EDP Sciences logo
Submit your paper
Search
Menu
All issues Volume 28 (2021) Parasite, 28 (2021) 70 References
Open Access
Issue
Parasite
Volume 28, 2021
Article Number 70
Number of page(s) 11
DOI https://doi.org/10.1051/parasite/2021067
Published online 19 October 2021
  1. Bezerra-Santos MA, Mendoza-Roldan JA, Thompson RA, Dantas-Torres F, Otranto D. 2021. Illegal wildlife trade: a gateway to zoonotic infectious diseases. Trends in Parasitology, 37(3), 181–184. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Cai YH, Lin H, Cheng JG, Wang Y, Fu WL, Zhu P, Wu J, Yang GY. 2016. Investigation on parasitic infection of captive forest musk deer in China. Sichuan Journal of Zoology, 35(1), 74–77. [Google Scholar]
  3. Chen D, Cheng JG, Cai YH, Fu WL, Zhu P, Wang Y, Yan M, Yang GY. 2016. Prevalence of intestinal parasites in young captive Moschus berezovskii. Journal of Economic Animal, 20(4), 197–199. [Google Scholar]
  4. Duszynski DW, Wilber PG. 1997. A guideline for the preparation of species descriptions in the Eimeriidae. Journal of parasitology, 333–336. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  5. Frey JK, Yates TL, Duszynski DW, Gannon WL, Gardner SL. 1992. Designation and curatorial management of type host specimens (symbiotypes) for new parasite species. Journal of Parasitology, 930–932. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  6. Green MJ. 1986. The distribution, status and conservation of the Himalayan musk deer Moschus chrysogaster. Biological Conservation, 35(4), 347–375. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  7. Hu XL, Liu G, Wei YT, Wang YH, Zhang TX, Yang S, Hu DF, Liu SQ. 2018. Regional and seasonal effects on the gastrointestinal parasitism of captive forest musk deer. Acta Tropica, 177, 1–8. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Hu XL, Wei YT, Huang SL, Liu G, Wang YH, Hu DF, Liu SQ. 2018. Effects of breeding center, age and parasite burden on fecal triiodothyronine levels in forest musk deer. PloS One, 13(10), e0205080. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Hua M, Yip H, Talbot P. 2013. Mining data on usage of electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS) from YouTube videos. Tobacco Control, 22(2), 103–106. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Levine ND. 1988. Progress in taxonomy of the Apicomplexan protozoa. Journal of Protozoology, 35(4), 518–520. [Google Scholar]
  11. Levine ND, Ivens V. 1970. The coccidian parasites (Protozoa, Sporozoa) of ruminants. Urbana, llinois: University of Illinois Press, 183–185. [Google Scholar]
  12. Levine ND, Ivens V. 1986. The coccidian parasites (Protozoa, Apicomplexa) of Artiodactyla. Urbana, llinois: University of Illinois, 1–265. [Google Scholar]
  13. Li YM, Hu XL, Yang S, Zhou JT, Qi L, Sun XN, Fan MY, Xu SH, Cha MH, Zhang MS. 2018. Comparison between the fecal bacterial microbiota of healthy and diarrheic captive musk deer. Frontiers in Microbiology, 9, 300. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Liu ZB, Cheng JG, Dai XY. 2002. Regional distribution and countermeasures of coccidiosis in captive forest musk deer. China Herbivores, 03, 44. [Google Scholar]
  15. Matschoulsky S. 1947. Questions on the coccidia of wild mammals in Buraf-Mongolsko USSR. Trudy Buryet-Mongolskoi Zooveterinarnogo Instituta, Ulan-Ude, 3, 78–84. [Google Scholar]
  16. Meng XX, Zhou CQ, Hu JC, Li C, Meng ZB, Feng JC, Zhou YJ, Zhu YJ. 2006. Musk deer farming in China. Animal Science, 82(1), 1–6. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  17. Pellérdy LP. 1974. Coccidia and coccidiosis. Akademiai Kiado: Berlin. p. 1–959. [Google Scholar]
  18. Qiao Y, Zou F, Wei K, Yue B. 2007. A rapid sex-identification test for the forest musk deer (Moschus berezovskii) based on the ZFX/ZFY gene. Zoological Science, 24(5), 493–495. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Sha GR, Zhang HX, Cai YH, Wang HY, Liu HY. 1994. Two new species of Eimeria in domestic forest musk deer. Sichuan Journal of Zoology, 13(1), 1–4. [Google Scholar]
  20. Sheng HL, Liu ZX. 2007. The musk deer in China. Shanghai Science and Technology Press: Shanghai. p. 1–249. [Google Scholar]
  21. Singh B, Gautam KB, Sahoo S, Kumar A, Gupta SK. 2020. Complete mitogenome of Kashmir musk deer (Moschus cupreus) and its comparative phylogenetic relationships. Molecular Biology Reports, 47(12), 9757–9763. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Svanbaev SK. 1958. Coccidia of rodents of Central Kazakhstan. Trudy Instituta Zoologii: Akademii Nauk Kazahkskoi. p. 187–197. [Google Scholar]
  23. Wang Y, Harris RB. 2015. Moschus berezovskii. The IUCN red list of threateded species, e.T13894A103431781. https://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2015-4.RLTS.T13894A61976926.en. [Google Scholar]
  24. Wu JY, Wang W. 2006. The musk deer of china. China Forestry Publishing House: Beijing. p. 1–575. [Google Scholar]
  25. Yang Q, Meng X, Xia L, Feng Z. 2003. Conservation status and causes of decline of musk deer (Moschus spp.) in China. Biological Conservation, 109(3), 333–342. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  26. Zhou YJ, Meng XX, Feng JC, Yang QS, Feng ZJ, Xia L, Bartos L. 2004. Review of the distribution, status and conservation of musk deer in China. Folia Zoologica, 53(2), 129–140. [Google Scholar]

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.