As a volunteer side project, I've recently been helping a local non-profit cat rescue organization as an amateur mycologist. When a new cat is brought into the shelter, we want to screen for ringworm (a prevalent fungal infection) so that infected animals can be separated from those uninfected, and treated. We use a UV (365 nm) Wood's lamp to inspect each incoming cat's coat for fluorescence that would indicate an active infection by Microsporum species such as M. canis. But we are told by local vets that only half of active infections produce visible fluorescence, so we're exploring ways to make this test as accurate as it is convenient.
I've read that the actual fluorescent compounds are the pteridine precursors in the fungal folate synthesis pathway, but I cannot find data that support this hypothesis. Does anyone know a paper on this?
Also, do your think that some fungi convert the substituted pteridine substrates to dihydrofolate so efficiently that there is too little pteridine fluorescence to detect? Or is the poor accuracy of the Wood's lamp test caused by pathogenic fungi that do not make their own folate and therefore make no pteridines?
Thanks for your help.
it is possible too the use of the brometo de erhidium plus fuloro acetate
In humans, the answer is that Microsporum species cause exothrix infections...meaning that the spores (arthrocondia) are on the outside of the hairshaft.....therefore, they fluoresce. Trychophyton species, on the other hand, are endothrix infections, and do not flouresce. Cats are a known important reservoir for Microsporum infection.....Also, tinea corporis in humans does not flouresce. Only tinea capitis.
Does Dr. Kelly's answer imply that 100% of Microsporum canis infections will fluoresce?
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Biological Science
- Biota
- Eukaryota
- Fungi