4.4 Article

Detection of Borrelia burgdorferi s.l., Anaplasma phagocytophilum and Babesia spp. in Dermacentor reticulatus ticks found within the city of Bialystok, Poland-first data

Journal

EXPERIMENTAL AND APPLIED ACAROLOGY
Volume 85, Issue 1, Pages 63-73

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10493-021-00655-x

Keywords

Urban; Babesia canis; Babesia vogeli; Babesia venatorum; Babesia microti

Categories

Funding

  1. Medical University of Bialystok [N/ST/MN/18/001/1145]
  2. European Union [754432]
  3. Polish Ministry of Science and Higher Education

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The study in Poland found that Dermacentor reticulatus ticks in urban areas are infected with at least three pathogens, posing a significant public health risk for tick-borne diseases.
Pathogens carried by ticks pose a threat to both human and animal health across the world. Typically associated with rural landscapes, ticks appear to adapt well to life in urban recreational areas. Although Dermacentor reticulatus is commonly found across Europe, data on the prevalence of pathogens in this tick species, in an urban environment, are very limited. PCR was used to examine 368 D. reticulatus individuals collected in the Zwierzyniecki Forest Nature Reserve in Bialystok, Poland. In total, 10.3% of ticks were infected, with Babesia spp. (9.2%), Anaplasma phagocytophilum (0.8%) and Borrelia burgdorferi sensu lato (0.3%). Rickettsia spp., Bartonella spp., and Coxiella burnetii were not detected. Sequence analysis for Babesia-positive samples identified 79.4% of them as Babesia canis, 8.8% as Babesia microti, 5.9% as Babesia spp., 2.9% as Babesia venatorum, and 2.9% as Babesia vogeli. Results obtained in this study indicate that D. reticulatus ticks found within the urban premises of the study area are infected with at least three pathogens and therefore are an important factor in public health risk for tick-borne diseases.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available