00312-2016.

Informed Consent Statement

Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.

Data Availability Statement

The original contributions presented in this study are included in the article. Further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Pedrassani, D.; Viera, A.M.; Thiem, B.E.M. Contamination by Toxocara spp. and Ancylostoma spp. in areas of leisure from Canoinhas County, Santa Catarina state. Arch. Vet. Sci. 2008, 13, 110–117. [Google Scholar]
  2. Lima, V.F.S.; Cringoli, G.C.; Rinaldi, L.; Monteiro, M.F.M.; Calado, A.M.C.; Ramos, R.A.N.; Meira-Santos, P.O.; Alves, L.C. A comparison of mini-FLOTAC and FLOTAC with classic methods to diagnosing intestinal parasites of dogs from Brazil. Parasitol. Res. 2015, 114, 3529–3533. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Rodriguez-Morales, A.J.; González-Leal, N.; Montes-Montoya, M.C. Cutaneous Larva Migrans. Curr. Trop. Med. Rep. 2021, 8, 190–203. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Narayan, K.G.; Sinha, D.K.; Singh, D.K. Larva Migrans. In Handbook of Management of Zoonoses; Springer: Singapore, 2024; pp. 1051–1059. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Silva, A.M.B.; Bouth, R.C.; Costa, K.S.; Carvalho, D.C.; Hirai, K.E.; Prado, R.R.; Araújo, S.G.; Pereira, A.C.L.; Ribeiro, K.T.S. Ocorrência de enteroparasitoses em comunidades ribeirinhas. Rev. Pan-Amaz. Saude. 2014, 5, 45–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Kohansall, M.H.; Fazaeli, A.; Nourian, A.; Hanilool, A.; Kamali, K. Dogs’ gastrointestinal parasites and their association with public health in Iran. J. Vet. Res. 2017, 61, 189–195. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. Otranto, D.; Dantas-Torres, F.; Mihalca, A.D.; Traub, R.J.; Lappin, M.; Baneth, G. Parasitas zoonóticos de cães abandonados e abrigados na era da crise econômica e política global. Trends Parasitol. 2017, 33, 813–825. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Heilmann, R.M.; Grellet, A.; Grützner, N.; Cranford, S.M.; Suchodolski, J.S.; Chastant-Maillard, S.; Steiner, J.M. Effect of selected gastrointestinal parasites and viral agents on fecal S100A12 concentrations in puppies as a potential comparative model. Parasit. Vectors 2018, 11, 252. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Coelho, N.M.D.; Coelho, W.M.D.; Gomes, J.F.; Meireles, M.V.; Nagata, W.B.; de Lima, V.M.F.; Santos-Doni, T.R.; Silva, V.B.; da Silveira Neto, L.; Nakamura, A.A. Evidence of the Zoonotic Transmission of Cryptosporidium among Children and Pets. Pathogens 2023, 12, 1393. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Souza, J.B.B.; Silva, Z.M.d.A.; Alves-Ribeiro, B.S.; Moraes, I.d.S.; Alves-Sobrinho, A.V.; Saturnino, K.C.; Ferraz, H.T.; Machado, M.R.F.; Braga, Í.A.; Ramos, D.G.d.S. Prevalence of Intestinal Parasites, Risk Factors and Zoonotic Aspects in Dog and Cat Populations from Goiás, Brazil. Vet. Sci. 2023, 10, 492. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Merigueti, Y.F.F.B.; Giuffrida, R.; Silva, R.C.d.; Kmetiuk, L.B.; Santos, A.P.D.; Biondo, A.W.; Santarém, V.A. Dog and Cat Contact as Risk Factor for Human Toxocariasis: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Front. Public Health 2022, 10, 854468. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Santos, I.F.; Nhantumbo, B.; Alho, P. Ocorrência de casos de Ancylostoma caninum e Toxocara canis no Hospital Veterinário escola (HEV) (2001–2010)—Maputo—Moçambique. Rev. Eletrônica Med. Vet. 2013, 21, 1–8. [Google Scholar]
  13. Grellet, A.; Chastant-Maillard, S.; Robin, C.; Feugier, A.; Boogaerts, C.; Boucraut-Baralon, C.; Polack, B. Fatores de risco de diarreia ao desmame em cachorros alojados em canis de reprodução. Prev. Vet. Med. 2014, 117, 260–265. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Táparo, C.V.; Perri, S.H.V.; Serrano, A.C.M.; Ishizaki, M.N.; Costa, T.P.; Amarante, A.F.T.; Bresciani, K.D.S. Comparison between coproparasitological techniques for the diagnosis of helminth eggs or protozoa oocysts in dogs. Rev. Bras. Parasitol. Vet. 2006, 15, 1–5. [Google Scholar]
  15. Barutzki, D.; Schaper, R. Age-dependant prevalence of endoparasites in young dogs and cats up to one year of age. Parasitol. Res. 2015, 112, 119–131. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. Lwanga, S.K.; Lemeshow, S. Sample Size Determination in Health Studies: A Practical Manual; World Health Organization: Geneva, Switzerland, 1991. [Google Scholar]
  17. Elwood, C.; Devauchelle, P.; Elliott, J. Emesis in dogs: A review. J. Small Anim. Pract. 2010, 51, 4–22. [Google Scholar]
  18. Coelho, W.M.D.; Amarante, A.F.T.; Perri, S.H.V.; Coelho, N.M.D.; Apolinário, J.C.; Teixeira, W.F.P.; Bresciani, K.D.S. Coccidiose em cães e gatos do município de Andradina, estado de São Paulo, Brasil. Braz. J. Vet. Res. Anim. Sci. 2012, 49, 162–166. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Faust, E.C.; D’Antoni, J.S.; Odom, V.; Miller, M.J.; Peres, C.; Sawitz, W.; Thomen, L.F.; Tobie, J.; Walkern, J.H. A critical study of clinical laboratory techinics for the diagnosis of protozoan cysts and helminth eggs in feces. I: Preliminary communication. Am. J. Trop. Med. Hyg. 1938, 18, 169–183. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Willis, H.H. A simple levitation method for the detection of hookworm ova. Med. J. Aust. 1921, 8, 375–376. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Elliot, A.; Morgan, U.M.; Thompson, A.R.C. Improved staining method for detecting Cryptosporidium oocysts in stools using malachite green. J. Gen. Appl. Microbiol. 1999, 45, 139–142. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Johnson, S.A.M.; Gakuya, D.W.; Mbuthia, P.G.; Mande, J.D.; Maingi, N. Prevalence of gastrointestinal helminths and management practices for dogs in the Greater Accra region of Ghana. Heliyon 2015, 1, e00023. