<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no"?>
<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD Journal Publishing DTD v2.3 20070202//EN" "journalpublishing.dtd">
<article xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" article-type="research-article" dtd-version="2.3" xml:lang="EN">
<front>
<journal-meta>
<journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">Front. Anim. Sci.</journal-id>
<journal-title>Frontiers in Animal Science</journal-title>
<abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="pubmed">Front. Anim. Sci.</abbrev-journal-title>
<issn pub-type="epub">2673-6225</issn>
<publisher>
<publisher-name>Frontiers Media S.A.</publisher-name>
</publisher>
</journal-meta>
<article-meta>
<article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3389/fanim.2025.1533577</article-id>
<article-categories>
<subj-group subj-group-type="heading">
<subject>Animal Science</subject>
<subj-group>
<subject>Original Research</subject>
</subj-group>
</subj-group>
</article-categories>
<title-group>
<article-title>Identification of five <italic>Eimeria</italic> species in broiler farms in southern Thailand using SYBR Green-based real-time polymerase chain reaction</article-title>
</title-group>
<contrib-group>
<contrib contrib-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Chanchayanon</surname>
<given-names>Baramee</given-names>
</name>
<xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1">
<sup>1</sup>
</xref>
<uri xlink:href="https://loop.frontiersin.org/people/3100544/overview"/>
<role content-type="https://credit.niso.org/contributor-roles/investigation/"/>
<role content-type="https://credit.niso.org/contributor-roles/methodology/"/>
<role content-type="https://credit.niso.org/contributor-roles/software/"/>
<role content-type="https://credit.niso.org/contributor-roles/validation/"/>
<role content-type="https://credit.niso.org/contributor-roles/writing-original-draft/"/>
<role content-type="https://credit.niso.org/contributor-roles/writing-review-editing/"/>
</contrib>
<contrib contrib-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Pakpinyo</surname>
<given-names>Somsak</given-names>
</name>
<xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff2">
<sup>2</sup>
</xref>
<uri xlink:href="https://loop.frontiersin.org/people/3047906/overview"/>
<role content-type="https://credit.niso.org/contributor-roles/data-curation/"/>
<role content-type="https://credit.niso.org/contributor-roles/supervision/"/>
<role content-type="https://credit.niso.org/contributor-roles/software/"/>
<role content-type="https://credit.niso.org/contributor-roles/validation/"/>
<role content-type="https://credit.niso.org/contributor-roles/writing-review-editing/"/>
</contrib>
<contrib contrib-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Limpavithayakul</surname>
<given-names>Kriengwich</given-names>
</name>
<xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff2">
<sup>2</sup>
</xref>
<uri xlink:href="https://loop.frontiersin.org/people/3100692/overview"/>
<role content-type="https://credit.niso.org/contributor-roles/investigation/"/>
<role content-type="https://credit.niso.org/contributor-roles/methodology/"/>
<role content-type="https://credit.niso.org/contributor-roles/writing-review-editing/"/>
</contrib>
<contrib contrib-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Promvijit</surname>
<given-names>Promwit</given-names>
</name>
<xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1">
<sup>1</sup>
</xref>
<role content-type="https://credit.niso.org/contributor-roles/investigation/"/>
<role content-type="https://credit.niso.org/contributor-roles/methodology/"/>
<role content-type="https://credit.niso.org/contributor-roles/writing-review-editing/"/>
</contrib>
<contrib contrib-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Sriprad</surname>
<given-names>Auntika</given-names>
</name>
<xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1">
<sup>1</sup>
</xref>
<role content-type="https://credit.niso.org/contributor-roles/investigation/"/>
<role content-type="https://credit.niso.org/contributor-roles/methodology/"/>
<role content-type="https://credit.niso.org/contributor-roles/writing-review-editing/"/>
</contrib>
<contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="yes">
<name>
<surname>Limsatanun</surname>
<given-names>Arithat</given-names>
</name>
<xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1">
<sup>1</sup>
</xref>
<xref ref-type="author-notes" rid="fn001">
<sup>*</sup>
</xref>    <uri xlink:href="https://loop.frontiersin.org/people/2901643/overview"/>
<role content-type="https://credit.niso.org/contributor-roles/conceptualization/"/>
<role content-type="https://credit.niso.org/contributor-roles/data-curation/"/>
<role content-type="https://credit.niso.org/contributor-roles/formal-analysis/"/>
<role content-type="https://credit.niso.org/contributor-roles/funding-acquisition/"/>
<role content-type="https://credit.niso.org/contributor-roles/project-administration/"/>
<role content-type="https://credit.niso.org/contributor-roles/resources/"/>
<role content-type="https://credit.niso.org/contributor-roles/supervision/"/>
<role content-type="https://credit.niso.org/contributor-roles/writing-original-draft/"/>
<role content-type="https://credit.niso.org/contributor-roles/writing-review-editing/"/>
</contrib>
</contrib-group>
<aff id="aff1">
<sup>1</sup>
<institution>Faculty of Veterinary Science, Prince of Songkla University</institution>, <addr-line>Songkhla</addr-line>,&#xa0;<country>Thailand</country>
</aff>
<aff id="aff2">
<sup>2</sup>
<institution>Avian Health Research Unit, Department of Veterinary Medicine, Faculty of Veterinary Science, Chulalongkorn University</institution>, <addr-line>Bangkok</addr-line>,&#xa0;<country>Thailand</country>
</aff>
<author-notes>
<fn fn-type="edited-by">
<p>Edited by: Virginia Marugan-Hernandez, Royal Veterinary College (RVC), United Kingdom</p>
</fn>
<fn fn-type="edited-by">
<p>Reviewed by: Mariela Lujan Tomazic, INTA-CONICET, Argentina</p>
<p>Kelsilandia Aguiar Martins, Royal Veterinary College (RVC), United Kingdom</p>
<p>Shan Randima Nawarathne, Chungnam National University, Republic of Korea</p>
</fn>
<fn fn-type="corresp" id="fn001">
<p>*Correspondence: Arithat Limsatanun, <email xlink:href="mailto:arithat.l@psu.ac.th">arithat.l@psu.ac.th</email>
</p>
</fn>
</author-notes>
<pub-date pub-type="epub">
<day>10</day>
<month>07</month>
<year>2025</year>
</pub-date>
<pub-date pub-type="collection">
<year>2025</year>
</pub-date>
<volume>6</volume>
<elocation-id>1533577</elocation-id>
<history>
<date date-type="received">
<day>24</day>
<month>11</month>
<year>2024</year>
</date>
<date date-type="accepted">
<day>09</day>
<month>06</month>
<year>2025</year>
</date>
</history>
<permissions>
<copyright-statement>Copyright &#xa9; 2025 Chanchayanon, Pakpinyo, Limpavithayakul, Promvijit, Sriprad and Limsatanun</copyright-statement>
<copyright-year>2025</copyright-year>
<copyright-holder>Chanchayanon, Pakpinyo, Limpavithayakul, Promvijit, Sriprad and Limsatanun</copyright-holder>
<license xlink:href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">
<p>This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.</p>
</license>
</permissions>
<abstract>
<sec>
<title>Introduction</title>
<p>Chicken coccidiosis is a globally significant poultry disease caused by <italic>Eimeria</italic> species, which are highly pathogenic protozoa that impair growth performance and contribute to high morbidity and mortality in the poultry industry. To identify specific <italic>Eimeria</italic> species, molecular techniques have been developed in several countries as alternatives to conventional diagnostic approaches, which are labor-intensive, time-consuming, and have low accuracy in detecting mixed infections.</p>
</sec>
<sec>
<title>Methods</title>
<p>This study aimed to develop a SYBR Green-based real-time polymerase chain reaction assay for the identification of <italic>Eimeria</italic> species in Thailand, using DNA from five reference species (<italic>E. acervulina</italic>, <italic>E. brunetti</italic>, <italic>E. maxima</italic>, <italic>E. necatrix</italic>, and <italic>E. tenella</italic>) and 25 field samples from broiler farms in southern Thailand.</p>
</sec>
<sec>
<title>Results</title>
<p>The assay demonstrated high sensitivity, specificity, and reproducibility. Species-specific melting temperature profiles allowed reliable differentiation of <italic>Eimeria</italic> DNA from primer-dimers and potential contaminants. Field testing revealed a high prevalence of mixed infections, with <italic>E. tenella</italic>, <italic>E. acervulina</italic>, and <italic>E. maxima</italic> being the most common, whereas <italic>E. brunetti</italic> and <italic>E. necatrix</italic> were not detected.</p>
</sec>
<sec>
<title>Discussion</title>
<p>Compared with conventional gross examination, the SYBR Green-based real-time polymerase chain reaction assay proved to be a more accurate and efficient tool for diagnosing coccidiosis in commercial broiler farms, particularly in detecting subclinical and mixed-species infections.</p>
</sec>
</abstract>
<kwd-group>
<kwd>broiler chicken</kwd>
<kwd>coccidiosis</kwd>
<kwd>
<italic>Eimeria</italic> species</kwd>
<kwd>real-time polymerase chain reaction</kwd>
<kwd>SYBR Green</kwd>
<kwd>Thailand</kwd>
</kwd-group>    <contract-sponsor id="cn001">Huvepharma<named-content content-type="fundref-id">10.13039/501100003830</named-content>
</contract-sponsor>
<counts>
<fig-count count="5"/>
<table-count count="5"/>
<equation-count count="3"/>
<ref-count count="64"/>
<page-count count="13"/>
<word-count count="6470"/>
</counts>
<custom-meta-wrap>
<custom-meta>
<meta-name>section-in-acceptance</meta-name>
<meta-value>Precision Livestock Farming</meta-value>
</custom-meta>
</custom-meta-wrap>
</article-meta>
</front>
<body>
<sec id="s1" sec-type="intro">
<label>1</label>
<title>Introduction</title>
<p>Coccidia are pathogenic intestinal protozoa that cause significant economic losses in the poultry industry worldwide, including in Thailand (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B45">Peek and Landman, 2011</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B19">Dorne et&#xa0;al., 2013</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B18">Del Cacho et&#xa0;al., 2016</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B35">Lin et&#xa0;al., 2017</xref>). Chicken coccidiosis is caused by <italic>Eimeria</italic> species, such as <italic>E. acervulina, E. maxima, E. necatrix</italic>, and <italic>E. tenella</italic> (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B11">Cerventes et&#xa0;al., 2020</xref>). Chickens are often infected with a mixture of <italic>Eimeria</italic> species, which leads to a range of clinical signs, including watery or bloody diarrhea, depression, poor growth performance, and mortality (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B11">Cerventes et&#xa0;al., 2020</xref>).</p>
<p>To prevent and control coccidiosis in broiler farms, anticoccidial drugs such as salinomycin, robenidine, and ionophores have been routinely added to feed programs for over 40 years (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B45">Peek and Landman, 2011</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B28">Kadykalo et&#xa0;al., 2018</xref>). However, the efficacy of these drugs has declined as a result of increasing resistance among <italic>Eimeria</italic> species (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B13">Chapman, 1984</xref>, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B14">1986</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B43">Peek and Landman, 2003</xref>, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B44">2006</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B1">Abbas et&#xa0;al., 2011</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B60">Sun et&#xa0;al., 2023</xref>). This resistance has led to widespread subclinical coccidiosis in broilers (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B58">Shirzad et&#xa0;al., 2011</xref>), which is a major concern, as it impairs growth performance and increases feed conversion ratios, resulting in financial losses for the poultry industry (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B17">Dalloul and Lillehoj, 2006</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B4">Blake et&#xa0;al., 2020</xref>).</p>
<p>Traditionally, the identification of <italic>Eimeria</italic> species has relied on clinical signs, characteristic gross intestinal lesions, and microscopic examination of oocyst morphology&#x2014;methods that require highly skilled and experienced personnel (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B10">Carvalho et&#xa0;al., 2011b</xref>). In Thailand, coccidiosis surveillance in broiler farms is primarily conducted using these conventional approaches, especially gross lesion evaluation. This process is slow and delays the collection of epidemiological data. Moreover, subclinical lesions in medicated broiler farms often yield unreliable diagnostic information. Therefore, the application of molecular techniques for <italic>Eimeria</italic> species identification would significantly enhance the accuracy and efficiency of coccidiosis investigations.</p>
<p>With the increasing value of the global poultry market, the development of effective diagnostic methods to monitor and control chicken coccidiosis has become a priority for the poultry industry. Several studies have developed polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and real-time PCR assays to enhance the routine diagnosis and species-level identification of <italic>Eimeria</italic> (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B53">Schnitzler et&#xa0;al., 1998</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B25">Haug et&#xa0;al., 2007</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B5">Blake et&#xa0;al., 2008</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B29">Kawahara et&#xa0;al., 2008</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B36">Morgan et&#xa0;al., 2009</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B61">Vrba et&#xa0;al., 2010</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B9">Carvalho et&#xa0;al., 2011a</xref>, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B10">b</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B22">Gyorke et&#xa0;al., 2013</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B32">Lan et&#xa0;al., 2017</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B6">Brown Jordan et&#xa0;al., 2018</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B20">Geng et&#xa0;al., 2021</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B42">Pajic et&#xa0;al., 2023</xref>).</p>
<p>In Thailand, monitoring of chicken coccidiosis still relies on conventional techniques, including the evaluation of specific macroscopic lesions and oocyst morphology. This study is the first to apply a SYBR Green-based real-time PCR assay for the identification of <italic>Eimeria</italic> species and to investigate chicken coccidiosis outbreaks in southern Thailand.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="s2" sec-type="materials|methods">
<label>2</label>
<title>Materials and methods</title>
<sec id="s2_1">
<label>2.1</label>
<title>Positive control sample</title>
<p>A positive control sample containing <italic>E. acervulina</italic>, <italic>E. maxima</italic>, <italic>E. tenella</italic>, <italic>E. brunetti</italic>, and <italic>E. necatrix</italic> was provided by the pharmaceutical company HIPRA (Bangkok, Thailand). The average concentration of each species was approximately 300 sporulated oocysts per mL.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="s2_2">
<label>2.2</label>
<title>Sample collection and preparation</title>
<p>Fecal samples were collected from 25 small-scale broiler farms with closed-house systems in southern Thailand between 2022 and 2024. The chickens raised on these farms were commonly of the Cobb 500, Arbor Acres, or Ross 308 breeds, managed under an all-in/all-out system. The average age of the broilers was 25&#x2013;35 days, with an average weight of 1.5&#x2013;2.0 kg. Feed formulation and quantity met the nutritional requirements of each breed line, and water was provided <italic>ad libitum</italic>.</p>
<p>The selected farms met standardized criteria, including evidence of subclinical coccidiosis&#x2014;defined as moderate to poor performance without overt clinical signs such as bloody diarrhea&#x2014;and the use of anticoccidial shuttle programs in all flocks. These programs included standard commercial anticoccidial drugs commonly used in poultry farming in Thailand, such as ionophores (salinomycin, narasin, and monensin), synthetic compounds (nicarbazin, diclazuril, and robenidine), and chemical-ionophore combinations (nicarbazin-narasin). Shuttle programs typically involve rotation among different classes of anticoccidial drugs to reduce resistance while maintaining control of the parasite. None of the farms reported the use of coccidiosis vaccines.</p>
<p>To isolate coccidian oocysts, 5&#x2013;10 birds were randomly selected from each farm. The birds were weighed and humanely euthanized using carbon dioxide. Each bird underwent necropsy, and gross lesions associated with specific <italic>Eimeria</italic> species were recorded according to the criteria of <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B27">Johnson and Reid (1970)</xref>, to compare with real-time PCR results (<xref ref-type="supplementary-material" rid="SF2">
<bold>Supplementary Table S1</bold>
</xref>).</p>
