4.7 Review

Coxiella burnetii in ticks, livestock, pets and wildlife: A mini-review

Journal

FRONTIERS IN VETERINARY SCIENCE
Volume 9, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
DOI: 10.3389/fvets.2022.1068129

Keywords

Coxiella burnetii; Q fever; coxiellosis; ticks; livestock; wildlife

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Coxiella burnetii is a zoonotic bacterium that poses a threat to public health and economy. Livestock are the primary source of infection, but wildlife and ticks may also contribute to its spread. Understanding the role of vectors and hosts is crucial in preventing the transmission of Coxiella burnetii.
Coxiella burnetii is a zoonotic bacterium with an obligatory intracellular lifestyle and has a worldwide distribution. Coxiella burnetii is the causative agent of Q fever in humans and coxiellosis in animals. Since its discovery in 1935, it has been shown to infect a wide range of animal species including mammals, birds, reptiles, and arthropods. Coxiella burnetii infection is of public and veterinary health and economic concern due to its potential for rapid spread and highly infectious nature. Livestock are the primary source of C. burnetii infection in most Q fever outbreaks which occurs mainly through inhalation of contaminated particles. Aside from livestock, many cases of Q fever linked to exposure to wildlife. Changes in the dynamics of human-wildlife interactions may lead to an increased potential risk of interspecies transmission and contribute to the emergence/re-emergence of Q fever. Although C. burnetii transmission is mainly airborne, ticks may act as vectors and play an important role in the natural cycle of transmission of coxiellosis among wild vertebrates and livestock. In this review, we aim to compile available information on vectors, domestic, and wild hosts of C. burnetii, and to highlight their potential role as bacterial reservoirs in the transmission of C. burnetii.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available