Peer-reviewed veterinary case report
Vector-borne infections common in domestic dogs across Namibia
By de Villiers, Lourens et al.·Published in Parasites & vectors·2025·Department of Veterinary Tropical Diseases·View original on PubMed →
PetCaseFinder translated the abstract of this peer-reviewed paper into plain English so pet owners can read it. We do not publish original research — every detail traces back to the citation above. How we work →
Original publication title: Prevalence, diagnostic evaluation, and disease associations of vector-borne pathogens in domestic dogs across Namibia: a multi-modal approach.
- Species:
- dog
Plain-English summary
A study in Namibia found that a significant number of domestic dogs tested positive for various tick-borne diseases. Out of 375 dogs examined, 64% showed signs of infections like Ehrlichia and Anaplasma, which can cause serious health issues. The researchers used different testing methods, with the most effective being a specific blood test called qPCR. They discovered that dogs in certain regions had higher infection rates, and these infections were linked to symptoms like low platelet counts. This highlights the importance of testing for these diseases in dogs, especially in areas where ticks are common.
People also search for: dog tick disease Namibia · symptoms of Ehrlichia in dogs · how to test for Anaplasma in pets
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Due to limited documentation on vector-borne pathogens of companion animals in Namibia, a country-wide, multi-site field study was conducted to estimate the prevalence of these pathogens in domestic dogs. METHODS: Samples of whole blood and serum from 375 dogs in 15 towns across eight regions were analysed. Vector-borne pathogens were screened by light microscopic examination of blood smears, point-of-care serology, and quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction (qPCR). Haematology and serum biochemistry analyses were also performed. RESULTS: Collectively, the SNAP4DxPlus Test provided 64% seropositive results, comprising Ehrlichia species (59%), Anaplasma species (45%), Dirofilaria immitis (2%), and Borrelia burgdorferi (< 1%). Altogether, prevalence as determined by probe-based qPCR assays was 54%, comprising Ehrlichia canis (27%), Hepatozoon canis (25%), Anaplasma species (13%), and Babesia vogeli (8%). Light microscopy yielded the least number of positives, indicating a collective positive result of only 11% in screening for Ehrlichia, Anaplasma, Hepatozoon, Babesia, and microfilaria species. On the whole, Kunene and Otjozondjupa regions showed the highest pathogen prevalence (75%), and the lowest was from Erongo region (38%), on qPCR testing. Significant associations between tick presence and infection by E. canis (P = 0.001), Anaplasma species (P = 0.006), and B. vogeli (P = 0.008) were demonstrated. Likewise, relevant associations between haemoparasite infection and variables of patient signalment, history, and various disease manifestations were shown. Finally, significant associations were found between pathogen infection and numerous clinical pathology abnormalities of the erythron, leukon, and thrombon, including thrombocytopenia (P = 0.022). CONCLUSIONS: Diagnostic modalities should be used contextually to test for canine pathogens, with due consideration of the limitations. Appropriate diagnostic testing such as qPCR, guided by relevant known associations with disease manifestation, should guide responsible treatment strategies and identify potential zoonotic risks in pets.
Find similar cases for your pet
PetCaseFinder finds other peer-reviewed reports of pets with the same symptoms, plus a plain-English summary of what was tried across them.
Search related cases →Original publication on PubMed: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40640947/