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Fontanarrosa, M.F.; Vezzani, D.; Basabe, J.; Eiras, D.F. An epidemiological study of gastrointestinal parasites of dogs from Southern Greater Buenos Aires (Argentina): Age, gender, breed, mixed infections, and seasonal and spatial patterns. Vet. Parasitol. 2006, 136, 283–295. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  24. Zanzani, S.A.; Gazzonis, A.L.; Scarpa, P.; Berrilli, F.; Manfredi, T.M. Intestinal Parasites of Owned Dogs and Cats from Metropolitan and Micropolitan Areas: Prevalence, Zoonotic Risks, and Pet Owner Awareness in Northern Italy. Biomed. Res. Int. 2014, 2014, 696508. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. Torres-Chablé, O.M.; García-Herrera, R.A.; Hernández-Hernández, M.; Peralta-Torres, J.A.; Ojeda-Robertos, N.F.; Blitvich, B.J.; Baak-Baak, C.M.; García-Rejón, J.E.; Machain-Wiliams, C.I. Prevalence of gastrointestinal parasites in domestic dogs in Tabasco, southeastern Mexico. Braz. J. Vet. Parasitol. 2015, 24, 432–437. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Moskvina, T.V.; Ermolenko, A.V. Helminths infections in domestic dogs from Russia. Vet. World. 2016, 9, 1248–1258. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Palmer, C.S.; Thompson, R.A.; Traub, R.J.; Rees, R.; Robertson, I.D. National study of the gastrointestinal parasites of dogs and cats in Australia. Vet. Parasitol. 2008, 151, 181–190. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  28. Duncan, K.T.; Koons, N.R.; Litherland, M.A.; Little, S.E.; Nagamori, Y. Prevalence of intestinal parasites in fecal samples and estimation of parasite contamination from dog parks in central Oklahoma. Vet. Parasitol. Reg. Stud. Rep. 2020, 19, 100362. [Google Scholar]
  29. Uehlinger, F.D.; Naqvie, S.A.; Greenwood, S.J.; Mcclure, J.T.; Conboy, G.; O’Handley, R.; Barkema, H.W. Zoonotic potential of Giardia duodenalis and Cryptosporidium spp. and prevalence of intestinal parasites in young dogs from different populations on Prince Edward Island, Canada. Vet. Parasitol. 2013, 196, 509–514. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Seva, A.P.; Pena, H.F.J.; Nava, A.; Souza, A.O.S.; Holsback, L.; Soares, R.M. Endoparasites in domestic animals surrounding an Atlantic Forest remnant, in São Paulo State, Brazil. Brasil. J. Vet. Parasitol. 2018, 27, 12–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Sanchez-Thevenet, P.; Carmena, D.; Adell-Aledo, M.; Dacal, E.; Arias, E.; Sougar, J.M.; Rodriguez, E.; Dea-Ayuela, M. High Prevalence and Diversity of Zoonotic and Other Intestinal Parasites in Dogs from Eastern Spain. Vector Borne Zoonotic Dis. 2019, 19, 915–922. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Duijvestijna, M.; Mughini-Grasa, L.; Schuurmana, N.; Schijfa, W.; Wagenaara, A.J.; Egberinka, H. Enteropathogen infections in canine puppies: (Co-)occurrence, clinical relevance and risk factors. Vet. Microbio. 2016, 195, 115–122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Balassiano, B.C.; Campos, M.R.; Pereira, M.J. Factors associated with gastrointestinal parasite infection in dogs in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. Prev. Vet. Med. 2009, 91, 234–240. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  34. Murnik, L.C.; Daugschies, A.; Delling, C. Gastrointestinal parasites in young dogs and risk factors associated with infection. Parasitol. Res. 2023, 122, 585–596. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  35. Ferreira, J.I.; Pena, H.F.; Azevedo, S.S.; Labruna, M.B.; Gennari, S.M. Occurrences of gastrointestinal parasites in fecal samples from domestic dogs in São Paulo, SP, Brazil. Rev. Bras. Parasitol. Vet. 2016, 25, 435–440. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  36. Overgaauw, P.A.M.; Knapen, F.V. Veterinary and public health aspects of Toxocara spp. Vet. Parasitol. 2013, 193, 398–403. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Weisel, T.; Dittrich, S.; Möhl, I.; ADusu, E.; Jelinek, T. Evaluation of seven commercial antigen detection tests for Giardia and Cryptosporidium in stool samples. Clin. Microbiol. Infect. 2006, 12, 656–659. [Google Scholar]
  38. Casemore, D.P. Laboratory methods for diagnosing cryptosporidiosis. J. Clin. Pathol. 1991, 44, 445–451. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Fayer, R. Taxonomy and species delimitation in Cryptosporidium. Exp. Parasitol. 2010, 124, 90–97. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Table 1. Number of domestic dogs positive for gastrointestinal parasites by fecal consistency.
Table 1. Number of domestic dogs positive for gastrointestinal parasites by fecal consistency.
ParasiteConsistency of Fecal Samples
LiquefiedPastySemi-SolidSolidTotal
Toxocara spp. 14351537
Ancylostomatidae8121122
Giardia spp.50038
Cystoisospora spp.12051128
No parasites19331338
Table 2. Number of positive domestic dogs for gastrointestinal parasites according to age *.
Table 2. Number of positive domestic dogs for gastrointestinal parasites according to age *.
Age Range (Months)Gastrointestinal Parasites
Toxocara spp.AncylostomatidaeGiardia spp. Cystoisospora spp.
Positive%Negative%Positive%Negative%Positive%Negative%Positive%Negative%
1–2 926.51116.714.51924.42251819.6828.61216.7
3–41544.12943.91150.03342.34504043.51035.73447.2
5–61029.42639.41045.52633.32253436.91035.72636.1
Total341006610022100781008100921002810072100
* Positive by one or both flotation diagnostic methods.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Reginaldo, G.M.d.S.; Widmer, G.; Inácio, S.V.; Gomes, J.F.; Bertequini Nagata, W.; Moreno, G.P.T.; Camargo Neto, J.A.B.; Ferreira, W.L.; Soares, F.A.; Bresciani, K.D.S. Prevalence of Potentially Zoonotic Endoparasites in Domestic Dog Puppies. Vet. Sci. 2025, 12, 332. https://doi.org/10.3390/vetsci12040332

