Table 1. SIVcpz and SFVcpz prevalence by sampling location.
| Collection sitea | Subspecies Originc | Chimpanzee Samples tested for SIVcpz | SIVcpz Antibody-Positive Samples | SIVcpz-Infected Chimpanzeesd | SIVcpz Prevalence (95% CI) | Chimpanzee Samples tested for SFVcpze | SFVcpz Prevalence (95% CI)e |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bankim (BK) | P. t. e | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | - |
| Deuk (DK) | P. t. e | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | - |
| Ebo Forest (EB) | P. t. e | 19 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | - |
| Kombe (KM) | P. t. e | 7 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | - |
| Liabelem Highlands (ED) | P. t. e | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | - |
| Linte (LN) | P. t. e | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | - |
| Makombe (MK) | P. t. e | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | - |
| Mamfe (MF) | P. t. e | 39 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 13 | 98 |
| Mbam et Djerem (MD) | P. t. e | 9 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | - |
| Metep (MP) | P. t. e | 15 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 100 |
| Mone (YW) | P. t. e | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | - |
| Mount Golep (MG) | P. t. e | 15 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | - |
| Ngambe-Tikar (NT) | P. t. e | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | - |
| Takamanda (TK)b | P. t. e | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | - |
| Vome (VM) | P. t. e | 6 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | - |
| Wassa Emtse (WE)b | P. t. e | 25 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 26 | 81 |
| Wouchaba (WC) | P. t. e | 6 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | - |
| Yagba (YB) | P. t. e | 14 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | - |
| Belgique (BQ) b | P. t. t | 142 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 82 | 44 |
| Biwali (BI) b | P. t. t | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | - |
| Bouamir (BM) b | P. t. t | 38 | 2 | 1 | 4.9 | 0 | - |
| Boumba Bek (BB) b | P. t. t | 34 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 31 | 66 |
| Campo Ma'an (CP) b | P. t. t | 232 | 9 | 2 | 1.6 | 10 | 100 |
| Deng Deng (DD) | P. t. t | 9 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | - |
| Diang (DG) b | P. t. t | 29 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 29 | 100 |
| Diassa (DI) b | P. t. t | 55 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | - |
| Djoum (DJ) b | P. t. t | 17 | 4 | 1 | 11.0 | 0 | - |
| Douomo Pierre (DP) b | P. t. t | 160 | 17 | 4 | 4.7 | 114 | 60 |
| Ekom (EK) b | P. t. t | 46 | 6 | 4 | 16.3 | 19 | 66 |
| Gribi (GB) b | P. t. t | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | - |
| Kagnol (KG) b | P. t. t | 15 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | - |
| Kika (KK) b | P. t. t | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | - |
| Lobeke (LB) b | P. t. t | 38 | 5 | 5 | 24.7 | 16 | 53 |
| Lomié (LM) b | P. t. t | 62 | 0 | 0 | 0 | - | |
| Mambele (MB) b | P. t. t | 101 | 31 | 17 | 31.6 | 25 | 54 |
| Mbinang (MB) b | P. t. t | 24 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | - |
| Mboi (BY) b* | P. t. t | 1 | 1 | 1 | - | 0 | - |
| Minta (MT) b | P. t. t | 81 | 10 | 2 | 5.4 | 81 | 79 |
| Nki (NK) b | P. t. t | 8 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | - |
| Somalomo (SL) b | P. t. t | 44 | 5 | 1 | 4.3 | 0 | - |
aLocation of samples collections are shown in Fig 2.
bSamples collected by the team of BH and MP (Keele et al. 2006; Van heuverswyn et al 2007).
cP. t. e: Pan troglodytes ellioti; P. t. t: Pan troglodytes troglodytes.
dBased on microsatellite analysis results from Keele et al. 2006; Van heuverswyn et al 2007; Mitchell et al. 2015.
e Data from Liu et al 2008.
* Prevalence was not calculated because the number of samples collected was too small.