Next Article in Journal
Low Praziquantel Treatment Coverage for Schistosoma mansoni in Mayuge District, Uganda, Due to the Absence of Treatment Opportunities, Rather Than Systematic Non-Compliance
Previous Article in Journal
Assessment of a Rabies Virus Rapid Diagnostic Test for the Detection of Australian Bat Lyssavirus
Open AccessArticle

Zoonotic Helminth Diseases in Dogs and Dingoes Utilising Shared Resources in an Australian Aboriginal Community

One Health Research Group, College of Public Health, Medical and Veterinary Sciences, James Cook University, Townsville, QLD 4811, Australia
College of Science and Engineering and Centre for Environmental and Sustainability Science, James Cook University, Cairns, QLD 4870, Australia
School of Biological Sciences, University of Tasmania, Private Bag 55, Hobart, TAS 7001, Australia
CSIRO Land and Water, EcoSciences Precinct, GPO Box 2583, Brisbane, QLD 4001, Australia
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Trop. Med. Infect. Dis. 2018, 3(4), 110;
Received: 5 September 2018 / Revised: 3 October 2018 / Accepted: 4 October 2018 / Published: 8 October 2018
The impacts of free-roaming canids (domestic and wild) on public health have long been a concern in Australian Indigenous communities. We investigated the prevalence of zoonotic helminth diseases in dogs and sympatric dingoes, and used radio telemetry to measure their spatial overlap, in an Aboriginal community in the Wet Tropics of Australia. Samples collected from dingoes and dogs showed high levels of infection with the zoonotic hookworm, Ancylostoma caninum. Dingoes were also positive for A. ceylanicum infection (11.4%), but dogs were infection free. Whipworm, Trichuris vulpis, infection was far more prevalent in necropsies of domestic dogs (78.6%) than dingoes (3.7%). Dogs were free from Dirofilaria immitis infection, while dingoes recorded 46.2% infection. Eleven dingoes and seven free-roaming domestic dogs were fitted with Global Positioning System collars and tracked over an extended period. Dingo home-ranges almost completely overlapped those of the domestic dogs. However, dingoes and dogs did not utilise the same area at the same time, and dogs may have avoided dingoes. This spatial overlap in resource use presents an opportunity for the indirect spill-over and spill-back of parasites between dogs and dingoes. Tracking and camera traps showed that the community rubbish tip and animal carcasses were areas of concentrated activity for dogs and dingoes. View Full-Text
Keywords: dingo; dogs; aboriginal; diseases; canine; zoonoses dingo; dogs; aboriginal; diseases; canine; zoonoses
Show Figures

Graphical abstract

MDPI and ACS Style

Smout, F.A.; Skerratt, L.F.; Johnson, C.N.; Butler, J.R.A.; Congdon, B.C. Zoonotic Helminth Diseases in Dogs and Dingoes Utilising Shared Resources in an Australian Aboriginal Community. Trop. Med. Infect. Dis. 2018, 3, 110.

Show more citation formats Show less citations formats
Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Access Map by Country/Region

Back to TopTop