Table 2 Reverse line blot hybridisation detection of tick-borne pathogens in South African caracals (Caracal caracal)
Order |  | Central Karoo (n = 27) | Namaqualand (n = 14) | Cape Peninsula (n = 16) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Â | Total proportion of positive reactionsa | 100 | 100 | 100 |
| Â | Pathogen: Catch-all probes | |||
Rickettsiales | Ehrlichia/Anaplasma spp. | 11 (2–29%)b | 0 (0–23%) | 88 (62–98%) |
Piroplasmida | Theileria/Babesia spp. | 4 (1–19%) | 43 (18–71%) | 88 (62–98%) |
Theileria spp. | 0 (0–13%) | 0 (0–23%) | 31 (11–59%) | |
Babesia sp. 1 | 100 (87–100%) | 100 (77–100%) | 100 (79–100%) | |
Babesia sp. 2 | 93 (76–99%) | 100 (77–100%) | 100 (79–100%) | |
Pathogen: Species-specific probes | ||||
Babesia felis | 0 (0–13%) | 0 (0–23%) | 75 (48–93%) | |
Babesia microti | 0 (0–13%) | 0 (0–23%) | 88 (62–98%) | |
Babesia leo | 0 (0–13%) | 0 (0–23%) | 63 (35–85%) | |
Theileria annulata | 4 (1–19%) | 0 (0–23%) | 0 (0–21%) | |