Table 3 The prevalence (%) and 95% CI (lower, upper intervals) of canine tick-borne disease pathogens by city using molecular screening.
| Â | Delhi (n = 162) | Mumbai (n = 162) | Sikkim (n = 101) | Ladakh (n = 100) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Babesia vogeli | 8.6% (4.8, 14.1) | 7.4% (3.9, 12.6) | 2% (0.6, 8.4) | 0% (0, 3.6) |
Babesia gibsoni | 0% (0, 2.3) | 0% (0, 2.3) | 1% (0.03, 5.4) | 0% (0, 3.6) |
Hepatozoon canis | 38.3% (30.8, 46.2) | 43.8% (36.1, 51.8) | 0% (0, 3.6) | 24% (16, 33.6) |
Ehrlichia canis | 39.5% (31.9, 47.5) | 27.2% (20.5, 34.7) | 0% (0, 3.6) | 0% (0, 3.6) |
Anaplasma platys | 13% (8.2, 19.1) | 8% (4.3, 13.3) | 0% (0, 3.6) | 0% (0, 3.6) |
Mycoplasma haemocanis | 17.3% (11.8, 24) | 14.2% (9.2, 20.5) | 1% (0.03, 5.4) | 12% (6.4, 20) |