<p>Intestinal contents were equally collected by scraping the mucosal surface of the duodenum, jejunum, ileum, and cecum sections using forceps, obtaining approximately 10&#x2013;20 g per bird. Samples from individual birds were processed separately. Each sample was placed in 2.5% (w/v) potassium dichromate in a Ziplock plastic bag and left overnight. The next day, the samples were washed with water through a mesh sieve into a beaker, then centrifuged at 1,500 rpm for 5 min to sediment the oocysts. The supernatant was discarded, and the resuspended pellets were incubated in 2.5% (w/v) potassium dichromate at 28&#xb0;C for two days to allow sporulation, then stored at 4&#xb0;C (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B15">Conway and Mckenzie, 2007</xref>). The remaining suspension was examined for the presence of oocysts using a simple flotation method with saturated sodium chloride and visualized under a microscope.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="s2_3">
<label>2.3</label>
<title>DNA extraction</title>
<p>Genomic DNA from field samples was extracted from oocysts and other parasitic stages using the Quick-DNA Fecal/Soil Microbe Microprep Kit (Zymo Research, Orange, CA, USA), following the instructions of the manufacturer. Intestinal samples were directly added to ZR BashingBead<sup>&#x2122;</sup> Lysis Tubes and subjected to bead-beating using a Minilys homogenizer (Bertin Technologies, Montigny-le-Bretonneux, France) at maximum speed for 1 min to disrupt the oocyst walls. Samples then underwent four cycles of freeze-thawing. Extracted DNA was subsequently analyzed by real-time PCR using species-specific primers targeting five <italic>Eimeria</italic> species, as summarized in <xref ref-type="table" rid="T1">
<bold>Table&#xa0;1</bold>
</xref>.</p>
<table-wrap id="T1" position="float">
<label>Table&#xa0;1</label>
<caption>
<p>Specific primers for 5 <italic>Eimeria</italic> spp. and the annealing temperature.</p>
</caption>
<table frame="hsides">
<thead>
<tr>
<th valign="top" align="center">Eimeria spp.</th>
<th valign="top" align="center">Primer</th>
<th valign="top" align="center">Oligonucleotides sequence (5&#x2019;-3&#x2019;)</th>
<th valign="top" align="center">PCR amplicon size (bp)</th>
<th valign="top" align="center">Annealing temperature (&#xb0;C)</th>
<th valign="top" align="center">Target gene/region</th>
<th valign="top" align="center">Reference</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td valign="top" rowspan="2" align="center">
<italic>E. acervulina</italic>
</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">EAF</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">GGCTTGGATGATGTTTGCTG</td>
<td valign="top" rowspan="2" align="center">321</td>
<td valign="top" rowspan="2" align="center">62</td>
<td valign="top" rowspan="2" align="center">ITS-1 region of rDNA</td>
<td valign="top" rowspan="2" align="center">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B53">Schnitzler et&#xa0;al., 1998</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="center">EAR</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">CGAACGCAATAACACACGCT</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" rowspan="2" align="center">
<italic>E. brunetti</italic>
</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">EBF</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">GATCAGTTTGAGCAAACCTTCG</td>
<td valign="top" rowspan="2" align="center">311</td>
<td valign="top" rowspan="2" align="center">56</td>
<td valign="top" rowspan="2" align="center">ITS-1 region of rDNA</td>
<td valign="top" rowspan="2" align="center">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B53">Schnitzler et&#xa0;al., 1998</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="center">EBR</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">TGGTCTTCCGTACGTCGGAT</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" rowspan="2" align="center">
<italic>E. necatrix</italic>
</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">ENF</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">TACATCCCAATCTTTGAATCG</td>
<td valign="top" rowspan="2" align="center">384</td>
<td valign="top" rowspan="2" align="center">51</td>
<td valign="top" rowspan="2" align="center">ITS-1 region of rDNA</td>
<td valign="top" rowspan="2" align="center">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B53">Schnitzler et&#xa0;al., 1998</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="center">ENR</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">GGCATACTAGCTTCGAGCAAC</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" rowspan="2" align="center">
<italic>E. tenella</italic>
</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">ETF</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">AATTTAGTCCATCGCAACCCT</td>
<td valign="top" rowspan="2" align="center">279</td>
<td valign="top" rowspan="2" align="center">60</td>
<td valign="top" rowspan="2" align="center">ITS-1 region of rDNA</td>
<td valign="top" rowspan="2" align="center">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B53">Schnitzler et&#xa0;al., 1998</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="center">ETR</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">CGAGCGCTCTGCATACGACA</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" rowspan="2" align="center">
<italic>E. maxima</italic>
</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">EMAF</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">GTGGGACTGTGGTGATGGGG</td>
<td valign="top" rowspan="2" align="center">205</td>
<td valign="top" rowspan="2" align="center">60</td>
<td valign="top" rowspan="2" align="center">ITS-1 region of rDNA</td>
<td valign="top" rowspan="2" align="center">
<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B54">Schnitzler et&#xa0;al., 1999</xref>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="center">EMAR</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">ACCAGCATGCGCTCACAACCC</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</table-wrap>
</sec>
<sec id="s2_4">
<label>2.4</label>
<title>Real-time PCR assay</title>
<p>Real-time PCR was performed using the CFX96 Touch Detection System (Bio-Rad, CA, USA). Each 20 &#xb5;L reaction mixture contained 10 &#xb5;L of 2x SensiFAST<sup>&#x2122;</sup> SYBR No-ROX Mix (Meridian Bioscience, OH, USA), 0.8 &#xb5;L each of forward and reverse primers (400 nM), 7.4 &#xb5;L of sterile DNase-free water, and 1 &#xb5;L of DNA template.</p>
<p>The thermal cycling conditions were as follows: initial denaturation at 95&#xb0;C for 3 min, followed by 40 cycles of denaturation at 95&#xb0;C for 5 s; annealing at 51&#x2013;59.5&#xb0;C for 10 s (temperature depending on <italic>Eimeria</italic> species, as shown in <xref ref-type="table" rid="T1">
<bold>Table&#xa0;1</bold>
</xref>); and extension at 72&#xb0;C for 20 s. Distilled water was used as the template for the negative control. All reactions were performed in triplicate.</p>
<p>Fluorescence data were collected at every 0.1&#xb0;C increment during the melting curve analysis. Melting temperature (Tm) was analyzed using Precision Melt Analysis Software (Bio-Rad, CA, USA) over a range of 65&#x2013;95&#xb0;C. Average quantification cycle (Cq) values, which reflect DNA copy number, were calculated using the Bio-Rad CFX software.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="s2_5">
<label>2.5</label>
<title>Serial DNA dilution</title>
<p>A 10-fold serial dilution of DNA-positive controls containing five <italic>Eimeria</italic> species was prepared and analyzed using real-time PCR. The highest genomic DNA concentration was quantified using a NanoDrop Lite spectrophotometer based on the A260/A280 absorbance ratio (Thermo Scientific, UK). The limit of detection was determined using serial dilutions, ranging from 7.5 ng/&#xb5;L to 0.075 fg/&#xb5;L of genomic DNA (10<sup>0</sup> to 10<sup>&#x2212;8</sup> dilution factor), along with corresponding Cq values (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B7">Bustin et&#xa0;al., 2009</xref>). Five dilution points (10<sup>0</sup>, 10<sup>&#x2212;1</sup>, 10<sup>&#x2212;2</sup>, 10<sup>&#x2212;3</sup>, and 10<sup>&#x2212;4</sup>) were used for standard curve construction, as they consistently yielded reliable amplification within the detection range of the assay.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="s2_6">
<label>2.6</label>
<title>Statistical analysis</title>
<p>The prevalence of each <italic>Eimeria</italic> species was calculated as the percentage of positive samples among the total number of samples tested. Accordingly, 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using the Wilson score interval method (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B64">Wilson, 1927</xref>), which offers more accurate coverage than the standard Wald method, especially for small sample sizes and proportions near 0 or 1 (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B38">Newcombe, 1998</xref>). The Wilson score interval is computed using the following formula:</p>
<disp-formula>
<mml:math display="block" id="M1">
<mml:mrow>
<mml:mi>p</mml:mi>
<mml:mo>+</mml:mo>
<mml:mfrac>
<mml:mrow>
<mml:msup>
<mml:mi>z</mml:mi>
<mml:mn>2</mml:mn>
</mml:msup>
</mml:mrow>
<mml:mrow>
<mml:mn>2</mml:mn>
<mml:mi>n</mml:mi>
</mml:mrow>
</mml:mfrac>
<mml:mo>&#xb1;</mml:mo>
<mml:mi>z</mml:mi>
<mml:msqrt>
<mml:mrow>
<mml:mfrac>
<mml:mrow>
<mml:mi>p</mml:mi>
<mml:mrow>
<mml:mo stretchy="false">(</mml:mo>
<mml:mrow>
<mml:mn>1</mml:mn>
<mml:mo>&#x2212;</mml:mo>
<mml:mi>p</mml:mi>
</mml:mrow>
<mml:mo stretchy="false">)</mml:mo>
</mml:mrow>
</mml:mrow>
<mml:mi>n</mml:mi>
</mml:mfrac>
<mml:mo>+</mml:mo>
<mml:mfrac>
<mml:mrow>
<mml:msup>
<mml:mi>z</mml:mi>
<mml:mn>2</mml:mn>
</mml:msup>
</mml:mrow>
<mml:mrow>
<mml:mn>4</mml:mn>
<mml:msup>
<mml:mi>n</mml:mi>
<mml:mn>2</mml:mn>
</mml:msup>
</mml:mrow>
</mml:mfrac>
</mml:mrow>
</mml:msqrt>
</mml:mrow>
</mml:math>
</disp-formula>
<p>where p is the observed proportion (prevalence), n is the sample size, and z is the 1&#x2212; <inline-formula>
<mml:math display="inline" id="im1">
<mml:mrow>
<mml:mfrac>
<mml:mi>&#x3b1;</mml:mi>
<mml:mn>2</mml:mn>
</mml:mfrac>
</mml:mrow>
</mml:math>
</inline-formula> quantile of the standard normal distribution (1.96 for a 95% CI). Fisher&#x2019;s exact test was used for pairwise comparisons between species, with Bonferroni correction applied to adjust for multiple comparisons. Statistical significance was set at p &lt; 0.05.</p>
<p>Cq values for each <italic>Eimeria</italic> species were determined using SYBR Green-based real-time PCR. All reactions were performed in triplicate to ensure reliability. For each species in each sample, the mean Cq value and standard deviation were calculated (<xref ref-type="supplementary-material" rid="SF2">
<bold>Supplementary Tables S1</bold>
</xref>, <xref ref-type="supplementary-material" rid="SF3">
<bold>S2</bold>
</xref>). The corresponding 95% CIs for Cq values were calculated using the following formula:</p>
<disp-formula>
<mml:math display="block" id="M2">
<mml:mrow>
<mml:mi>C</mml:mi>
<mml:msub>
<mml:mi>I</mml:mi>
<mml:mrow>
<mml:mn>95</mml:mn>
<mml:mo>%</mml:mo>
</mml:mrow>
</mml:msub>
<mml:mo>=</mml:mo>
<mml:mover accent="true">
<mml:mi>x</mml:mi>
<mml:mo>&#x21bc;</mml:mo>
</mml:mover>
<mml:mo>&#xb1;</mml:mo>
<mml:msub>
<mml:mi>t</mml:mi>
<mml:mrow>
<mml:mi>n</mml:mi>
<mml:mo>&#x2212;</mml:mo>
<mml:mn>1</mml:mn>
<mml:mo>,</mml:mo>
<mml:mi>&#x3b1;</mml:mi>
<mml:mo stretchy="false">/</mml:mo>
<mml:mn>2</mml:mn>
</mml:mrow>
</mml:msub>
<mml:mo>&#xd7;</mml:mo>
<mml:mfrac>
<mml:mi>s</mml:mi>
<mml:mrow>
<mml:msqrt>
<mml:mi>n</mml:mi>
</mml:msqrt>
</mml:mrow>
</mml:mfrac>
</mml:mrow>
</mml:math>
</disp-formula>
<p>where <inline-formula>
<mml:math display="inline" id="im2">
<mml:mover accent="true">
<mml:mi>x</mml:mi>
<mml:mo>&#x21bc;</mml:mo>
</mml:mover>
</mml:math>
</inline-formula> is the mean Cq value, s is the standard deviation, n is the number of replicates (3), and <inline-formula>
<mml:math display="inline" id="im3">
<mml:mrow>
<mml:msub>
<mml:mi>t</mml:mi>
<mml:mrow>
<mml:mi>n</mml:mi>
<mml:mo>&#x2212;</mml:mo>
<mml:mn>1</mml:mn>
<mml:mo>,</mml:mo>
<mml:mi>&#x3b1;</mml:mi>
<mml:mo stretchy="false">/</mml:mo>
<mml:mn>2</mml:mn>
</mml:mrow>
</mml:msub>
</mml:mrow>
</mml:math>
</inline-formula> is the critical t-value for n &#x2212; 1 degrees of freedom at <inline-formula>
<mml:math display="inline" id="im4">
<mml:mrow>
<mml:mfrac>
<mml:mi>&#x3b1;</mml:mi>
<mml:mn>2</mml:mn>
</mml:mfrac>
</mml:mrow>
</mml:math>
</inline-formula> (4.303 for n = 3, &#x3b1; = 0.05).</p>
<p>One-way analysis of variance was performed to compare Cq values among the different <italic>Eimeria</italic> species, followed by Tukey&#x2019;s <italic>post hoc</italic> test for pairwise comparisons. Statistical significance was set at p &lt; 0.05.</p>
<p>The reproducibility of the PCR assay was evaluated by calculating the coefficient of variation (CV) for each sample across three separate testing days. A lower CV indicates greater precision and reproducibility of the real-time PCR assay. The CV was calculated using the following formula:</p>
<disp-formula>
<mml:math display="block" id="M3">
<mml:mrow>
<mml:mi>C</mml:mi>
<mml:mi>V</mml:mi>
<mml:mrow>
<mml:mo stretchy="false">(</mml:mo>
<mml:mo>%</mml:mo>
<mml:mo stretchy="false">)</mml:mo>
</mml:mrow>
<mml:mo>=</mml:mo>
<mml:mfrac>
<mml:mrow>
<mml:mi>S</mml:mi>
<mml:mi>t</mml:mi>
<mml:mi>a</mml:mi>
<mml:mi>n</mml:mi>
<mml:mi>d</mml:mi>
<mml:mi>a</mml:mi>
<mml:mi>r</mml:mi>
<mml:mi>d</mml:mi>
<mml:mtext>&#xa0;</mml:mtext>
<mml:mi>D</mml:mi>
<mml:mi>e</mml:mi>
<mml:mi>v</mml:mi>
<mml:mi>i</mml:mi>
<mml:mi>a</mml:mi>
<mml:mi>t</mml:mi>
<mml:mi>i</mml:mi>
<mml:mi>o</mml:mi>
<mml:mi>n</mml:mi>
</mml:mrow>
<mml:mrow>
<mml:mi>M</mml:mi>
<mml:mi>e</mml:mi>
<mml:mi>a</mml:mi>
<mml:mi>n</mml:mi>
</mml:mrow>
</mml:mfrac>
<mml:mo>&#xd7;</mml:mo>
<mml:mn>100</mml:mn>
</mml:mrow>
</mml:math>
</disp-formula>
<p>The standard deviation and mean were derived from the Cq values of triplicate measurements for each sample. Based on the CV, reproducibility was classified as excellent for CV values below 1%, good for values below 2%, acceptable for values below 5%, and poor for values &#x2265; 5% (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B7">Bustin et&#xa0;al., 2009</xref>).</p>
<p>Agreement and discrepancies between gross examination and real-time PCR results were assessed for each <italic>Eimeria</italic> species. The agreement rate was defined as the percentage of samples in which both methods produced the same result, whether positive or negative. The discrepancy rate referred to the percentage of samples for which the two methods disagreed. Discrepancies were further categorized as either Gross+/PCR&#x2212; or Gross&#x2212;/PCR+. McNemar&#x2019;s test was used to determine whether the detection rates of the two methods differed significantly.</p>
<p>Prevalence estimates, 95% CIs, and reproducibility analyses were performed using Python (version 3.8) with the NumPy and Pandas libraries. All statistical analyses were conducted using R (version 4.4.3).</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="s3" sec-type="results">
<label>3</label>
<title>Results</title>
<sec id="s3_1">
<label>3.1</label>
<title>Sensitivity of the real-time PCR assay and limit of detection</title>
<p>The sensitivity of the real-time PCR assays for the five <italic>Eimeria</italic> species was assessed using a 10-fold serial dilution of genomic DNA. The limit of detection for all five species was determined to be at the 10<sup>&#x2212;4</sup> dilution (750 fg/&#xb5;L), as Cq values remained detectable up to this dilution, whereas no amplification was observed at further dilutions (10<sup>&#x2212;5</sup> to 10<sup>&#x2212;8</sup>).</p>
<p>Standard curves were generated for each <italic>Eimeria</italic> species based on the 10-fold serial dilution. Cq values ranged from approximately 20 to 38 across the dilution series. The relationship between Cq values and the log<sub>10</sub> of the dilution factors demonstrated strong linearity for all species, with R<sup>2</sup> values ranging from 0.993 to 0.999, indicating excellent correlation. The slopes of the standard curves ranged from &#x2212;3.465 to &#x2212;4.186, corresponding to real-time PCR efficiencies between 73.3% and 94.4%. <italic>E. maxima</italic> exhibited the highest PCR efficiency (94.4%) with a slope of &#x2212;3.465, whereas <italic>E. necatrix</italic> showed the lowest efficiency (73.3%) with a slope of &#x2212;4.186 (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="f1">
<bold>Figure&#xa0;1</bold>
</xref>).</p>
<fig id="f1" position="float">
<label>Figure&#xa0;1</label>
<caption>
<p>The graph displays standard quantification curves for five <italic>Eimeria</italic> species plotted as Quantification Cycle (Cq) versus Log Dilution Factor (10&#xd7;). Each <italic>species</italic> is represented by a different colored line.</p>
</caption>
<graphic mimetype="image" mime-subtype="tiff" xlink:href="fanim-06-1533577-g001.tif">
<alt-text content-type="machine-generated">Graph showing standard curves for Eimeria species with quantification cycle (Cq) on the vertical axis and log dilution factor on the horizontal axis. It includes five colored trend lines for E. acervulina, E. brunetti, E. maxima, E. necatrix, and E. tenella, each with specific equations, R-squared values, and efficiency percentages in the legend.</alt-text>
</graphic>
</fig>
</sec>
<sec id="s3_2">
<label>3.2</label>
<title>Specificity of the real-time PCR assay</title>
<p>Agarose gel electrophoresis confirmed that each primer amplified only the expected target amplicon size for the corresponding <italic>Eimeria</italic> species DNA (<xref ref-type="supplementary-material" rid="SF1">
<bold>Supplementary Figure S1</bold>
</xref>). The primers used in this study were previously described (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B53">Schnitzler et&#xa0;al., 1998</xref>, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B54">1999</xref>) and were designed based on the internal transcribed spacer 1 region of ribosomal DNA. This region is highly specific for <italic>Eimeria</italic> species identification because of its high interspecies variability and low intraspecies variability. The diagnostic specificity of these primers was previously validated by <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B54">Schnitzler et&#xa0;al. (1999)</xref>, who demonstrated that each primer pair specifically amplified DNA from its corresponding <italic>Eimeria</italic> species without cross-reactivity with other species or host DNA.</p>
