Table 1.
Haemogregarines prevalence among frog and toad species in overall and according to the six sampling districts.
| Provinces | Districts | Frogs | Toads | p value3 | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hoplobatrachus tigerinus | Bufo stomaticus | Bufo olivaceous | Bufo melanostictus | |||||||
| Positive/Total (% ± C.I.1) | p value2 | Positive/Total (% ± C.I.1) | p value2 | Positive/Total (% ± C.I.1) | p value2 | Positive/Total (% ± C.I.1) | p value2 | |||
| Punjab | Layyah | 3/27 (11 ± 0.117) | 0.271 | 2/17 (12 ± 0.152) | 0.721 | 2/8 (25 ± 0.299) | 0.453 | – | # | 0.581 |
| Multan | 2/24 (8 ± 0.109) | 0/3 (0) | 0/2 (0) | – | 0.799 | |||||
| Sargodha | 0/20 (0) | 2/19 (11 ± 0.137) | – | 0/6 (0) | 0.238 | |||||
| KPK | Upper Dir | – | 6/55 (11 ± 0.082) | – | – | # | ||||
| Buner | 0/10 (0) | 0/14 (0) | – | – | # | |||||
| Mardan | 0/18 (0) | - | – | – | # | |||||
| Total | 5/99 (5.05 ± 0.043) | 10/108 (9.3 ± 0.054) | 2/10 (20 ± 0.246) | 0/6 (0) | 0.260 | |||||
p > 0.05 = Non significant. 1C.I.: 95% confidence interval, 2p value calculated between districts for each amphibian species, 3p value calculated between amphibian species for each district, −Absence of sampling in this district, #Statistical analysis was not possible.