Volume 12, Number 4—April 2006
Research
Human Trypanosoma cruzi Infection and Seropositivity in Dogs, Mexico
Table 3
Prevalence of antibodies to Trypanosoma cruzi in dogs in the southern area of the State of Mexico
Municipality | Village | No. screened | Seropositivity,* no. (%) |
||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
IgG positive† | IgM positive‡ | IgG and IgM positive | |||
Tejupilco | El Carmen Ixtapan | 16 | 5 (31.3) | 0 | 5 (31.3) |
Rincon del Carmen | 42 | 10 (23.8) | 13 (30.9) | 16 (38.0) | |
Rio Grande | 24 | 1 (4.2) | 0 | 1 (4.2) | |
Tejupilco | 10 | 1 (10.0) | 0 | 1 (10.0) | |
Zacatapec | 22 | 1 (4.5) | 0 | 1 (4.5) | |
Subtotal | 114 | 18 (15.8) | 13 (11.4) | 24 (21.0) | |
Toluca | 80 | 8 (10.0) | 12 (15.0) | 14 (17.5) | |
Northern area§ | 24 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
Chiapas | 28 | 11 (39.3) | 4 (14.3) | 12 (42.8) |
*IgG, immunoglobulin G. p<0.001 for IgG, IgM, and IgG plus IgM seropositivity.
†IgG-seropositive dogs were 8 mo to 6 y of age; 85% were >2 y of age.
‡IgM-seropositive dogs were 4 months to 6 years of age; a similar distribution was observed in all age groups.
§Northern villages of Apaxco, Hueypoxita, Jaltenco, and Nextlalpan were included in this group.
1These authors contributed equally to this work.
Page created: January 23, 2012
Page updated: January 23, 2012
Page reviewed: January 23, 2012
The conclusions, findings, and opinions expressed by authors contributing to this journal do not necessarily reflect the official position of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the Public Health Service, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, or the authors' affiliated institutions. Use of trade names is for identification only and does not imply endorsement by any of the groups named above.