Reply to Detection of Leptospira interrogans DNA in Urine of a Captive Ocelot (Leopardus pardalis)

In reply to a comment, we want to mention that we consider this report significant in animal leptospirosis. The presence of leptospiral DNA in the urine of a captive wild cat supports findings described in previous reports [1,2], as in our study, where leptospiral DNA is detected in urine without the presence of anti-leptospiral antibodies.

This finding further increases the likelihood that domestic and wild cats play a key role in the maintenance and transmission of Leptospira spp. The methodology used in this work was similar to ours. Concerning the MAT technique, we would like to mention that the panel of serovars used was wide and followed the suggestions of the World Organization for Animal Health. There are differences in some of the serovars used between studies, but this is normal. For the accurate diagnostic and epidemiological surveillance of leptospirosis, it is imperative to use endemic serovars in the geographic region.

Concerning the PCR methodology, it was not only used for the detection of the lipL32 gene (present only in pathogenic Leptospira spp.), one step further was taken, and a sequence that allowed the identification of the pathogenic Leptospira spp. as Leptospira interrogans was made.

In conclusion, we are aware that this type of research helps us to improve our knowledge about leptospirosis in terms of its epidemiology and reservoir animals.