Advertisement

Canadian Journal of Public Health

, Volume 92, Issue 1, pp 67–71 | Cite as

A Serological Survey of Rural Dogs and Cats on the Southwestern Canadian Prairie for Zoonotic Pathogens

  • Frederick A. LeightonEmail author
  • Harvey A. Artsob
  • May C. Chu
  • James G. Olson
Article

Abstract

A survey for antibodies against agents of plague, tularemia, and Rocky Mountain spotted fever (RMSF), and against Sin Nombre hantavirus (SNV), Bartonella henselae and B. clarridgeiae was conducted in the summer of 1995 using serum from rural dogs and cats living in the vicinity of four public parks in southeastern Alberta and southwestern Saskatchewan. Antibodies to all pathogens were detected in all survey areas. Overall prevalence rates were 0.075 for Yersinia pestis, 0.089 for Francisella tularensis, 0.025 for Rickettsia rickettsii (dogs only), and 0.029, 0.178 and 0.186 for SNV, B. henselae and B. clarridgeiae, respectively (cats only). This serological survey of rural dogs and cats was more sensitive and efficient than previous surveys based on collection and culture of rodents and ectoparasites. All six pathogens appear endemic to the region. Surveillance for plague, tularemia, RMSF and SNV, and management of associated public risks should be done in endemic regions.

