Table 3.
Toxoplasma gondii-like strains’ prevalence rates among different species of frogs and toads 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) | 0.043* | 2/17 (12 ± 0.152) | 0.027* | 0/8 (0) | # | – | # | 0.593 |
| Multan | 5/24 (21 ± 0.162) | 0/3 (0) | 0/2 (0) | – | 0.532 | |||||
| Sargodha | 0/20 (0) | 0/19 (0) | - | 0/6 (0) | # | |||||
| KPK | Upper Dir | – | 0/55 (0) | - | – | # | ||||
| Buner | 0/10 (0) | 0/14 (0) | - | – | # | |||||
| Mardan | 0/18 (0) | - | - | – | # | |||||
| Total | 5/99 (5.05 ± 0.043) | 2/108 (1.9 ± 0.025) | 0/10 (0) | 0/6 (0) | 0.0513 | |||||
1C.I.: 95% confidence interval, 2p value calculated between districts for each amphibian species, 3p value calculated between amphibian species for each district, *Statistically significant, p < 0.05.