<p>A single peak was observed in the Tm amplification curves for each <italic>Eimeria</italic> species when using the positive control (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="f2">
<bold>Figure&#xa0;2</bold>
</xref>), indicating specific amplification. Melting curve analysis further revealed distinct Tm profiles for all five species (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="f3">
<bold>Figure&#xa0;3</bold>
</xref>). <italic>E. acervulina</italic> exhibited the highest Tm range (87.0&#x2013;87.5&#xb0;C), followed by <italic>E. tenella</italic> (86.0&#x2013;86.5&#xb0;C), <italic>E. brunetti</italic> (81.0&#x2013;81.5&#xb0;C), <italic>E. maxima</italic> (79.5 &#xb1; 0.5&#xb0;C), and <italic>E. necatrix</italic> (79.0&#xb0;C). All species displayed characteristic peak patterns that were consistent across replicates.</p>
<fig id="f2" position="float">
<label>Figure&#xa0;2</label>
<caption>
<p>Real-time amplification of positive control <bold>(A)</bold> and Melting curve temperature <bold>(B)</bold>. EA, <italic>Eimeria acervulina</italic>; EB, <italic>Eimeria brunetti</italic>; EM, <italic>Eimeria maxima</italic>;EN; <italic>Eimeria necatrix</italic>; and ET, <italic>Eimeria tenella.</italic>
</p>
</caption>
<graphic mimetype="image" mime-subtype="tiff" xlink:href="fanim-06-1533577-g002.tif">
<alt-text content-type="machine-generated">Chart showing two side-by-side graphs. Graph A depicts PCR amplification curves with fluorescence on the y-axis and cycles on the x-axis, labeled EB, EN, ET, EM, and EA. Graph B displays melt peaks with negative derivative fluorescence versus temperature, showing peaks for labels EB, EN, ET, EM, and EA. Each line represents a different sample type or condition, marked with distinct colors and arrows.</alt-text>
</graphic>
</fig>
<fig id="f3" position="float">
<label>Figure&#xa0;3</label>
<caption>
<p>Melting curve analysis of 5 <italic>Eimeria</italic> spp. in field samples detected by Real-time PCR. EA, <italic>Eimeria acervulina</italic>; EB, <italic>Eimeria brunetti</italic>; EM, <italic>Eimeria maxima</italic>; EN, <italic>Eimeria necatrix</italic>; and ET, <italic>Eimeria tenella</italic>.</p>
</caption>
<graphic mimetype="image" mime-subtype="tiff" xlink:href="fanim-06-1533577-g003.tif">
<alt-text content-type="machine-generated">Five line graphs display melt peaks for different samples labeled EA, EB, EM, EN, and ET. Each graph shows distinct melt curves and peaks at various temperatures between 65 and 95 degrees Celsius, with -d(RFU)/dT represented on the vertical axis.</alt-text>
</graphic>
</fig>
<p>The melting curves for <italic>E. acervulina</italic> and <italic>E. tenella</italic> showed sharp, well-defined peaks, whereas those for <italic>E. maxima</italic> and <italic>E. necatrix</italic> occasionally exhibited secondary peaks or shoulders. The fluorescence derivative (dF/dT) values varied by species, with <italic>E. maxima</italic> showing the highest peak amplitude (approximately 400 dF/dT) and <italic>E. tenella</italic> the lowest (approximately 140 dF/dT).</p>
</sec>
<sec id="s3_3">
<label>3.3</label>
<title>Cq values in the real-time PCR assay</title>
<p>No amplification was observed in the non-template controls for any of the <italic>Eimeria</italic> species in the real-time PCR assay (<xref ref-type="supplementary-material" rid="SF3">
<bold>Supplementary Table S2</bold>
</xref>). The mean Cq values and their 95% CIs were calculated for all five <italic>Eimeria</italic> species in both the positive control and field samples (<xref ref-type="table" rid="T2">
<bold>Table&#xa0;2</bold>
</xref>).</p>
<table-wrap id="T2" position="float">
<label>Table&#xa0;2</label>
<caption>
<p>The Cq values with 95% confidence intervals for all <italic>Eimeria</italic> Species.</p>
</caption>
<table frame="hsides">
<thead>
<tr>
<th valign="top" align="left">Species of <italic>Eimeria</italic>
</th>
<th valign="top" align="left">Mean Cq of positive sample</th>
<th valign="top" align="left">95% CI of positive sample</th>
<th valign="top" align="left">Mean Cq of field samples</th>
<th valign="top" align="left">95% CI of field samples</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="left">
<italic>E. acevulina</italic>
</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">25.56 &#xb1; 1.11</td>
<td valign="top" align="left">22.80-28.32</td>
<td valign="top" align="left">27.36 &#xb1; 0.41<sup>a</sup>
</td>
<td valign="top" align="left">19.13-34.49</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="left">
<italic>E. brunetti</italic>
</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">22.12 &#xb1; 0.30</td>
<td valign="top" align="left">21.37-22.87</td>
<td valign="top" align="left">N/D</td>
<td valign="top" align="left">N/A</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="left">
<italic>E. maxima</italic>
</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">24.22 &#xb1; 1.40</td>
<td valign="top" align="left">20.74-27.70</td>
<td valign="top" align="left">33.03 &#xb1; 0.80<sup>b</sup>
</td>
<td valign="top" align="left">26.14-38.03</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="left">
<italic>E. necatrix</italic>
</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">21.15 &#xb1; 0.48</td>
<td valign="top" align="left">19.96-22.34</td>
<td valign="top" align="left">N/D</td>
<td valign="top" align="left">N/A</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="left">
<italic>E. tenella</italic>
</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">22.89 &#xb1; 0.52</td>
<td valign="top" align="left">21.60-24.18</td>
<td valign="top" align="left">25.08 &#xb1; 0.64<sup>c</sup>
</td>
<td valign="top" align="left">14.45-33.49</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<table-wrap-foot>
<fn>
<p>N/D indicates species not detected in field samples, and N/A indicates that the information is unavailable. Different superscript letters (a, b, c) indicate statistically significant differences between species (p &lt; 0.05).</p>
</fn>
</table-wrap-foot>
</table-wrap>
<p>In the positive control, the mean Cq values were as follows: 25.56 &#xb1; 2.75 for <italic>E. acervulina</italic>, 22.12 &#xb1; 0.74 for <italic>E. brunetti</italic>, 24.22 &#xb1; 3.47 for <italic>E. maxima</italic>, 21.15 &#xb1; 1.19 for <italic>E. necatrix</italic>, and 22.89 &#xb1; 1.29 for <italic>E. tenella</italic>.</p>
<p>Among the field samples, <italic>E. tenella</italic> exhibited the lowest mean Cq value (23.45 &#xb1; 0.67), indicating the highest concentration of target DNA, followed by <italic>E. acervulina</italic> (27.32 &#xb1; 0.63). <italic>E. maxima</italic> had the highest mean Cq value (32.18 &#xb1; 1.19), suggesting the lowest DNA concentration among the detected species.</p>
<p>Statistical comparisons revealed that <italic>E. tenella</italic> had significantly lower Cq values than <italic>E. acervulina</italic> (p = 0.015), indicating a higher DNA load. In contrast, <italic>E. maxima</italic> had significantly higher Cq values than <italic>E. acervulina</italic> (p &lt; 0.001), suggesting lower DNA levels. The most pronounced difference was observed between <italic>E. tenella</italic> and <italic>E. maxima</italic>, with <italic>E. tenella</italic> exhibiting significantly lower Cq values (p &lt; 0.001), further confirming its higher target DNA concentration (<xref ref-type="table" rid="T3">
<bold>Table&#xa0;3</bold>
</xref>).</p>
<table-wrap id="T3" position="float">
<label>Table&#xa0;3</label>
<caption>
<p>The prevalence with 95% <italic>confidence intervals</italic> for eimeria Species.</p>
</caption>
<table frame="hsides">
<thead>
<tr>
<th valign="bottom" align="center">Species</th>
<th valign="bottom" align="center">Positive Samples</th>
<th valign="bottom" align="center">Total Samples</th>
<th valign="bottom" align="center">Lower CI</th>
<th valign="bottom" align="center">Upper CI</th>
<th valign="bottom" align="center">Prevalence with CI</th>
<th valign="top" align="center">Statistical Group</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td valign="bottom" align="left">
<italic>E. acevulina</italic>
</td>
<td valign="bottom" align="center">23</td>
<td valign="bottom" align="center">25</td>
<td valign="bottom" align="center">75.03389</td>
<td valign="bottom" align="center">97.77796</td>
<td valign="bottom" align="center">92.00% (75.03-97.78%)</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">a</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="bottom" align="left">
<italic>E. brunetti</italic>
</td>
<td valign="bottom" align="center">0</td>
<td valign="bottom" align="center">25</td>
<td valign="bottom" align="center">0</td>
<td valign="bottom" align="center">13.31923</td>
<td valign="bottom" align="center">0.00% (0.00-13.32%)</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">c</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="bottom" align="left">
<italic>E. maxima</italic>
</td>
<td valign="bottom" align="center">17</td>
<td valign="bottom" align="center">25</td>
<td valign="bottom" align="center">48.41027</td>
<td valign="bottom" align="center">82.79481</td>
<td valign="bottom" align="center">68.00% (48.41-82.79%)</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">b</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="bottom" align="left">
<italic>E. necatrix</italic>
</td>
<td valign="bottom" align="center">0</td>
<td valign="bottom" align="center">25</td>
<td valign="bottom" align="center">0</td>
<td valign="bottom" align="center">13.31923</td>
<td valign="bottom" align="center">0.00% (0.00-13.32%)</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">c</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="bottom" align="left">
<italic>E. tenella</italic>
</td>
<td valign="bottom" align="center">24</td>
<td valign="bottom" align="center">25</td>
<td valign="bottom" align="center">80.45594</td>
<td valign="bottom" align="center">99.29038</td>
<td valign="bottom" align="center">96.00% (80.46-99.29%)</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">a</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<table-wrap-foot>
<fn>
<p>Species sharing the same letter in the Statistical Group column are not significantly different from each other (p &gt; 0.05, Fisher&#x2019;s exact test with Bonferroni correction).</p>
</fn>
</table-wrap-foot>
</table-wrap>
</sec>
<sec id="s3_4">
<label>3.4</label>
<title>Prevalence of <italic>Eimeria</italic> species</title>
<p>
<italic>E. tenella</italic> had the highest prevalence, detected in 96% of samples (95% CI: 80.46&#x2013;99.29%), followed by <italic>E. acervulina</italic> at 92% (95% CI: 75.03&#x2013;97.78%). <italic>E. maxima</italic> was detected in 68% of samples (95% CI: 48.41&#x2013;82.79%), whereas <italic>E. brunetti</italic> and <italic>E. necatrix</italic> were not detected in any samples (0%; 95% CI: 0&#x2013;13.32%; <xref ref-type="table" rid="T3">
<bold>Table&#xa0;3</bold>
</xref>).</p>
<p>The half-width of the CI reflected the precision of the prevalence estimates. <italic>E. brunetti</italic> and <italic>E. necatrix</italic> had the narrowest intervals (6.66%), followed by <italic>E. tenella</italic> (9.42%) and <italic>E. acervulina</italic> (11.37%). In contrast, <italic>E. maxima</italic> showed the widest interval (17.19%), indicating greater uncertainty in its prevalence estimate compared with the other species.</p>
<p>Statistical analysis showed that <italic>E. tenella, E. acervulina</italic>, and <italic>E. maxima</italic> had significantly higher prevalence rates than <italic>E. brunetti</italic> and <italic>E. necatrix</italic> (p &lt; 0.001). The difference in prevalence between <italic>E. maxima</italic> and <italic>E. tenella</italic> was also statistically significant (p = 0.023), whereas no significant difference was observed between <italic>E. tenella</italic> and <italic>E. acervulina</italic> (p = 1.000).</p>
<p>Analysis of infection patterns revealed that mixed infections were most common, as 64% of samples contained all three detected species (<italic>E. acervulina, E. maxima</italic>, and <italic>E. tenella</italic>). Dual infections involving <italic>E. acervulina</italic> and <italic>E. tenella</italic> were present in 28% of samples. Single-species infections were rare, with <italic>E. maxima</italic> and <italic>E. tenella</italic> each occurring alone in only 4% of cases (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="f4">
<bold>Figure&#xa0;4</bold>
</xref>).</p>
<fig id="f4" position="float">
<label>Figure&#xa0;4</label>
<caption>
<p>The pie chart demonstrates the distribution of infection types, the horizontal bar chart presents the overall prevalence of each <italic>Eimeria</italic> species, and the table provides the prevalence percentages.</p>
</caption>
<graphic mimetype="image" mime-subtype="tiff" xlink:href="fanim-06-1533577-g004.tif">
<alt-text content-type="machine-generated">Pie and bar charts showing the distribution of *Eimeria* infection types and species prevalence. The pie chart indicates 64.0% for three species infections, 28.0% for two species, 4.0% each for single infections of *E. tenella* and *E. maxima*. The bar chart shows overall species prevalence with *E. acevulina* at 92.0%, *E. tenella* at 96.0%, and *E. maxima* at 68.0%. *E. necatrix* and *E. brunetti* show 0.0% prevalence.</alt-text>
</graphic>
</fig>
</sec>
<sec id="s3_5">
<label>3.5</label>
<title>Reproducibility analysis</title>
<p>The reproducibility of the real-time PCR assay was evaluated for all five <italic>Eimeria</italic> species using 25 samples per species, with measurements taken on three separate days (<xref ref-type="table" rid="T4">
<bold>Table&#xa0;4</bold>
</xref>). <italic>E. acervulina</italic> showed the highest reproducibility, with a mean CV of 1.53%, followed by <italic>E. maxima</italic> (2.32%) and <italic>E. tenella</italic> (2.59%). No valid data were available for <italic>E. brunetti</italic> and <italic>E. necatrix</italic>, as all Cq values for these species were negative.</p>
<table-wrap id="T4" position="float">
<label>Table&#xa0;4</label>
<caption>
<p>Reproducibility metrics for five <italic>Eimeria</italic> species.</p>
</caption>
<table frame="hsides">
<thead>
<tr>
<th valign="bottom" align="left">Species</th>
<th valign="bottom" align="center">Mean CV (%)</th>
<th valign="bottom" align="center">Min CV (%)</th>
<th valign="bottom" align="center">Max CV (%)</th>
<th valign="bottom" align="center">Excellent (CV &lt; 1%)</th>
<th valign="bottom" align="center">Good (CV &lt; 2%)</th>
<th valign="bottom" align="center">Acceptable (CV &lt; 5%)</th>
<th valign="bottom" align="center">Poor (CV &#x2265; 5%)</th>
<th valign="bottom" align="center">Insufficient data</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="left">
<italic>E. acervulina</italic>
</td>
<td valign="top" align="left">1.53</td>
<td valign="top" align="left">0.14</td>
<td valign="top" align="left">4.38</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">10</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">5</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">8</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">2</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="left">
<italic>E. maxima</italic>
</td>
<td valign="top" align="left">2.32</td>
<td valign="top" align="left">0.22</td>
<td valign="top" align="left">5.79</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">2</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">7</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">6</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">2</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">8</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="left">
<italic>E. tenella</italic>
</td>
<td valign="top" align="left">2.59</td>
<td valign="top" align="left">0.56</td>
<td valign="top" align="left">6.25</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">2</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">9</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">11</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">2</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">1</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="left">
<italic>E. brunetti</italic>
</td>
<td valign="top" align="left">NA</td>
<td valign="top" align="left">NA</td>
<td valign="top" align="left">NA</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">25</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" align="left">
<italic>E. necatrix</italic>
</td>
<td valign="top" align="left">NA</td>
<td valign="top" align="left">NA</td>
<td valign="top" align="left">NA</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">25</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<table-wrap-foot>
<fn>
<p>N/A indicates that the information is unavailable.</p>
</fn>
</table-wrap-foot>
</table-wrap>
<p>Analysis of reproducibility categories revealed that <italic>E. acervulina</italic> had the highest proportion of samples with excellent reproducibility, as 43.5% of valid samples (10 out of 23) had a CV below 1%. <italic>E. maxima</italic> showed good reproducibility in 41.2% of valid samples (CV &lt; 2%), whereas <italic>E. tenella</italic> had 45.8% of valid samples with acceptable reproducibility (CV &lt; 5%).</p>
</sec>
<sec id="s3_6">
<label>3.6</label>
<title>Agreement and discrepancies between gross examination and real-time PCR results</title>
<p>The level of agreement between gross examination and real-time PCR varied considerably among the five <italic>Eimeria</italic> species (<xref ref-type="table" rid="T5">
<bold>Table&#xa0;5</bold>