AMA Style

Reginaldo GMdS, Widmer G, Inácio SV, Gomes JF, Bertequini Nagata W, Moreno GPT, Camargo Neto JAB, Ferreira WL, Soares FA, Bresciani KDS. Prevalence of Potentially Zoonotic Endoparasites in Domestic Dog Puppies. Veterinary Sciences. 2025; 12(4):332. https://doi.org/10.3390/vetsci12040332

Chicago/Turabian Style

Reginaldo, Gisele Moraes dos Santos, Giovanni Widmer, Sandra Valéria Inácio, Jancarlo Ferreira Gomes, Walter Bertequini Nagata, Gabriela Pinheiro Tirado Moreno, João Alfredo Biagi Camargo Neto, Wagner Luis Ferreira, Felipe Augusto Soares, and Katia Denise Saraiva Bresciani. 2025. "Prevalence of Potentially Zoonotic Endoparasites in Domestic Dog Puppies" Veterinary Sciences 12, no. 4: 332. https://doi.org/10.3390/vetsci12040332

APA Style

Reginaldo, G. M. d. S., Widmer, G., Inácio, S. V., Gomes, J. F., Bertequini Nagata, W., Moreno, G. P. T., Camargo Neto, J. A. B., Ferreira, W. L., Soares, F. A., & Bresciani, K. D. S. (2025). Prevalence of Potentially Zoonotic Endoparasites in Domestic Dog Puppies. Veterinary Sciences, 12(4), 332. https://doi.org/10.3390/vetsci12040332

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop