Conference Agenda
Overview and details of the sessions of this conference. Please select a date or location to show only sessions at that day or location. Please select a single session for detailed view (with abstracts and downloads if available).
|
Daily Overview |
| Session | |
|
CP2.1: Canines 10 minute talks sponsored by Elanco Location: Lecture Theatre 2 Session Chair: Swaid Abdullah, The University of Queensland Session Chair: Liisa Ahlstrom, Elanco | |
    | |
Forty years on: What do handbags, dogs and Toxoplasma gondii have in common? 1: Sydney School of Veterinary Science, University of Sydney, Australia; 2: Sydney Infectious Diseases Institute, University of Sydney, Australia Exposure to Toxoplasma gondii in dogs has been recognised for decades, including an Australian study conducted at the University Veterinary Teaching Hospital in Sydney (UVTHS) in 1982, which showed that exposure was common among dogs presented for veterinary care. Since then, major changes in canine lifestyle, urbanisation and veterinary practice have occurred, raising questions about whether exposure patterns have shifted and what factors now best explain risk. Using diagnostic serology data from approximately 500 dogs, we examined a contemporary cohort of client‑owned dogs presented to a veterinary teaching hospital. Serological evidence of prior exposure remains common, consistent with historical findings. Age was the dominant predictor of seropositivity, with dogs aged four years or older showing substantially higher odds of exposure, reflecting cumulative lifetime contact with the parasite. Breed‑associated exposure ecology further clarified risk: Toy breeds consistently showed the lowest likelihood of seropositivity, while other purebred dogs had markedly higher odds, suggesting lifestyle and environmental exposure, rather than fine breed distinctions, drive risk. From a veterinary perspective, canine T. gondii seropositivity reflects prior exposure rather than disease, and positive serology (particularly in older, non‑Toy dogs) represents an expected background finding rather than evidence of toxoplasmosis. | |