The Abstract states “The incidence of Brucella spp. was found higher (7.5%) in raw milk than in the animal’s feca (15%).” This directly contradicts the data presented in the main text on Page 4, which correctly states: “Brucella spp. was found in 16.7% raw milk and 7.5% of fecal samples.”
The values for milk and feces prevalence are inverted in the Abstract. The Abstract is the most read part of any paper, and this error presents the opposite conclusion (that feces are a greater source than milk). This must be corrected immediately to avoid serious misinterpretation. The data in the main text (16.7% milk, 7.5% feces) is consistent with the totals in Table 3 (10/60 and 3/40) and is likely correct.