</xref>). <italic>E. acervulina</italic> showed an agreement rate of 44% and a discrepancy rate of 56%. <italic>E. maxima</italic> had a 72% agreement rate and a 28% discrepancy rate. <italic>E. necatrix</italic> and <italic>E. brunetti</italic> each demonstrated a 100% agreement rate, with no discrepancies observed. <italic>E. tenella</italic> exhibited a 56% agreement rate and a 44% discrepancy rate.</p>
<table-wrap id="T5" position="float">
<label>Table&#xa0;5</label>
<caption>
<p>Agreement and discrepancy analysis.</p>
</caption>
<table frame="hsides">
<thead>
<tr>
<th valign="top" align="center">Species</th>
<th valign="top" align="center">Gross+/PCR+</th>
<th valign="top" align="center">Gross+/PCR-</th>
<th valign="top" align="center">Gross-/PCR+</th>
<th valign="top" align="center">Gross-/PCR-</th>
<th valign="top" align="center">Agreement_Rate (%)</th>
<th valign="top" align="center">Discrepancy_Rate (%)</th>
<th valign="top" align="center">McNemar&#x2019;s P-value</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td valign="bottom" align="center">
<italic>E. acervulina</italic>
</td>
<td valign="bottom" align="center">9</td>
<td valign="bottom" align="center">0</td>
<td valign="bottom" align="center">14</td>
<td valign="bottom" align="center">2</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">44</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">56</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0.005</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="bottom" align="center">
<italic>E. maxima</italic>
</td>
<td valign="bottom" align="center">12</td>
<td valign="bottom" align="center">2</td>
<td valign="bottom" align="center">5</td>
<td valign="bottom" align="center">6</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">72</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">28</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0.4497</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="bottom" align="center">
<italic>E. necatrix</italic>
</td>
<td valign="bottom" align="center">0</td>
<td valign="bottom" align="center">0</td>
<td valign="bottom" align="center">0</td>
<td valign="bottom" align="center">25</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">100</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">NA</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="bottom" align="center">
<italic>E. brunetti</italic>
</td>
<td valign="bottom" align="center">0</td>
<td valign="bottom" align="center">0</td>
<td valign="bottom" align="center">0</td>
<td valign="bottom" align="center">25</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">100</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">NA</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="bottom" align="center">
<italic>E. tenella</italic>
</td>
<td valign="bottom" align="center">13</td>
<td valign="bottom" align="center">0</td>
<td valign="bottom" align="center">11</td>
<td valign="bottom" align="center">1</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">56</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">44</td>
<td valign="top" align="center">0.0026</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<table-wrap-foot>
<fn>
<p>McNemar&#x2019;s P-value &lt;0.05 indicates a statistically significant difference between the detection rates of the two methods. Sensitivity and specificity were calculated using PCR as the reference method for comparison. NA, Not applicable due to the absence of positive samples.</p>
</fn>
</table-wrap-foot>
</table-wrap>
<p>The nature of discrepancies also differed by species. For <italic>E. acervulina</italic>, all discrepancies (14 out of 25 samples) were cases where gross examination was negative, whereas real-time PCR was positive (Gross&#x2212;/PCR+). For <italic>E. maxima</italic>, discrepancies included both Gross+/PCR&#x2212; cases (two out of 25 samples) and Gross&#x2212;/PCR+ cases (five out of 25 samples). For <italic>E. tenella</italic>, all discrepancies (11 out of 25 samples) were Gross&#x2212;/PCR+ cases. No discrepancies were recorded for <italic>E. necatrix</italic> and <italic>E. brunetti</italic>, as all samples tested negative by both methods.</p>
<p>McNemar&#x2019;s test revealed a significant difference between the two methods, with real-time PCR detecting significantly more positive samples for <italic>E. acervulina</italic> (p = 0.0005) and <italic>E. tenella</italic> (p = 0.0026). However, no significant difference was found between the methods for <italic>E. maxima</italic> (p = 0.4497; <xref ref-type="fig" rid="f5">
<bold>Figure&#xa0;5</bold>
</xref>).</p>
<fig id="f5" position="float">
<label>Figure&#xa0;5</label>
<caption>
<p>Confusion matrices showing the agreement and discrepancy between gross examination and real-time PCR for five Eimeria species. Each cell shows the number of samples in each category. Green cells represent agreement between the two methods (true positives in the upper left and true negatives in the lower right), while red cells represent discrepancy (false positives in the upper right and false negatives in the lower left).</p>
</caption>
<graphic mimetype="image" mime-subtype="tiff" xlink:href="fanim-06-1533577-g005.tif">
<alt-text content-type="machine-generated">Confusion matrices for four Eimeria species. Each matrix compares cross-examination and real-time PCR results, with cells indicating true positives, true negatives, false positives, and false negatives. Green denotes agreement (true positive/true negative), and red denotes discrepancy (false positive/false negative). Each species&#x2014;E. acervulina, E. maxima, E. necatrix, E. brunetti, and E. tenella&#x2014;features different counts reflecting diagnostic outcomes.</alt-text>
</graphic>
</fig>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="s4" sec-type="discussion">
<label>4</label>
<title>Discussion</title>
<p>In this study, SYBR Green-based real-time PCR was used to identify <italic>Eimeria</italic> species. Real-time PCR is recognized for its high specificity, sensitivity, and reproducibility in DNA detection (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B7">Bustin et&#xa0;al., 2009</xref>). In particular, SYBR Green offers a productive and cost-effective alternative to hybridization probe-based PCR for <italic>Eimeria</italic> identification (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B29">Kawahara et&#xa0;al., 2008</xref>). Efficient oocyst rupture and DNA extraction are critical for detecting protozoan cysts in fecal samples, as DNA yield and quality directly influence PCR performance. Incomplete rupture may cause false negatives, whereas excessive disruption can fragment DNA (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B25">Haug et&#xa0;al., 2007</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B31">Kumar et&#xa0;al., 2014</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B49">Reginato et&#xa0;al., 2020</xref>).</p>
<p>Our optimized protocol, which incorporates bead-beating in lysis tubes, improved rupture efficiency and reduced co-extraction of PCR inhibitors from fecal samples (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B55">Schrader et&#xa0;al., 2012</xref>). This method is particularly suitable for <italic>Eimeria</italic>, whose oocysts resist both chemical and mechanical disruption (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B21">Guy et&#xa0;al., 2004</xref>). By controlling bead size, quantity, and homogenization parameters, our mechanical disruption technique effectively breaks the robust oocyst wall while minimizing DNA damage, preserving genomic integrity for accurate PCR analysis (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B23">Hachimi et&#xa0;al., 2024</xref>).</p>
<p>The limit of detection for <italic>Eimeria</italic> DNA by real-time PCR was approximately 750 fg. Given that one sporozoite contains about 75 fg of DNA according to <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B16">Cornelissen et&#xa0;al. (1984)</xref>, this corresponds to the detection of approximately 1&#x2013;1.2 sporulated oocysts in a mixed DNA sample of five species, or roughly two sporozoites per species. These results align with previous studies reporting detection thresholds between 1 and 13.6 sporozoites (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B25">Haug et&#xa0;al., 2007</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B5">Blake et&#xa0;al., 2008</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B29">Kawahara et&#xa0;al., 2008</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B40">Oliveira et&#xa0;al., 2011</xref>). In contrast, conventional PCR had a detection limit of 25 oocysts in earlier work (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B53">Schnitzler et&#xa0;al., 1998</xref>). However, because we did not conduct a direct sensitivity comparison between real-time and conventional PCR, no definitive conclusions can be drawn from our dataset.</p>
<p>Standard curves generated for all five <italic>Eimeria</italic> species demonstrated excellent linearity across five orders of magnitude (R<sup>2</sup> &gt; 0.99), indicating strong quantification capability for diagnostic use (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B7">Bustin et&#xa0;al., 2009</xref>). According to the Minimum Information for Publication of Quantitative Real-Time PCR Experiments guidelines, optimal PCR efficiency ranges from 90% to 110%, with corresponding slopes between &#x2013;3.1 and &#x2013;3.6. In this study, efficiencies ranged from 73.3% to 94.4%, with <italic>E. maxima</italic> achieving the highest (94.4%) and <italic>E. necatrix</italic> the lowest (73.3%). The values for the remaining species ranged from 75.0% to 84.3%. This variability may be explained by several factors. Differences in genomic structure can affect primer binding and amplification success (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B50">Reid et&#xa0;al., 2014</xref>). High GC content can also hinder amplification efficiency; for example, <italic>E. necatrix</italic> has a higher GC composition than <italic>E. maxima</italic>, which may contribute to its lower efficiency (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B25">Haug et&#xa0;al., 2007</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B41">Opel et&#xa0;al., 2010</xref>). Furthermore, species-specific DNA secondary structures may impede polymerase activity and reduce amplification efficiency (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B8">Bustin and Huggett, 2017</xref>). Despite the lower efficiency observed with <italic>E. necatrix</italic>, consistent use of standardized protocols, transparent reporting of efficiency values, and appropriate standard curves support reliable and reproducible quantification&#x2014;even when amplification performance is suboptimal (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B7">Bustin et&#xa0;al., 2009</xref>).</p>
<p>In this study, DNA from both positive controls and field samples was successfully amplified by SYBR Green-based real-time PCR, producing single, species-specific Tm peaks. The clear separation between high-Tm species (<italic>E. acervulina</italic> and <italic>E. tenella</italic>) and low-Tm species (<italic>E. maxima</italic> and <italic>E. necatrix</italic>) enabled reliable species differentiation without additional post-PCR processing. The higher Tm observed for <italic>E. tenella</italic> (85.5&#xb0;C) and <italic>E. necatrix</italic> (84.5&#xb0;C), compared with <italic>E. acervulina</italic> (83.5&#xb0;C), <italic>E. maxima</italic> (82.5&#xb0;C), and <italic>E. brunetti</italic> (81.5&#xb0;C), reflects their higher GC content. This pattern aligns with established biophysical principles, as GC base pairs form three hydrogen bonds&#x2014;more than the two in AT pairs&#x2014;requiring greater thermal energy to denature (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B52">Santalucia, 1998</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B51">Ririe et&#xa0;al., 1997</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B57">Shchyolkina et&#xa0;al., 2000</xref>). Consequently, amplicons with higher GC content showed correspondingly higher Tm values, supporting their utility in species identification.</p>
<p>The occasional secondary peaks observed in <italic>E. maxima</italic> and <italic>E. necatrix</italic> samples may indicate sequence variation within the amplified regions. This is consistent with prior findings of substantial genetic diversity among <italic>Eimeria</italic> species, which can affect real-time PCR amplification patterns (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B34">Lew et&#xa0;al., 2003</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B30">Kumar et&#xa0;al., 2015</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B47">Prakashbabu et&#xa0;al., 2017</xref>). Alternatively, these peaks could result from primer-dimers or non-specific amplification (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B33">Lan et&#xa0;al., 2004</xref>). However, their consistent appearance at species-specific temperatures suggests that they likely represent genuine intraspecies variants. <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B37">Morris and Gasser (2006)</xref> similarly showed that reproducible secondary peaks during melting curve analysis often reflect true genetic polymorphisms within the internal transcribed spacer 1 and other genomic regions, rather than technical artifacts. This phenomenon is particularly common in genetically diverse <italic>Eimeria</italic> species, such as <italic>E. maxima</italic> and <italic>E. necatrix</italic>. Although informative, these secondary peaks may introduce diagnostic ambiguity in field samples, where species identification often relies on melting temperature (Tm) profiles. Misinterpretation of secondary peaks may lead to false-positive or false-negative results, thereby compromising the accuracy of epidemiological assessments and the effectiveness of control strategies, particularly with common mixed infections (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B56">Scipioni et&#xa0;al., 2008</xref>).</p>
<p>Reproducibility analysis for <italic>E. acervulina</italic> detection yielded a CV of 1.53%, with 43.5% of samples demonstrating excellent reproducibility (CV &lt; 1%). These values align with established precision standards for quantitative molecular diagnostics. The real-time PCR assays for <italic>E. maxima</italic> and <italic>E. tenella</italic> showed comparable reproducibility, with mean CVs of 2.32% and 2.59%, respectively&#x2014;both within the acceptable threshold (CV &lt; 5%) for reliable quantitative molecular assays (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B7">Bustin et&#xa0;al., 2009</xref>).</p>
<p>Cq values and their 95% CIs provided key insights into <italic>Eimeria</italic> species abundance and assay precision. <italic>E. tenella</italic> and <italic>E. acervulina</italic> exhibited lower Cq values in field samples, consistent with their higher prevalence and DNA concentration in infected birds. Measurement precision, reflected by CI width, was greater for <italic>E. acervulina</italic> (mean CI width: 0.86) than for <italic>E. maxima</italic> (mean CI width: 1.64), possibly owing to the same factors influencing real-time PCR efficiency (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B3">Blake et&#xa0;al., 2006</xref>). The wider CIs observed for <italic>E. maxima</italic> indicated greater variability in quantification, warranting cautious interpretation of infection intensity estimates.</p>
<p>The consistent detection of all five <italic>Eimeria</italic> species in positive controls confirmed assay specificity and sensitivity. However, the absence of <italic>E. brunetti</italic> and <italic>E. necatrix</italic> in field samples could not be evaluated for biological relevance because of their non-detection. Although Cq values generally correlated with oocyst load, real-time PCR cannot precisely quantify absolute oocyst numbers because of factors affecting DNA yield, such as the degree of sporulation, extraction efficiency, and infection stage at sampling (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B25">Haug et&#xa0;al., 2007</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B36">Morgan et&#xa0;al., 2009</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B48">Raj et&#xa0;al., 2013</xref>).</p>
