Skip to main content
. 2012 Jul;106(3):159–165. doi: 10.1179/2047773212Y.0000000015

Table 1. Sample origin and assay results.

Sample Village* Patient gender Age (years) Microscopy results SSU-rDNA PCR Identified species
1 Kambi Turkana M 35 1+ + L. tropica
2 Jika F 15 0 + L. donovani
3 Jika M 52 0 +
4 Kambi Turkana F 56 1+ +
5 Kambi Turkana F 62 0 +
6 Kambi Turkana F 6 0 + (L. tropica)§
7 Jika M 6 0 + L. tropica
8 Kambi Turkana F 9 0 +
9 Kambi Turkana F 2.5 0 + L. tropica
10 Utut village M 35 0 +
11 Kambi Turkana M 5 1+ + L. tropica
12 Kambi Turkana M 2.3 1+ + L. tropica
13 Gitare M 10 0 +
14 Gitare M 5 1+ +
15 Gitare M 7 1+ + L. tropica
16 Gitare M 13 3+ + L. tropica
17 Gitare M 10 ND +
18 Gitare F 13 0 +
19 Gitare F 13 0 +
20 Gitare F 9 0 +
21 Gitare M 7 1+ +
22 Gitare M 13 ND +
23 Gitare F 7 1+ +
24 Gitare M 3 2+ + L. tropica
25 Gitare F 11 1+ + L. tropica

Notes: *See Fig. 1 for location of villages. These are the sites where active case detection was done. Not all patients included at these sites lived in the village itself.

M: male; F: female.

Parasite load grading. ND: not done.

§In Fig. 3, the suspected L. tropica fragment appears slightly higher, and could represent an aspecific amplicon. To be on the safe side, this was not considered positive for L. tropica.