Résumé

Durant l’été 1995, nous avons mené une enquête sur la présence d’anticorps spécifiques des agents de la peste, de la tularémie, de la fièvre des montagnes rocheuses (RMSF) et du Sin Nombre virus (SNV), Bartonella henselae et B. clarridgeiae en utilisant des sérums provenant de chiens et de chats ruraux vivant à proximité de quatre parcs publics du sud-est de l’Alberta et du sud-ouest de la Saskatchewan. Des anticorps contre tous les agents pathogènes étudiés étaient présents dans toutes les localités ciblées par l’étude. Les taux de prévalence globaux étaient de 0,075 pour Yersinia pestis, 0,089 pour Francisella tularensis, 0,025 pour Rickettsia rickettsii (chiens seulement) et de 0,029, 0,178 et 0,186, respectivement, pour SNV, B. henselae et B. clarridgeiae (chats seulement). Cette enquête sérologique visant des chiens et des chats s’est avérée plus sensible et plus efficace que les enquêtes précédentes, fondées sur la collecte et/ou la culture d’ectoparasites et de rongeurs. Les six pathogènes susmentionnés semblent être endémiques dans les régions étudiées. Il faudrait effectuer dans ces régions une épidémiosurveillance des agents de la peste, de la tularémie, de la RMSF et du SNV et gérer les risques auxquels la population pourrait être exposée.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Gibbons RJ. Survey of Rocky Mountain spotted fever and sylvatic plague in western Canada during 1938. Can Public Health J 1939;30:184–87.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Gibbons RJ, Humphreys FA. Plague surveys in western Canada. Can Public Health J 1941;32:24–28.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Humphreys FA, Campbell AG. Plague, Rocky Mountain spotted fever and tularaemia surveys in Canada. Can J Public Health 1947;38:124–30.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Childs JE, Ksiazek TG, Spiropoulou CF, et al. Serologic and genetic identification of Peromyscus maniculatus as the primary rodent reservoir for a new hantavirus in the southwestern United States. J Infect Dis 1999;169:1271–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Werker DH, Artsob H. Of mice and mostly men - hantavirus pulmonary syndrome. Can Med Assoc J 1998;158:912–13.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Barnes AM. Surveillance and control of bubonic plague in the United States. Symp Zool Soc Lond 1982;50:237–70.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Rust JH, Cavanaugh DC, O’Shita R, et al. The role of domestic animals in the epidemiology of plague. I. Experimental infections of dogs and cats. J Infect Dis 1971;124:522–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Rust JH, Miller BE, Bahmanyar M, et al. The role of domestic animals in the epidemiology of plague. II. Antibody to Yersinia pestis in the sera of dogs and cats. J Infect Dis 1971;124:527–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Archibald WS, Kunitz SJ. Detection of plague by testing serums of dogs on the Navajo reservation. HSMHA Health Reports 1971;86:377–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Feldmann H, Sanchez A, Morzunov S, et al. Utilization of autopsy RNA for the synthesis of the nucleocapsid antigen of a newly recognized virus associated with hantavirus pulmonary syndrome. Virus Res 1993;30:351–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Chu RM. Laboratory Manual of Plague Diagnostic Tests. Fort Collins: USDHHS Publications, 1999;45–51.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Brown SL, McKinney FT, Klein GC, et al. Evaluation of a safranin-O-stained antigen microagglutination test for Francisella tularensis antibodies. J Clin Microbiol 1980;11:146–48.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    National Centre for Infectious Diseases CDC. Indirect Fluorescent Antibody Technique for the Detection of Rickettsial Antibodies. Atlanta: USD-HHS, 1991;12.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Childs JE, Rooney JAC, Cooper JL, et al. Epidemiological observations on infection with Rochalimaea henselae species among cats living in Baltimore, MD. J Amer Vet Med Assoc 1994;204:1775–78.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Thrusfield M. Veterinary Epidemiology. Borough Green: Butterworths, 1986;1–280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Taylor P, Gordon DH, Isaacson M. The status of plague in Zimbabwe. Ann Trop Med Parasitol 1981;75:165–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Hubbert WT, Goldenberg MI, Kartman L, et al. Public health potential of sylvatic plague. J Amer Vet Med Assoc 1966;149:1651–54.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kartman L, Goldenberg MI, Hubbert WT. Recent observations on the epidemiology of plague in the United States. Am J Public Health 1966;56:1554–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Gage KL, Ostfeld RS, Olson JG. Nonviral vector-borne zoonoses associated with mammals in the United States. J Mammal 1995;76:695–715.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Bow MR, Brown JH. Tularaemia in the “Seven Persons Coulee,” Alberta. Can J Public Health 1943;34:415–18.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Bow MR, Brown JH. Tick-borne diseases of man in Alberta. Can Med Assoc J 1945;53:459–65.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Martin T, Holmes IH, Wobeser GA, et al. Tularemia in Canada with a focus on Saskatchewan. Can Med Assoc J 1982;127:279–82.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Hopla CE, Hopla AK. Tularemia. In: Beran GW (Ed.), Handbook of Zoonoses. Boca Raton: CRC Press, 1994;113–26.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Update: Hantavirus pulmonary syndrome-United States, 1999. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report 1999;48:521–25.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Mills JN, Yates TL, Childs JE, et al. Guidelines for working with rodents potentially infected with hantavirus. J Mammal 1995;76:716–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Kordic DL, Breitschwerdt EB. Infections and carriership of Bartonella and Afipia species in veterinary medicine. In: Schmidt A (Ed.), Bartonella and Afipia Species Emphasizing Bartonella henselae. Basel: S. Karger AG, 1998;183–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Maruyama S, Katsube Y. Epidemiology and pathology of Bartonella henselae in cats. In: Schmidt A (Ed.), Bartonella and Afipia Species Emphasizing Bartonella henselae. Basel: S. Karger AG, 1998;201–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Canadian Public Health Association 2001

Authors and Affiliations

  • Frederick A. Leighton
    • 1
    Email author
  • Harvey A. Artsob
    • 2
  • May C. Chu
    • 3
  • James G. Olson
    • 4
  1. 1.Canadian Cooperative Wildlife Health Centre, Department of Veterinary Pathology, Western College of Veterinary MedicineUniversity of SaskatchewanSaskatoonCanada
  2. 2.Zoonotic Diseases and Level 4 ProgramCanadian Science Centre for Human and Animal HealthWinnipegUSA
  3. 3.Bacterial Zoonoses Branch, Division of Vector-Borne Infectious Diseases, National Center for Infectious DiseasesCenters for Disease Control and PreventionFort CollinsUSA
  4. 4.Special Pathogens Branch, Division of Viral and Rickettsial Diseases, National Center for Infectious DiseasesCenters for Disease Control and PreventionAtlantaUSA

Personalised recommendations