<p>All field samples tested positive for chicken coccidiosis by real-time PCR. <italic>E. acervulina</italic> was detected in 23 of 25 samples (92%; 95% CI: 75.03&#x2013;97.78%), <italic>E. maxima</italic> in 17 samples (68%; 95% CI: 48.41&#x2013;82.79%), and <italic>E. tenella</italic> in 24 samples (96%; 95% CI: 80.46&#x2013;99.29%). The wider CI for <italic>E. maxima</italic> may reflect greater variability in its detection across samples. Mixed infections involving all three detected species were the most common among broiler farms in southern Thailand (64%). Neither <italic>E. brunetti</italic> nor <italic>E. necatrix</italic> was detected in any of the samples. To date, <italic>E. brunetti</italic> infection has not been reported in broiler farms in Thailand, whereas <italic>E. necatrix</italic> is typically observed in breeder flocks or older chickens (9&#x2013;14 weeks), likely owing to its limited oocyst output in younger birds and greater susceptibility to anticoccidial drugs (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B11">Cerventes et&#xa0;al., 2020</xref>). Species-specific prepatent periods also influence detection rates, as <italic>E. acervulina</italic> (97&#x2013;98 h) and <italic>E. tenella</italic> (115&#x2013;120 h) have shorter prepatent periods than <italic>E. maxima</italic> (121&#x2013;140 h) (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B15">Conway and Mckenzie, 2007</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B12">Cha et&#xa0;al., 2018</xref>). In addition, <italic>E. acervulina</italic> and <italic>E. tenella</italic> produce significantly more oocysts per infected cell than <italic>E. maxima</italic>, increasing their likelihood of detection (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B62">Williams, 2001</xref>). The absence of mucosal content collected from the rectum may have limited the detection sensitivity for <italic>E. brunetti</italic>, which primarily infects the lower intestinal tract (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B11">Cerventes et&#xa0;al., 2020</xref>). During the samples collection process, the efficiency of oocyst recovery may have differed among various <italic>Eimeria</italic> species. This study did not assess the uniformity of oocyst purification across different intestinal sections which may affect the detection sensitivity among species. These biological factors likely explain why <italic>E. acervulina</italic> and <italic>E. tenella</italic> were consistently the most prevalent species across broiler farms compared with <italic>E. maxima</italic>. All farms in this study used anticoccidial drugs in their feed programs, indicating that chicken coccidiosis remains widespread and may involve drug-resistant strains in this region. Notably, no positive samples were found for <italic>E. mitis</italic>, <italic>E. precox</italic>, <italic>E. lata</italic>, <italic>E. nagambie</italic>, and <italic>E. zaria</italic>&#x2014;three of which are operational taxonomic units reported in Australia, India, the United States, and Europe (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B26">Jaramillo-Ortiz et&#xa0;al., 2023</xref>).</p>
<p>The perfect agreement between gross examination and real-time PCR results for <italic>E. necatrix</italic> and <italic>E. brunetti</italic> likely resulted from the absence of these species in the sample population. In the present study, all samples were collected exclusively from broiler farms. This observation aligns with previous research suggesting that <italic>E. necatrix</italic> and <italic>E. brunetti</italic> are uncommon in modern commercial broiler operations (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B63">Williams, 2005</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B6">Brown Jordan et&#xa0;al., 2018</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B26">Jaramillo-Ortiz et&#xa0;al., 2023</xref>). For the three detected species (<italic>E. acervulina, E. maxima</italic>, and <italic>E. tenella</italic>), agreement between methods ranged from moderate to poor. Most discrepancies involved gross examination failing to detect infections identified by real-time PCR. This is consistent with earlier research showing that PCR-based methods offer higher sensitivity than traditional diagnostic techniques (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B24">Haug et&#xa0;al., 2008</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B61">Vrba et&#xa0;al., 2010</xref>). The superior sensitivity of molecular techniques has important implications for coccidiosis surveillance in commercial broiler systems, as subclinical infections may remain undetected with gross examination alone, potentially leading to underestimated disease prevalence and avoidable production losses.</p>
<p>This study had several limitations. First, the sample size was relatively small (25 farms), which may limit the generalizability of the findings. Second, oocyst counting and histopathological examination were not performed, which could have provided additional insights into infection intensity and improved the accuracy of species identification. Third, although the real-time PCR assay is highly sensitive, it also has several limitations when applied in field conditions for detecting <italic>Eimeria</italic> infections in chickens. Real-time PCR may detect DNA from non-viable parasites or be inhibited by PCR inhibitors from an environment, potentially leading to an overestimation of true prevalence. It requires precise knowledge of infection timing, which is often difficult to determine field isolates, it cannot distinguish between different life stages of the parasite, potentially leading to misinterpretation if sampling isn&#x2019;t carefully timed. In addition, achieving standardized protocols across diverse field conditions is difficult but necessary for comparability (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B39">Nolan et&#xa0;al., 2015</xref>). Lastly, this study lacks performance indicators such as weight gain or feed conversion ratio (FCR), which would facilitate a more straightforward interpretation of the impact on growth performance based solely on <italic>Eimeria</italic> species detection.</p>
<p>Despite these limitations, our findings provide important comparative insights into the diagnostic performance of gross examination and real-time PCR for <italic>Eimeria</italic> detection. Mixed infections involving multiple <italic>Eimeria</italic> species present significant diagnostic challenges for conventional methods. They complicate lesion scoring, obscure subclinical lesions suppressed by anticoccidial drugs, and hinder the identification of distinct <italic>Eimeria</italic> subpopulations (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B36">Morgan et&#xa0;al., 2009</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B59">Sun et&#xa0;al., 2009</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B61">Vrba et&#xa0;al., 2010</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B58">Shirzad et&#xa0;al., 2011</xref>). Although newer technologies&#x2014;such as probe-based quantitative PCR (qPCR), loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP), and next-generation sequencing&#x2014;have emerged, real-time PCR remains more economically viable in several countries (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B2">Arya et&#xa0;al., 2005</xref>; <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B46">Pereira-G&#xf3;mez et&#xa0;al., 2021</xref>) In the context of Thailand, the widespread use of advanced molecular diagnostics is often constrained by infrastructural, financial, and technical limitations. As such, real-time PCR serves as a feasible and scalable diagnostic option, effectively balancing diagnostic accuracy with the realities of local resource availability and laboratory capabilities.</p>
<p>In conclusion, this study successfully developed and validated a SYBR Green-based real-time PCR assay for the identification of <italic>Eimeria</italic> species in the poultry industry in Thailand. The assay demonstrated high sensitivity, specificity, and reproducibility. Distinct Tm profiles enabled reliable differentiation of <italic>E. acervulina</italic>, <italic>E. brunetti</italic>, <italic>E. maxima, E. necatrix</italic>, and <italic>E. tenella.</italic> Field sample analysis revealed a high prevalence of mixed <italic>Eimeria</italic> infections in commercial broiler farms, with <italic>E. tenella</italic>, <italic>E. acervulina</italic>, and <italic>E. maxima</italic> as the predominant species, whereas <italic>E. brunetti</italic> and <italic>E. necatrix</italic> were not detected. The molecular assay proved significantly more sensitive than gross examination, identifying infections that would have been missed using traditional methods. This increased sensitivity has important implications for coccidiosis surveillance, as subclinical infections&#x2014;often undetected by gross examination alone&#x2014;can still lead to considerable production losses. The frequent occurrence of mixed <italic>Eimeria</italic> infections in medicated broiler farms, despite the use of anticoccidial shuttle programs, highlights the ongoing challenge of effective coccidiosis control in commercial poultry operations. Although real-time PCR is effective for <italic>Eimeria</italic> spp. detection, it exhibits limitations in the precise quantification of absolute <italic>Eimeria</italic> oocyst numbers. Its precision can be hindered by small sample sizes, PCR inhibitors in fecal samples, and detection of DNA from non-viable parasites, potentially overestimating prevalence.</p>
</sec>
</body>
<back>
<sec id="s6" sec-type="data-availability">
<title>Data availability statement</title>
<p>The original contributions presented in the study are included in the article/<xref ref-type="supplementary-material" rid="SF1">
<bold>Supplementary Material</bold>
</xref>. Further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="s7" sec-type="ethics-statement">
<title>Ethics statement</title>
<p>The animal studies were approved by Standard of animal research, Research and development office, Prince of Songkla University (ethic document no. MHESI 68014/1779). The studies were conducted in accordance with the local legislation and institutional requirements. Written informed consent was obtained from the owners for the participation of their animals in this study.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="s8" sec-type="author-contributions">
<title>Author contributions</title>
<p>BC: Investigation, Methodology, Software, Validation, Writing &#x2013; original draft, Writing &#x2013; review &amp; editing. SP: Data curation, Supervision, Software, Validation, Writing &#x2013; review &amp; editing. KL: Investigation, Methodology, Writing &#x2013; review &amp; editing. PP: Investigation, Methodology, Writing &#x2013; review &amp; editing. AS: Investigation, Methodology, Writing &#x2013; review &amp; editing. AL: Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal Analysis, Funding acquisition, Project administration, Resources, Supervision, Writing &#x2013; original draft, Writing &#x2013; review &amp; editing.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="s9" sec-type="funding-information">
<title>Funding</title>
<p>The author(s) declare that financial support was received for the research and/or publication of this article. This research was supported by an academic service fund from Huvepharma Thailand Ltd. to Faculty of Veterinary Science, Prince of Songkla University (MorOr117.1.7/64-02). The funder was not involved in the study design, collection, analysis, interpretation of data, the writing of this article or the decision to submit it for publication.</p>
</sec>
<ack>
<title>Acknowledgments</title>
<p>We thank to the poultry companies, and the small-scale poultry farm owners for kindly providing the animal samples and sharing knowledge and information. Thanks to HIPRA company, Thailand for the positive control in this study. Thanks to Dr. Niroj Kijphakapanith for helping with sample collection. We gratefully thank Dr. Sumeth Sapchukun who greatly supported us during this study.</p>
</ack>
<sec id="s10" sec-type="COI-statement">
<title>Conflict of interest</title>
<p>The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="s11" sec-type="ai-statement">
<title>Generative AI statement</title>
<p>The author(s) declare that no Generative AI was used in the creation of this manuscript.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="s12" sec-type="disclaimer">
<title>Publisher&#x2019;s note</title>
<p>All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="s13" sec-type="supplementary-material">
<title>Supplementary material</title>
<p>The Supplementary Material for this article can be found online at: <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fanim.2025.1533577/full#supplementary-material">https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fanim.2025.1533577/full#supplementary-material</ext-link>
</p>
<supplementary-material xlink:href="DataSheet1.pdf" id="SF1" mimetype="application/pdf">
<label>Supplementary Figure&#xa0;1</label>
<caption>
<p>Primer annealing time and DNA band pictures.</p>
</caption>
</supplementary-material>
<supplementary-material xlink:href="Table1.xlsx" id="SF2" mimetype="application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.spreadsheetml.sheet">
<label>Supplementary Table&#xa0;1</label>
<caption>
<p>Gross lesion and real-time results table.</p>
</caption>
</supplementary-material>
<supplementary-material xlink:href="Table2.xlsx" id="SF3" mimetype="application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.spreadsheetml.sheet">
<label>Supplementary Table&#xa0;2</label>
<caption>
<p>The Cq value and Tm of 5 <italic>Eimeria</italic> spp.</p>
</caption>
</supplementary-material>
</sec>
<ref-list>
<title>References</title>
<ref id="B1">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Abbas</surname> <given-names>R. Z.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Iqbal</surname> <given-names>Z.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Blake</surname> <given-names>D.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Khan</surname> <given-names>M. N.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Saleemi</surname> <given-names>M. K.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2011</year>). <article-title>Anticoccidial drug resistance in fowl coccidia: the state of play revisited</article-title>. <source>J. World&#x2019;s Poult. Sci.</source> <volume>67</volume>, <fpage>337</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>349</lpage>. doi:&#xa0;<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1017/S004393391100033X</pub-id>
</citation></ref>
<ref id="B2">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Arya</surname> <given-names>M.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Shergill</surname> <given-names>I. S.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Williamson</surname> <given-names>M.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Gommersall</surname> <given-names>L.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Arya</surname> <given-names>N.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Patel</surname> <given-names>H. R.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2005</year>). <article-title>Basic principles of real-time quantitative PCR</article-title>. <source>Expert Rev. Mol. Diagn.</source> <volume>5</volume>, <fpage>209</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>219</lpage>. doi:&#xa0;<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1586/14737159.5.2.209</pub-id>, PMID: <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">15833050</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B3">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Blake</surname> <given-names>D. P.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Hesketh</surname> <given-names>P.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Archer</surname> <given-names>A.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Shirley</surname> <given-names>M. W.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Smith</surname> <given-names>A. L.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2006</year>). <article-title>Eimeria maxima: the influence of host genotype on parasite reproduction as revealed by quantitative real-time PCR</article-title>. <source>Int. J. Parasitol.</source> <volume>36</volume>, <fpage>97</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>105</lpage>. doi:&#xa0;<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.ijpara.2005.09.011</pub-id>, PMID: <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">16300767</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B4">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Blake</surname> <given-names>D. P.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Knox</surname> <given-names>J.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Dehaeck</surname> <given-names>B.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Huntington</surname> <given-names>B.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Rathinam</surname> <given-names>T.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Ravipati</surname> <given-names>V.</given-names>
</name>
<etal/>
</person-group>. (<year>2020</year>). <article-title>Re-calculating the cost of coccidiosis in chickens</article-title>. <source>Vet. Res.</source> <volume>51</volume>, <fpage>115</fpage>. doi:&#xa0;<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1186/s13567-020-00837-2</pub-id>, PMID: <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">32928271</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B5">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Blake</surname> <given-names>D. P.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Qin</surname> <given-names>Z.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Cai</surname> <given-names>J.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Smith</surname> <given-names>A. L.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2008</year>). <article-title>Development and validation of real-time polymerase chain reaction assays specific to four species of Eimeria</article-title>. <source>Avian Pathol.</source> <volume>37</volume>, <fpage>89</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>94</lpage>. doi:&#xa0;<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1080/03079450701802248</pub-id>, PMID: <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">18202955</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B6">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Brown Jordan</surname> <given-names>A.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Blake</surname> <given-names>D.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Beard</surname> <given-names>J.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Beharry</surname> <given-names>A.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Serrette</surname> <given-names>L.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Soleyn</surname> <given-names>A.</given-names>
</name>
<etal/>
