J. Christian Franson
2023
<p><span>Citing published reports and their own diagnostic data, Kaleta and Taday (</span><span class="ref-lnk lazy-ref"><span class="off-screen">Citation</span>2003</span><span>) (</span>https://doi.org/10.1080/03079450310001593613<span>) reported that 469 domestic and free-living bird species were determined to be chlamydia-positive, based on isolation of the organism and antigen detection or on serological detection of circulating antibodies. However, I was unable to reconcile the designation of chlamydia-positive in some of the species listed by Kaleta and Taday (</span><span class="ref-lnk lazy-ref"><span class="off-screen">Citation</span>2003</span><span>) with the information provided in the corresponding references cited. For example, Eddie </span><i>et al</i><span>. (</span><span class="ref-lnk lazy-ref"><span class="off-screen">Citation</span>1966</span><span>) tested sera from 24 species of birds in Alaska (see their </span><button class="ref showTableEventRef" data-id="T0001">Table 1</button><span>) by “direct and indirect complement fixation techniques in the presence of the standard psittacosis antigen.” Eddie </span><i>et al</i><span>. (</span><span class="ref-lnk lazy-ref"><span class="off-screen">Citation</span>1966</span><span>) reported that serum samples from only two species reacted, and the authors considered those titres too low to be of diagnostic significance. However, Kaleta and Taday (</span><span class="ref-lnk lazy-ref"><span class="off-screen">Citation</span>2003</span><span>) listed 20 bird species from Eddie </span><i>et al</i><span>. (</span><span class="ref-lnk lazy-ref"><span class="off-screen">Citation</span>1966</span><span>) as being positive for chlamydia. Additional apparent discrepancies are listed in </span><button class="ref showTableEventRef" data-id="T0001">Table 1</button><span> of the current article.</span></p>
application/pdf
10.1080/03079457.2023.2225978
en
Taylor & Francis
Apparent discrepancies in the review “Avian host range of Chlamydophila spp. based on isolation, antigen detection and serology” by Kaleta, E.F. & Taday, E.M.A. (2003), Avian Pathology, 32, 435–462
article