Canine babesiosis: A case study

Introduction

Babesiosis is a major tick-borne disease in dogs, with a global distribution that includes India. It is caused by various Babesia species, which parasitize dogs' red blood cells, causing their destruction and progressive anemia. The disease is characterized by fever, lethargy, hemolytic anemia, thrombocytopenia, lymphadenopathy and spleenomegaly. (Teodorowski et al., 2022) [10] . Canine babesia can be divided into two morphological categories: large and small. Babesia canis, Babesia vogeli and Babesia rossi are in the large form, measuring 2.5-5.0 μm, while Babesia gibsoni and Babesia annae are in the small form, measuring about 1.0-2.5 μm (Petra et al., 2018) [8] . Dogs acquire infection when Babesia-infected ticks bite the dog and introduce sporozoites into the dog's blood. The sporozoites penetrate red blood cells, transform into trophozoites and start dividing, turning into merozoites that exit the red blood cells, leading to their destruction and further invading additional erythrocytes. Simultaneously, inside erythrocytes, some merozoites develop into pre-gametocytes (gamonts), which are consumed by the tick feeding on an infected host. In the tick gut, these pre-gametocytes develop into male and female gametes, subsequently undergo gametogony and combine to form a zygote. This zygote reaches the salivary gland and multiplies into sporozoites, which can infect the vertebrate host once the tick progresses to the next stage. Babesia can be transmitted from infected pregnant dogs to their fetuses and dogs can also spread the disease by biting other dogs (Petra et al., 2018; Alsaad et al., 2021) [8,1] . This report was aimed to observe the clinical cases of babesia infection in dogs with clinical, biochemical and molecular examinations.

Case reports 2.1 Case Selection

Five dogs were presented at the Teaching Veterinary Clinical Complex, DSVCKV, Durg with the history of weakness, inappetence and tick infestation. Details of the animals are given in Table 1.

Clinical examination

The clinical examination of the animals revealed fever, pale conjunctival and oral mucus membranes, weakness, lethargy and dehydration. Dog 5 also had seizures while dog 1 and dog 4 showed hemoglobinuria, at the time of presentation.

Based on the clinical examination suggestive of haemoprotozoan parasite infection, thin blood smears were prepared from ear tip for parasitic examination. Blood samples were collected aseptically from the cephalic vein for hematological, biochemical and molecular analysis.

Blood smear examination

The Giemsa-stained blood smears revealed the Babesia spp as pyriform shaped parasite with in the RBCs. Sometimes, more than one organism were seen in a single RBC (Fig 1).

Haematological and biochemical analysis

Haematological analysis was done using automated hematology analyser (URIT 2900 Vet Plus) whereas biochemical analysis of serum was carried out in semiautomatic biochemistry analyser (microlab using CliniQuant-FSR (Meril) Kit.

Examination of blood parameters indicated normocytic normochromic anemia (Table 2). Moreover, Biochemical changes revealed hypoproteinaemia and increased liver enzymes in diseased dogs (Table 3).

Molecular diagnosis

Treatment

All the dog were treated with inj. Imidocarb @ 6.6 mg/kg BW, intramuscular and then maintained on tab. Doxycycline @ 5 mg/kg BW orally, BID for 28 days. Additionally, fluid therapy and oral haematinics (Syp. Sharkoferrol 5ml OD) were administered to the dogs. Antipyretic drug analgin was administered on first 3 days when dogs showed fever.

Owner was advised to come after one week for further investigation After 14 days, the intramuscular injection of imidocarb at a dose of 6.6 mg/kg BW was repeated.

Results and Discussion

After a week dogs (1, 2 and 3) showed maximum improvement whereas dogs 4 and 5 took 15 days to recover. Post-treatment, the peripheral blood smear tested negative for haemoprotozoan infection. The percentage of haemoglobin showed improvement. Appetite gradually came back. The owner was recommended to maintain the haematinics for one month.

In the current case study, dogs showed various clinical manifestations that are also observed in earlier reports with Babesia gibsoni infection. Moreover, anemia and hypoproteinaemia were also recorded (Jacobson, 2006; Chaudhary et al., 2025) [5,4] . In our study, we confirmed that the dogs were infected with Babesia gibsoni using molecular method. Similar to our study, Jain et al. (2018) [6] also reported 26% Babesia gibsoni infection in dogs of Kerala using Multiplex PCR. Singh et al. (2016) [9] found 13 (7.9%) dogs out of 164 blood samples positive for Babesia gibsoni infection based on microscopic examination, 18S rRNA nested-PCR and sequencing of the PCR products. The rapid recovery with Imidocarb observed in the present study is consistent with earlier reports demonstrating that Imidocarb Dipropionate is one of the most common babesiacides used worldwide and is highly effective against Babesia gibsoni (Bhojne et al., 2013; Karasova et al., 2022) [2, 7] .

Conclusion

In the current research, Babesia infection was identified through both traditional (light microscopy) and molecular (real-time PCR) methods. The microscopic analysis is costeffective and rapid, yet PCR is a more specific and sensitive method as it differentiates Babesia species that are challenging to identify morphologically via blood smear examination. PCR is capable of identifying parasitaemia, even when present in low amounts. This infection in dogs can be effectively managed using both specific and supportive strategies. Tick vector management is the sole effective approach to avert this illness. Moreover, it is important for owners to regularly check their dogs for tick infestations.

References

1. Alsaad KM, Jarad A, Lafta MA. Acute canine babesiosis in a dog at Basrah, Iraq: a case study. IOSR Journal of Agriculture and Veterinary Science. 2021;14(5):16-21.
2. Bhojne GR, Dakshinkar NP, Sanghai AA, Dubey AG. Canine babesiosis: a case study. Indian Journal of Canine Practice. 2013;5(1):117-118.
3. Chauhan RS, Chandra D. Veterinary Laboratory Diagnosis. 2nd ed. Uttar Pradesh, India: International Book Distributing Co.; 2007.
4. Choudhary A, Singh R, Meena DS, Sewag A, Ankita, Chaudhary W. Molecular occurrence and characterization of canine babesiosis in naturally infected pet dogs in Jaipur, Rajasthan, India. Indian Journal of Animal Research. 2025;1-7.
5. Jacobson LS. The South African form of severe and complicated canine babesiosis: clinical advances 19942004. Veterinary Parasitology. 2006;138:126-139.
6. Jain J, Lakshmanan B, Nagaraj HV, Praveena JE, Syamala K, Aravindakshan T. Detection of Babesia canis vogeli, Babesia gibsoni and Ehrlichia canis by multiplex PCR in naturally infected dogs in South India. Veterinarski Arhiv. 2018;88:215-224.
7. Karasova M, Tothova C, Grelova S, Fialkovicova M. The etiology, incidence, pathogenesis, diagnostics and treatment of canine babesiosis caused by Babesia gibsoni infection. Animals. 2022;12:739.
8. Petra B, Josipa K, Renata BR, Vladimir M. Canine babesiosis: where do we stand? Acta VeterinariaBeograd. 2018;68(2):127-160.
9. Singh MN, Raina OK, Sankar M, Rialch A, Tigga MN, Kumar GR, et al. Molecular detection and genetic diversity of Babesia gibsoni in dogs in India. Infection, Genetics and Evolution. 2016;41:100-106.
10. Teodorowski O, Kalinowski M, Winiarczyk D, Dokuzeylul B, Winiarczyk S, Adaszek L. Babesia gibsoni infection in dogs: a European perspective. Animals. 2022;12:730.