</person-group>. (<year>2018</year>). <article-title>Molecular identification of eimeria species in broiler chickens in Trinidad, West Indies</article-title>. <source>Vet. Sci.</source> <volume>5</volume>, <elocation-id>12</elocation-id>. doi:&#xa0;<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3390/vetsci5010012</pub-id>, PMID: <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">29361806</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B7">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Bustin</surname> <given-names>S. A.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Benes</surname> <given-names>V.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Garson</surname> <given-names>J. A.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Hellemans</surname> <given-names>J.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Huggett</surname> <given-names>J.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Kubista</surname> <given-names>M.</given-names>
</name>
<etal/>
</person-group>. (<year>2009</year>). <article-title>The MIQE guidelines: minimum information for publication of quantitative real-time PCR experiments</article-title>. <source>Clin. Chem.</source> <volume>55</volume>, <fpage>611</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>622</lpage>. doi:&#xa0;<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1373/clinchem.2008.112797</pub-id>, PMID: <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">19246619</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B8">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Bustin</surname> <given-names>S.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Huggett</surname> <given-names>J.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2017</year>). <article-title>qPCR primer design revisited</article-title>. <source>Biomol. Detect. Quantif.</source> <volume>14</volume>, <fpage>19</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>28</lpage>. doi:&#xa0;<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.bdq.2017.11.001</pub-id>, PMID: <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">29201647</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B9">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Carvalho</surname> <given-names>F. S.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Wenceslau</surname> <given-names>A. A.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Teixeira</surname> <given-names>M.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Albuquerque</surname> <given-names>G. R.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2011</year>a). <article-title>Molecular diagnosis of Eimeria species affecting naturally infected Gallus gallus</article-title>. <source>Genet. Mol. Res.</source> <volume>10</volume>, <fpage>996</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>1005</lpage>. doi:&#xa0;<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.4238/vol10-2gmr1043</pub-id>, PMID: <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">21710449</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B10">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Carvalho</surname> <given-names>F. S.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Wenceslau</surname> <given-names>A. A.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Teixeira</surname> <given-names>M.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Matos carneiro</surname> <given-names>J. A.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Melo</surname> <given-names>A. D.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Albuquerque</surname> <given-names>G. R.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2011</year>b). <article-title>Diagnosis of Eimeria species using traditional and molecular methods in field studies</article-title>. <source>Vet. Parasitol.</source> <volume>176</volume>, <fpage>95</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>100</lpage>. doi:&#xa0;<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.vetpar.2010.11.015</pub-id>, PMID: <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">21167646</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B11">
<citation citation-type="book">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Cerventes</surname> <given-names>H. M.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Mcdougald</surname> <given-names>L. R.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Jerkins</surname> <given-names>M. C.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2020</year>). &#x201c;<article-title>Cocidiosis</article-title>,&#x201d; in <source>Diseases of Poultry</source>, <edition>14 ed</edition>. Eds. <person-group person-group-type="editor">
<name>
<surname>Swayne</surname> <given-names>D. E.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Boulianne</surname> <given-names>M.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Logue</surname> <given-names>C. M.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Mcdougald</surname> <given-names>L. R.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>David</surname> <given-names>V. N.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Suarez</surname> <given-names>L.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>De Wit</surname> <given-names>S.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Grimes</surname> <given-names>T.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Johnson</surname> <given-names>D.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Kromm</surname> <given-names>M.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Prajitno</surname> <given-names>T. Y.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Rubinoff</surname> <given-names>I.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Zavala</surname> <given-names>G.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<publisher-name>John Wiley &amp; Sons, Inc</publisher-name>, <publisher-loc>NJ United states</publisher-loc>), <fpage>1193</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>1217</lpage>.</citation></ref>
<ref id="B12">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Cha</surname> <given-names>J. O.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Zhao</surname> <given-names>J.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Yang</surname> <given-names>M. S.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Kim</surname> <given-names>W. I.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Cho</surname> <given-names>H. S.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Lim</surname> <given-names>C. W.</given-names>
</name>
<etal/>
</person-group>. (<year>2018</year>). <article-title>Oocyst-shedding patterns of three eimeria species in chickens and shedding pattern variation depending on the storage period of eimeria tenella oocysts</article-title>. <source>J. Parasitol.</source> <volume>104</volume>, <fpage>18</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>22</lpage>. doi:&#xa0;<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1645/16-132</pub-id>, PMID: <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">28967300</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B13">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Chapman</surname> <given-names>H. D.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>1984</year>). <article-title>Drug resistance in avian coccidia (a review)</article-title>. <source>Vet. Parasitol.</source> <volume>15</volume>, <fpage>11</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>27</lpage>. doi:&#xa0;<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/0304-4017(84)90106-7</pub-id>, PMID: <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">6385460</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B14">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Chapman</surname> <given-names>H. D.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>1986</year>). <article-title>Isolates of Eimeria tenella: studies on resistance to ionophorous anticoccidial drugs</article-title>. <source>Res. Vet. Sci.</source> <volume>41</volume>, <fpage>281</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>282</lpage>. doi:&#xa0;<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/S0034-5288(18)30617-9</pub-id>, PMID: <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">3775121</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B15">
<citation citation-type="book">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Conway</surname> <given-names>D. P.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Mckenzie</surname> <given-names>M. E.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2007</year>). <source>Poultry coccidiosis</source>. <edition>3 ed</edition> (<publisher-loc>Ames (IA</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>Blackwell Publishing Professional</publisher-name>).</citation></ref>
<ref id="B16">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Cornelissen</surname> <given-names>A. W.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Overdulve</surname> <given-names>J. P.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>van der Ploeg</surname> <given-names>M.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>1984</year>). <article-title>Determination of nuclear DNA of five eucoccidian parasites, Isospora (Toxoplasma) gondii, Sarcocystis cruzi, Eimeria tenella, E. acervulina and Plasmodium berghei, with special reference to gamontogenesis and meiosis in I. (T.) gondii</article-title>. <source>Parasitology</source> <volume>88</volume>, <fpage>531</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>553</lpage>. doi:&#xa0;<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1017/s0031182000054792</pub-id>, PMID: <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">6204268</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B17">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Dalloul</surname> <given-names>R. A.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Lillehoj</surname> <given-names>H. S.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2006</year>). <article-title>Poultry coccidiosis: recent advancements in control measures and vaccine development</article-title>. <source>Expert Rev. Vaccines</source> <volume>5</volume>, <fpage>143</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>163</lpage>. doi:&#xa0;<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1586/14760584.5.1.143</pub-id>, PMID: <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">16451116</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B18">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Del Cacho</surname> <given-names>E.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Gallego</surname> <given-names>M.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Lillehoj</surname> <given-names>H. S.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Quilez</surname> <given-names>J.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Lillehoj</surname> <given-names>E. P.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Sanchez-acedo</surname> <given-names>C.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2016</year>). <article-title>Induction of protective immunity against experimental Eimeria tenella infection using serum exosomes</article-title>. <source>Vet. Parasitol.</source> <volume>224</volume>, <fpage>1</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>6</lpage>. doi:&#xa0;<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.vetpar.2016.04.043</pub-id>, PMID: <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">27270382</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B19">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Dorne</surname> <given-names>J. L.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Fernandez-cruz</surname> <given-names>M. L.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Bertelsen</surname> <given-names>U.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Renshaw</surname> <given-names>D. W.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Peltonen</surname> <given-names>K.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Anadon</surname> <given-names>A.</given-names>
</name>
<etal/>
</person-group>. (<year>2013</year>). <article-title>Risk assessment of coccidostatics during feed cross-contamination: animal and human health aspects</article-title>. <source>Toxicol. Appl. Pharmacol.</source> <volume>270</volume>, <fpage>196</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>208</lpage>. doi:&#xa0;<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.taap.2010.12.014</pub-id>, PMID: <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">21215766</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B20">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Geng</surname> <given-names>T.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Ye</surname> <given-names>C.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Lei</surname> <given-names>Z.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Shen</surname> <given-names>B.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Fang</surname> <given-names>R.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Hu</surname> <given-names>M.</given-names>
</name>
<etal/>
</person-group>. (<year>2021</year>). <article-title>Prevalence of Eimeria parasites in the Hubei and Henan provinces of China</article-title>. <source>Parasitol. Res.</source> <volume>120</volume>, <fpage>655</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>663</lpage>. doi:&#xa0;<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/s00436-020-07010-w</pub-id>, PMID: <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">33409626</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B21">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Guy</surname> <given-names>R. A.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Xiao</surname> <given-names>C.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Horgen</surname> <given-names>P. A.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2004</year>). <article-title>Real-time PCR assay for detection and genotype differentiation of Giardia lamblia in stool specimens</article-title>. <source>J. Clin. Microbiol.</source> <volume>42</volume>, <fpage>3317</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>3320</lpage>. doi:&#xa0;<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1128/JCM.42.7.3317-3320.2004</pub-id>, PMID: <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">15243104</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B22">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Gyorke</surname> <given-names>A.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Pop</surname> <given-names>L.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Cozma</surname> <given-names>V.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2013</year>). <article-title>Prevalence and distribution of Eimeria species in broiler chicken farms of different capacities</article-title>. <source>Parasite</source> <volume>20</volume>, <fpage>50</fpage>. doi:&#xa0;<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1051/parasite/2013052</pub-id>, PMID: <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">24309007</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B23">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Hachimi</surname> <given-names>O.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Falender</surname> <given-names>R.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Davis</surname> <given-names>G.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Wafula</surname> <given-names>R. V.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Sutton</surname> <given-names>M.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Bancroft</surname> <given-names>J.</given-names>
</name>
<etal/>
