TABLE 2:
Prevalence by species and communities.
| Community | Goats | Sheep | ||||||
| S | KC | M. conjunctivae | Chlamydiaceae | S | KC | M. conjunctivae | Chlamydiaceae | |
| Hisper | 23 | 0 | 0.0% (0)* | 0.0% (0) | 9 | 0 | 11.1% (1)* | 0.0% (0) |
| Hoper | 22 | 1 | 22.7% (5)* | 4.6% (1) | 10 | 2 | 30.0% (3)* | 10.0% (1) |
| Hushe | 36 | 0 | 5.6% (2)* | 2.8% (1) | 43 | 5 | 18.6% (8)* | 4.6% (2) |
| Kanday | 61 | 1 | 11.5% (7)* | 0.0% (0) | 73 | 5 | 17.8% (13)* | 4.1% (3) |
| Minapin | 2 | 0 | 0.0% (0)* | 0.0% (0) | 15 | 0 | 26.7% (4)* | 6.7% (1) |
| Skanderabad | 14 | 0 | 7.1% (1)* | 7.1% (1) | 26 | 0 | 19.2% (5)* | 3.9% (1) |
| Total | 158 | 2 | 9.5% (15)* | 1.9% (3) | 176 | 12 | 19.3% (34)* | 4.5% (8) |
Summary of samples (S), clinical signs (KC) and prevalence (percentage and number of positives) of M. conjunctivae and Chlamydiaceae bacteria in the eyes of small domestic ruminants from the Central Karakoram National Park area in Pakistan
* Mean M. conjunctivae prevalence was significantly (P=0.01842) higher in sheep than in goats both overall and for each sampling community
KC, keratoconjunctivitis