Search

Leishmaniases are a spectrum of diseases caused by protozoans from the genus Leishmania(Kinetoplastida: Trypanosomatidae) and are divided into 2 main clinical forms: tegumentary leishmaniasis (TL) and visceral leishmaniasis (VL). Transmission occurs after the bite of sandfly vectors (Diptera: Phlebotominae) when females take a blood meal from the vertebrate host [1]. In the New World, several species of Leishmania (~20) cause disease to man, the symptoms and epidemiology of which vary depending on species. However, there are species that are nonpathogenic to humans, such as L. enriettii. In 1946, Medina observed ear lesions in 2 farm-reared guinea pigs (Cavia porcellus [Rodentia: Cavida]) from the neighboring state of Sao Paulo. After lesion analysis, Leishmania was confirmed as the pathogen. The complete L. enriettii description was published by Muniz and Medina in 1948 at the Federal University of Parana, Brazil [2]. Although this species has been used as a model for cutaneous leishmaniasis (CL), many aspects of its biology remain unknown. In the past 6 years, an increased interest has emerged after the finding of a similar isolate in the red kangaroo (Macrofus rufus) in Australia [3]. This article aims to summarize some of the most important publications on this unique pathogen. It demonstrates a high phenotypic plasticity, being able to infect different vertebrate hosts and vectors. It also discusses recent human and veterinary infections due to other L. enriettii complex members.

[Extract] Effective surveillance is crucial for early detection and successful mitigation of emerging diseases [1]. The current global approach to surveillance for wildlife diseases affecting biodiversity ("biodiversity diseases") is still inadequate as demonstrated by the slow characterization and response to the two recent devastating epidemics, chytridiomycosis and white-nose syndrome [2]–[5]. Current surveillance for wildlife disease usually targets diseases that affect humans or livestock, not those impacting wildlife populations. Barriers to effective surveillance for biodiversity diseases include a relative lack of social and political will and the inherent complexity and cost of implementing surveillance for multiple and diverse free-ranging populations. Here we evaluate these challenges and the inadequacies of current surveillance techniques, and we suggest an integrated approach for effective surveillance.