</person-group>. (<year>2024</year>). <article-title>Evaluation of molecular-based methods for the detection and quantification of Cryptosporidium spp. in wastewater</article-title>. <source>Sci. Total Environ.</source> <volume>947</volume>, <elocation-id>174219</elocation-id>. doi:&#xa0;<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.scitotenv.2024.174219</pub-id>, PMID: <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">38917908</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B24">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Haug</surname> <given-names>A.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Gjevre</surname> <given-names>A. G.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Thebo</surname> <given-names>P.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Mattsson</surname> <given-names>J. G.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Kaldhusdal</surname> <given-names>M.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2008</year>). <article-title>Coccidial infections in commercial broilers: epidemiological aspects and comparison of Eimeria species identification by morphometric and polymerase chain reaction techniques</article-title>. <source>Avian Pathol.</source> <volume>37</volume>, <fpage>161</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>170</lpage>. doi:&#xa0;<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1080/03079450801915130</pub-id>, PMID: <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">18393094</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B25">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Haug</surname> <given-names>A.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Thebo</surname> <given-names>P.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Mattsson</surname> <given-names>J. G.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2007</year>). <article-title>A simplified protocol for molecular identification of Eimeria species in field samples</article-title>. <source>Vet. Parasitol.</source> <volume>146</volume>, <fpage>35</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>45</lpage>. doi:&#xa0;<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.vetpar.2006.12.015</pub-id>, PMID: <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">17386979</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B26">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Jaramillo-Ortiz</surname> <given-names>J. M.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Burrell</surname> <given-names>C.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Adeyemi</surname> <given-names>O.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Werling</surname> <given-names>D.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Blake</surname> <given-names>D. P.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2023</year>). <article-title>First detection and characterisation of Eimeria zaria in European chickens</article-title>. <source>Vet. Parasitol.</source> <volume>324</volume>, <elocation-id>110068</elocation-id>. doi:&#xa0;<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.vetpar.2023.110068</pub-id>, PMID: <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">37931476</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B27">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Johnson</surname> <given-names>J.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Reid</surname> <given-names>W. M.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>1970</year>). <article-title>Anticoccidial drugs: lesion scoring techniques in battery and floor-pen experiments with chickens</article-title>. <source>Exp. Parasitol.</source> <volume>28</volume>, <fpage>30</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>36</lpage>. doi:&#xa0;<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/0014-4894(70)90063-9</pub-id>, PMID: <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">5459870</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B28">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Kadykalo</surname> <given-names>S.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Roberts</surname> <given-names>T.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Thompson</surname> <given-names>M.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Wilson</surname> <given-names>J.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Lang</surname> <given-names>M.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Espeisse</surname> <given-names>O.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2018</year>). <article-title>The value of anticoccidials for sustainable global poultry production</article-title>. <source>Int. J. Antimicrob. Agents</source> <volume>51</volume>, <fpage>304</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>310</lpage>. doi:&#xa0;<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2017.09.004</pub-id>, PMID: <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">28935212</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B29">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Kawahara</surname> <given-names>F.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Taira</surname> <given-names>K.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Nagai</surname> <given-names>S.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Onaga</surname> <given-names>H.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Onuma</surname> <given-names>M.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Nunoya</surname> <given-names>T.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2008</year>). <article-title>Detection of five avian Eimeria species by species-specific real-time polymerase chain reaction assay</article-title>. <source>Avian Dis.</source> <volume>52</volume>, <fpage>652</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>656</lpage>. doi:&#xa0;<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1637/8351-050908-Reg.1</pub-id>, PMID: <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">19166058</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B30">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Kumar</surname> <given-names>S.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Garg</surname> <given-names>R.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Banerjee</surname> <given-names>P. S.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Ram</surname> <given-names>H.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Kundu</surname> <given-names>K.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Kumar</surname> <given-names>S.</given-names>
</name>
<etal/>
</person-group>. (<year>2015</year>). <article-title>Genetic diversity within ITS-1 region of Eimeria species infecting chickens of north India</article-title>. <source>Infect. Genet. Evol.</source> <volume>36</volume>, <fpage>262</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>267</lpage>. doi:&#xa0;<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.meegid.2015.09.023</pub-id>, PMID: <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">26423669</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B31">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Kumar</surname> <given-names>S.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Garg</surname> <given-names>R.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Moftah</surname> <given-names>A.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Clark</surname> <given-names>E. L.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Macdonald</surname> <given-names>S. E.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Chaudhry</surname> <given-names>A. S.</given-names>
</name>
<etal/>
</person-group>. (<year>2014</year>). <article-title>An optimised protocol for molecular identification of Eimeria from chickens</article-title>. <source>Vet. Parasitol.</source> <volume>199</volume>, <fpage>24</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>31</lpage>. doi:&#xa0;<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.vetpar.2013.09.026</pub-id>, PMID: <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">24138724</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B32">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Lan</surname> <given-names>L. H.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Sun</surname> <given-names>B. B.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Zuo</surname> <given-names>B. X.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Chen</surname> <given-names>X. Q.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Du</surname> <given-names>A. F.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2017</year>). <article-title>Prevalence and drug resistance of avian Eimeria species in broiler chicken farms of Zhejiang province, China</article-title>. <source>Poult. Sci.</source> <volume>96</volume>, <fpage>2104</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>2109</lpage>. doi:&#xa0;<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3382/ps/pew499</pub-id>, PMID: <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">28339722</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B33">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Lan</surname> <given-names>Y.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Xun</surname> <given-names>S.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Tamminga</surname> <given-names>S.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Williams</surname> <given-names>B. A.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Verstegen</surname> <given-names>M. W.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Erdi</surname> <given-names>G.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2004</year>). <article-title>Real-time PCR detection of lactic acid bacteria in cecal contents of eimeria tenella-lnfected broilers fed soybean oligosaccharides and soluble soybean polysaccharides</article-title>. <source>Poult. Sci.</source> <volume>83</volume>, <fpage>1696</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>1702</lpage>. doi:&#xa0;<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1093/ps/83.10.1696</pub-id>, PMID: <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">15510555</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B34">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Lew</surname> <given-names>A. E.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Anderson</surname> <given-names>G. R.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Minchin</surname> <given-names>C. M.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Jeston</surname> <given-names>P. J.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Jorgensen</surname> <given-names>W. K.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2003</year>). <article-title>Inter- and intra-strain variation and PCR detection of the internal transcribed spacer 1 (ITS-1) sequences of Australian isolates of Eimeria species from chickens</article-title>. <source>Vet. Parasitol.</source> <volume>112</volume>, <fpage>33</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>50</lpage>. doi:&#xa0;<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/s0304-4017(02)00393-x</pub-id>, PMID: <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">12581583</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B35">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Lin</surname> <given-names>R. Q.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Lillehoj</surname> <given-names>H. S.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Lee</surname> <given-names>S. K.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Oh</surname> <given-names>S.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Panebra</surname> <given-names>A.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Lillehoj</surname> <given-names>E. P.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2017</year>). <article-title>Vaccination with Eimeria tenella elongation factor-1alpha recombinant protein induces protective immunity against E. tenella and E. maxima infections</article-title>. <source>Vet. Parasitol.</source> <volume>243</volume>, <fpage>79</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>84</lpage>. doi:&#xa0;<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.vetpar.2017.06.003</pub-id>, PMID: <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">28807316</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B36">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Morgan</surname> <given-names>J. A.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Morris</surname> <given-names>G. M.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Wlodek</surname> <given-names>B. M.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Byrnes</surname> <given-names>R.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Jenner</surname> <given-names>M.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Constantinoiu</surname> <given-names>C. C.</given-names>
</name>
<etal/>
</person-group>. (<year>2009</year>). <article-title>Real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR) assays for the specific detection and quantification of seven Eimeria species that cause coccidiosis in chickens</article-title>. <source>Mol. Cell Probes</source> <volume>23</volume>, <fpage>83</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>89</lpage>. doi:&#xa0;<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.mcp.2008.12.005</pub-id>, PMID: <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">19141318</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B37">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Morris</surname> <given-names>G. M.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Gasser</surname> <given-names>R. B.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2006</year>). <article-title>Biotechnological advances in the diagnosis of avian coccidiosis and the analysis of genetic variation in Eimeria</article-title>. <source>Biotechnol. Adv.</source> <volume>24</volume>, <fpage>590</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>603</lpage>. doi:&#xa0;<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.bioteChadv.2006.06.001</pub-id>, PMID: <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">16901674</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B38">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Newcombe</surname> <given-names>R. G.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>1998</year>). <article-title>Improved confidence intervals for the difference between binomial proportions based on paired data</article-title>. <source>Stat. Med.</source> <volume>17</volume>, <fpage>2635-2650.</fpage>
</citation></ref>
<ref id="B39">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Nolan</surname> <given-names>M. J.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Tomley</surname> <given-names>F. M.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Kaiser</surname> <given-names>P.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Blake</surname> <given-names>D. P.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2015</year>). <article-title>Quantitative real-time PCR (qPCR) for replication - Implications for experimental refinement and animal welfare</article-title>. <source>Parasitol. Int.</source> <volume>64</volume>, <fpage>464</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>470</lpage>. doi:&#xa0;<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.parint.2015.06.010</pub-id>, PMID: <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">26141544</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B40">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Oliveira</surname> <given-names>U. C.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Fraga</surname> <given-names>J. S.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Licois</surname> <given-names>D.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Pakandl</surname> <given-names>M.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Gruber</surname> <given-names>A.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2011</year>). <article-title>Development of molecular assays for the identification of the 11 Eimeria species of the domestic rabbit (Oryctolagus cuniculus)</article-title>. <source>Vet. Parasitol.</source> <volume>176</volume>, <fpage>275</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>280</lpage>. doi:&#xa0;<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.vetpar.2010.10.054</pub-id>, PMID: <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">21111537</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B41">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Opel</surname> <given-names>K. L.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Chung</surname> <given-names>D.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Mccord</surname> <given-names>B. R.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2010</year>). <article-title>A study of PCR inhibition mechanisms using real time PCR</article-title>. <source>J. Forensic Sci.</source> <volume>55</volume>, <fpage>25</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>33</lpage>. doi:&#xa0;<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1111/j.1556-4029.2009.01245.x</pub-id>, PMID: <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">20015162</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B42">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Pajic</surname> <given-names>M.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Todorovic</surname> <given-names>D.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Knezevic</surname> <given-names>S.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Prunic</surname> <given-names>B.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Velhner</surname> <given-names>M.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Andric</surname> <given-names>D. O.</given-names>
</name>
<etal/>
</person-group>. (<year>2023</year>). <article-title>Molecular investigation of eimeria species in broiler farms in the province of Vojvodina, Serbia</article-title>. <source>Life (Basel)</source> <volume>13</volume>, <elocation-id>1039</elocation-id>. doi:&#xa0;<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.3390/life13041039</pub-id>, PMID: <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">37109568</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B43">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Peek</surname> <given-names>H. W.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Landman</surname> <given-names>W. J.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2003</year>). <article-title>Resistance to anticoccidial drugs of Dutch avian Eimeria spp. field isolates originating from 1996, 1999 and 2001</article-title>. <source>Avian Pathol.</source> <volume>32</volume>, <fpage>391</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>401</lpage>. doi:&#xa0;<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1080/0307945031000121149</pub-id>, PMID: <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">17585463</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B44">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Peek</surname> <given-names>H. W.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Landman</surname> <given-names>W. J.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2006</year>). <article-title>Higher incidence of Eimeria spp. field isolates sensitive for diclazuril and monensin associated with the use of live coccidiosis vaccination with paracox-5 in broiler farms</article-title>. <source>Avian Dis.</source> <volume>50</volume>, <fpage>434</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>439</lpage>. doi:&#xa0;<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1637/7486-121205R.1</pub-id>, PMID: <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">17039846</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B45">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Peek</surname> <given-names>H. W.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Landman</surname> <given-names>W. J.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2011</year>). <article-title>Coccidiosis in poultry: anticoccidial products, vaccines and other prevention strategies</article-title>. <source>Vet. Q</source> <volume>31</volume>, <fpage>143</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>161</lpage>. doi:&#xa0;<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1080/01652176.2011.605247</pub-id>, PMID: <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">22029884</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B46">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Pereira-G&#xf3;mez</surname> <given-names>M.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Fajardo</surname> <given-names>&#xc1;.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Echeverr&#xed;a</surname> <given-names>N.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>L&#xf3;pez-tort</surname> <given-names>F.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Perbolianachis</surname> <given-names>P.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Cost&#xe1;bile</surname> <given-names>A.</given-names>
