Table 3.
Distribution of Cryptosporidium species/genotypes amongst pigs worldwide
| Collection site | No. positive/sample size | Prevalence (%) by microscopically or others (95% CI) | No. positive/sample size | Prevalence (%) by PCR (95% CI) | Cryptosporidium species (no.) | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Japan | 112/344 | 32.56 (27.58–37.53) | 37/62 | 59.68 (47.12–72.24) | C. suis (13), C. scrofarum (16), C. suis + C. scrofarum (8) | Yui et al. (2014) [6] |
| central Vietnam | 28/193 | 14.51 (9.49–19.52) | 10/14 | 71.43 (44.36–98.50) | C. suis (8), C. scrofarum (2) | Nguyen et al. (2013) [28] |
| Danish | 350/856 | 40.89 (37.59–44.19) | 56/75 | 74.67 (64.59–84.74) | C. suis (18), C. scrofarum (38) | Petersen et al. (2015) [29] |
| Austria | 2/44 | 4.55 (0–10.95) | 8/44 | 18.18 (6.32–30.04) | C. suis (2), C. scrofarum (3), C. suis + C. scrofarum (3) | Němejc et al. (2013) [30] |
| Australia | 45/289 | 15.57 (11.37–19.78) | C. suis (13), C. scrofarum (32) | Johnson et al. (2008) [31] | ||
| The Czech Republic | 6/231 | 2.60 (0.53–4.66) | 39/231 | 16.88 (12.02–21.75) | C. suis (13), C. scrofarum (14), C. suis + C. scrofarum (12) | Němejc et al. (2013) [30] |
| The Czech Republic | 194/1620 | 11.98 (10.39–13.56) | 353/1620 | 21.79 (19.78–23.80) | C. suis (142), C. scrofarum (126), C. suis + C. scrofarum (82), C. parvum (1), C. muris (3) | Němejc et al. (2013) [32] |
| The Czech Republica | 0/193 | 0 | 32/193 | 16.58 (11.29–21.87) | C. suis (13), C. scrofarum (7), C. suis + C. scrofarum (12) | Němejc et al. (2012) [33] |
| The Czech Republic | 87/413 | 21.07 (17.12–25.01) | 69/413 | 16.71 (13.09–20.32) | C. suis (45), C. scrofarum (22), C. muris (2) | Kváč et al. (2009) [34] |
| The Czech Republic, South Bohemia | 38/144 | 26.39 (19.10–33.67) | 38/144 | 26.39 (19.10–33.67) | C. suis (2), C. scrofarum (21), C. suis + C. scrofarum (15) | Kváč et al. (2009) [35] |
| Poland | 3/129 | 2.33 (0–4.96) | 11/129 | 8.53 (3.64–13.41) | C. suis (1), C. scrofarum (8), C. suis + C. scrofarum (2) | Němejc et al. (2013) [30] |
| The Slovak Republic | 0/56 | 0 | 3/56 | 5.36 (0–11.44) | C. suis (2), C. scrofarum (1) | Němejc et al. (2013) [30] |
| Canada, Prince Edward Island | 163/633 | 25.75 (22.33–29.17) | 113/633 | 17.85 (14.86–20.84) |
C. suis (41), C. scrofarum (69), C. parvum (2), Mouse genotype (1) |
Buduamoako et al. (2012) [36] |
| Canada, Ontario | 54/122 | 44.26 (35.32–53.20) | 68/122 | 55.74 (46.80–64.68) | C. scrofarum (26), C. parvum (38) | Farzan et al. (2011) [37] |
| Spain, Zaragoza | 32/142 | 22.54 (15.58–29.49) | 26/142 | 18.31 (11.87–24.75) | C. suis (10), C. scrofarum (16) | Suárezluengas et al. (2007) [38] |
| Spain, Galicia a | 35/209 | 16.75 (11.64–21.85) | C. suis (5), C. scrofarum (19), C. parvum (3) | Garcíapresedo et al. (2013) [39] | ||
| Total | 1069/5120 | 20.88 (19.77–21.99) | 943/4376 | 21.55 (20.33–22.77) | C. suis (328), C. scrofarum (420), C. suis + C. scrofarum (134), C. parvum (44), C.muris (5), Mouse genotype (1) |
aThe samples from these two studies came from wild boars