Table 3. County, species, seroprevalence, and CI of sampled rodents.
| County (n) | Collection Year | Species | Seroprevalence | CI |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bandera (4) | 2012 | P. maniculatus (3) | 0 | |
| S. hispidus (1) | ||||
| Blanco (3) | 2012 | P. maniculatus (3) | 0 | |
| Burnett (7) | 2012 | P. maniculatus (6) | 0 | |
| S. hispidus (1) | 0 | |||
| Cottle (47) | 2013 | P. leucopus (2) | 0 | |
| P. maniculatus (32) | 0 | |||
| S. hispidus (2) | 0 | |||
| N. albigula (2) | 0 | |||
| D. elator (2) | 0 | |||
| Perognathus spp (7) * | 0 | |||
| Edwards (101) | 2012 | P. leucopus (22) | 4.5% (1) | 0.2–24.9 |
| P. maniculatus (58) | 0 | |||
| S. hispidus (4) | 0 | |||
| N. albigula (16) | 0 | |||
| Dipodomys spp (1) * | 0 | |||
| Hemphill (12) | 2013 | P. maniculatus (7) | 0 | |
| P. leucopus (1) | 0 | |||
| N. albigula (1) | 0 | |||
| Dipodomys spp (2) | 0 | |||
| C. hispidus (1) | 0 | |||
| La Salle (64) | 2012 | P. leucopus (36) | 0 | |
| P. maniculatus (4) | 0 | |||
| S. hispidus (10) | 0 | |||
| N. albigula (8) | 0 | |||
| Perognathus spp (6) * | 0 | |||
| Real (4) | 2012 | P. maniculatus (4) | 0 | |
| Travis (3) | 2012 | P. maniculatus (3) | 0 | |
| Uvalde (12) | 2015 | N. albigula (6) | 0 | |
| P. maniculatus (4) | 0 | |||
| S. hispidus (2) | 0 | |||
| Walker (6) | 2012 | P. maniculatus (6) | 0 | |
| Total (263) | 0.4% (1) | 0.02–2.4 |
* Rodents were classified to the genus level.
examining blood specimens by dark field microscopy failed to detect spirochetes.