</name>
<etal/>
</person-group>. (<year>2021</year>). <article-title>Evaluation of SYBR Green real time PCR for detecting SARS-CoV-2 from clinical samples</article-title>. <source>J. Virol. Methods</source> <volume>289</volume>, <elocation-id>114035</elocation-id>. doi:&#xa0;<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.jviromet.2020.114035</pub-id>, PMID: <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">33285190</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B47">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Prakashbabu</surname> <given-names>B. C.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Thenmozhi</surname> <given-names>V.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Limon</surname> <given-names>G.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Kundu</surname> <given-names>K.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Kumar</surname> <given-names>S.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Garg</surname> <given-names>R.</given-names>
</name>
<etal/>
</person-group>. (<year>2017</year>). <article-title>Species occurrence varies between geographic regions and poultry production systems and may influence parasite genetic diversity</article-title>. <source>Vet. Parasitol.</source> <volume>233</volume>, <fpage>62</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>72</lpage>. doi:&#xa0;<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.vetpar.2016.12.003</pub-id>, PMID: <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">28043390</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B48">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Raj</surname> <given-names>G. D.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Aarthi</surname> <given-names>S.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Selvabharathi</surname> <given-names>R.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Raman</surname> <given-names>M.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Blake</surname> <given-names>D. P.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Tomley</surname> <given-names>F. M.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2013</year>). <article-title>Real-time PCR-based quantification of Eimeria genomes: a method to outweigh underestimation of genome numbers due to PCR inhibition</article-title>. <source>Avian Pathol.</source> <volume>42</volume>, <fpage>304</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>308</lpage>. doi:&#xa0;<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1080/03079457.2013.790531</pub-id>, PMID: <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">23656603</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B49">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Reginato</surname> <given-names>C. Z.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Br&#xe4;unig</surname> <given-names>P.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Portella</surname> <given-names>L. P.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Mortari</surname> <given-names>A. P. G.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Minuzzi</surname> <given-names>C. E.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Sangioni</surname> <given-names>L. A.</given-names>
</name>
<etal/>
</person-group>. (<year>2020</year>). <article-title>DNA extraction methods for molecular detection of Eimeria spp. in cattle and sheep</article-title>. <source>Pesquisa Vet. Bras.</source> <volume>40</volume>, <fpage>514</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>518</lpage>. doi:&#xa0;<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1590/1678-5150-Pvb-6625</pub-id>
</citation></ref>
<ref id="B50">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Reid</surname> <given-names>A. J.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Blake</surname> <given-names>D. P.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Ansari</surname> <given-names>H. R.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Billington</surname> <given-names>K.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Browne</surname> <given-names>H. P.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Bryant</surname> <given-names>J.</given-names>
</name>
<etal/>
</person-group>. (<year>2014</year>). <article-title>Genomic analysis of the causative agents of coccidiosis in domestic chickens</article-title>. <source>Genome Res.</source> <volume>24</volume>, <fpage>1676</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>1685</lpage>. doi:&#xa0;<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1101/gr.168955.113</pub-id>, PMID: <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">25015382</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B51">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Ririe</surname> <given-names>K. M.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Rasmussen</surname> <given-names>R. P.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Wittwer</surname> <given-names>C. T.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>1997</year>). <article-title>Product differentiation by analysis of DNA melting curves during the polymerase chain reaction</article-title>. <source>Anal. Biochem.</source> <volume>245</volume>, <fpage>154</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>160</lpage>. doi:&#xa0;<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1006/abio.1996.9916</pub-id>, PMID: <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">9056205</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B52">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Santalucia</surname> <given-names>J.</given-names>
<suffix>Jr.</suffix>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>1998</year>). <article-title>A unified view of polymer, dumbbell, and oligonucleotide DNA nearest-neighbor thermodynamics</article-title>. <source>Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.</source> <volume>95</volume>, <fpage>1460</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>1465</lpage>. doi:&#xa0;<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1073/pnas.95.4.1460</pub-id>, PMID: <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">9465037</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B53">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Schnitzler</surname> <given-names>B. E.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Thebo</surname> <given-names>P. L.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Mattsson</surname> <given-names>J. G.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Tomley</surname> <given-names>F. M.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Shirley</surname> <given-names>M. W.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>1998</year>). <article-title>Development of a diagnostic PCR assay for the detection and discrimination of four pathogenic.Eimeria species of the chicken</article-title>. <source>Avian Pathol.</source> <volume>27</volume>, <fpage>490</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>497</lpage>. doi:&#xa0;<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1080/03079459808419373</pub-id>, PMID: <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">18484033</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B54">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Schnitzler</surname> <given-names>B. E.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Thebo</surname> <given-names>P. L.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Tomley</surname> <given-names>F. M.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Uggla</surname> <given-names>A.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Shirley</surname> <given-names>M. W.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>1999</year>). <article-title>PCR identification of chicken Eimeria: a simplified read-out</article-title>. <source>Avian Pathol.</source> <volume>28</volume>, <fpage>89</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>93</lpage>. doi:&#xa0;<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1080/03079459995091</pub-id>, PMID: <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">16147553</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B55">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Schrader</surname> <given-names>C.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Schielke</surname> <given-names>A.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Ellerbroek</surname> <given-names>L.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Johne</surname> <given-names>R.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2012</year>). <article-title>PCR inhibitors - occurrence, properties and removal</article-title>. <source>J. Appl. Microbiol.</source> <volume>113</volume>, <fpage>1014</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>1026</lpage>. doi:&#xa0;<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1111/j.1365-2672.2012.05384.x</pub-id>, PMID: <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">22747964</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B56">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Scipioni</surname> <given-names>A.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Mauroy</surname> <given-names>A.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Ziant</surname> <given-names>D.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Saegerman</surname> <given-names>C.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Thiry</surname> <given-names>E.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2008</year>). <article-title>A SYBR Green RT- PCR assay in single tube to detect human and bovine noroviruses and control for inhibition</article-title>. <source>Virol. J.</source> <volume>5</volume>, <elocation-id>94</elocation-id>. doi:&#xa0;<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1186/1743-422X-5-94</pub-id>, PMID: <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">18702817</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B57">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Shchyolkina</surname> <given-names>A. K.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Borisova</surname> <given-names>O. F.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Livshits</surname> <given-names>M. A.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Pozmogova</surname> <given-names>G. E.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Chernov</surname> <given-names>B. K.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>KlemenT</surname> <given-names>R.</given-names>
</name>
<etal/>
</person-group>. (<year>2000</year>). <article-title>Parallel-stranded DNA with mixed AT/GC composition: role of trans G.C base pairs in sequence dependent helical stability</article-title>. <source>Biochemistry</source> <volume>39</volume>, <fpage>10034</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>10044</lpage>. doi:&#xa0;<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1021/bi9913909</pub-id>, PMID: <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">10955991</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B58">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Shirzad</surname> <given-names>M. R.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Seifi</surname> <given-names>S.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Gheisari</surname> <given-names>H. R.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Hachesoo</surname> <given-names>B. A.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Habibi</surname> <given-names>H.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Bujmehrani</surname> <given-names>H.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2011</year>). <article-title>Prevalence and risk factors for subclinical coccidiosis in broiler chicken farms in Mazandaran province, Iran</article-title>. <source>Trop. Anim. Health Prod.</source> <volume>43</volume>, <fpage>1601</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>1604</lpage>. doi:&#xa0;<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1007/s11250-011-9876-3</pub-id>, PMID: <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">21626064</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B59">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Sun</surname> <given-names>X. M.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Pang</surname> <given-names>W.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Jia</surname> <given-names>T.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Yan</surname> <given-names>W. C.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>He</surname> <given-names>G.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Hao</surname> <given-names>L. L.</given-names>
</name>
<etal/>
</person-group>. (<year>2009</year>). <article-title>Prevalence of Eimeria species in broilers with subclinical signs from fifty farms</article-title>. <source>Avian Dis.</source> <volume>53</volume>, <fpage>301</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>305</lpage>. doi:&#xa0;<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1637/8379-061708-Resnote.1</pub-id>, PMID: <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">19630240</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B60">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Sun</surname> <given-names>H. C.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Su</surname> <given-names>X. Y.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Fu</surname> <given-names>Y.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Hao</surname> <given-names>L. L.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Zhou</surname> <given-names>W.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Zhou</surname>
</name>
<etal/>
</person-group>. (<year>2023</year>). <article-title>Pathogenicity and drug resistance of the isolate from Yiwu, Zhejiang province, eastern China</article-title>. <source>Poult. Sci.</source> <volume>102</volume>, <elocation-id>102845</elocation-id>. doi:&#xa0;<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.psj.2023.102845</pub-id>, PMID: <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">37441842</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B61">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Vrba</surname> <given-names>V.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Blake</surname> <given-names>D. P.</given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname>Poplstein</surname> <given-names>M.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2010</year>). <article-title>Quantitative real-time PCR assays for detection and quantification of all seven Eimeria species that infect the chicken</article-title>. <source>Vet. Parasitol.</source> <volume>174</volume>, <fpage>183</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>190</lpage>. doi:&#xa0;<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/j.vetpar.2010.09.006</pub-id>, PMID: <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">20888693</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B62">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Williams</surname> <given-names>R. B.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2001</year>). <article-title>Quantification of the crowding effect during infections with the seven Eimeria species of the domesticated fowl: its importance for experimental designs and the production of oocyst stocks</article-title>. <source>Int. J. Parasitol.</source> <volume>31</volume>, <fpage>1056</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>1069</lpage>. doi:&#xa0;<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1016/s0020-7519(01)00235-1</pub-id>, PMID: <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">11429169</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B63">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Williams</surname> <given-names>R. B.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>2005</year>). <article-title>Intercurrent coccidiosis and necrotic enteritis of chickens: rational, integrated disease management by maintenance of gut integrity</article-title>. <source>Avian Pathol.</source> <volume>34</volume>, <fpage>159</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>180</lpage>. doi:&#xa0;<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1080/03079450500112195</pub-id>, PMID: <pub-id pub-id-type="pmid">16191699</pub-id></citation></ref>
<ref id="B64">
<citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname>Wilson</surname> <given-names>E. B.</given-names>
</name>
</person-group> (<year>1927</year>). <article-title>Probable inference, the law of succession, and statistical inference</article-title>. <source>J. Am. Stat. Assoc.</source> <volume>22</volume>, <fpage>209</fpage>&#x2013;<lpage>212</lpage>. doi:&#xa0;<pub-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1080/01621459.1927.10502953</pub-id>
</citation></ref>
</ref-list>
</back>
</article>