Cited by 54Helminth infection and controlParasitic infections in humans and animalsParasite Biology and Host Interactions

Intestinal parasites of the red fox (Vulpes vulpes) in Slovenia

Open access
Vergles Rataj, Aleksandra, Posedi, Janez, Žele, Diana, Vengušt, Gorazd·2013·Acta Veterinaria Hungarica

Abstract

In the present study, 428 foxes were collected and examined for intestinal helminths using the washing-out method. Parasites were found in 93.2% of the examined animals. The most frequently identified nematodes were Uncinaria stenocephala (58.9%), Toxocara canis (38.3%) and Molineus patens (30.6%). Other nematodes found were Pterygodermatites affinis (4.2%), Capillaria sp. (2.8%), Crenosoma vulpis (2.8%), Toxascaris leonina (2.5%), Trichuris vulpis (0.7%) and Physaloptera sp. (0.2%). Mesocestoides sp. (27.6%) and Taenia crassiceps (22.2%) were the most prevalent cestodes, followed by T. polyacantha (6.5%), Hymenolepis nana (2.1%), T. pisiformis (2.1%) and Dipylidium caninum (1.4%). The study also revealed four trematode species: Rossicotrema donicum (1.6%), Heterophyes heterophyes (1.1%), Metagonimus yokogawai (1.1%), Prohemistomum appendiculatum (0.4%) and two protozoan species: oocysts of Sarcocystis (2.8%) and Isospora (0.4%). This is the first extensive study on the intestinal parasites of the red fox (Vulpes vulpes) in Slovenia. The 2.6% prevalence of Echinococcus multilocularis in the same sample population as investigated herein has been reported previously (Vergles Rataj et al., 2010).

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1556/avet.2013.029

Cites

0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The analysis of all Taenia tapeworms together without distinguishing species makes it hard to conclude definitely about regional differences.

    “It is hard to conclude definitely because we analyzed all tapeworms from Taenia genus together without distinguishing species (e.g., T. crassiceps, T. pisiformis, T. polyacantha, T. hydatigena, and T. taeniaeformis) [1,8,16] which have different lifecycles with various intermediate hosts.”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Vergles Rataj, A., Posedi, J., Žele, D., & Vengušt, G.
Affiliations
  • 1 University of Ljubljana Institute of Microbiology and Parasitology, Veterinary Faculty Gerbičeva 60 1115 Ljubljana Slovenia
  • University of Ljubljana (SI)
Venue
Acta Veterinaria Hungarica
Published
2013-12-01
Volume
61
Issue
4
Pages
454-462
ISSN
  • 0236-6290 (ISSN-L)
  • 1588-2705
OpenAlex
W2080081624
Cited by
54
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 1
FWCI
7.03
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
other-oa
Locations
  • Acta Veterinaria Hungarica (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Repository of the University of Ljubljana (University of Ljubljana) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • Repository of the Academy's Library (Library of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences) (acceptedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Veterinary › Small Animals › Helminth infection and control
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pathology and Forensic Medicine › Parasitic infections in humans and animals
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Parasite Biology and Host Interactions
Keywords
red fox, intestinal parasites, helminths, nematodes, cestodes, trematodes, protozoa, Uncinaria stenocephala, Toxocara canis, Mesocestoides, Taenia crassiceps, Echinococcus multilocularis, parasite prevalence, Slovenia
MeSH terms
Animals, Animals, Wild, Cestoda, Foxes, Helminths, Parasites, Prevalence, Slovenia

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review