4.2 Article

Detection of Rickettsia felis and Rickettsia typhi and Seasonal Prevalence of Fleas Collected from Small Mammals at Gyeonggi Province in the Republic of Korea

期刊

VECTOR-BORNE AND ZOONOTIC DISEASES
卷 11, 期 9, 页码 1243-1251

出版社

MARY ANN LIEBERT, INC
DOI: 10.1089/vbz.2010.0261

关键词

Ctenophthalmus congeneroides, Stenoponia sidimi; Flea; Korea; Rickettsia felis; Rickettsia typhi

资金

  1. Armed Forces Health Surveillance Center
  2. Global Emerging Infections Surveillance and Response System, Silver Spring, MD
  3. Seoul National University, Seoul, Korea

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Fleas were collected from live-captured small mammals to identify flea-borne pathogens, host associations, and seasonal prevalence of flea species, as part of the 65th Medical Brigade rodent-borne disease surveillance program at 20 military installations and training sites, Gyeonggi Province, Republic of Korea, 2005-2007. A total of 1251 fleas were recovered from 2833 small mammals. Apodemus agrarius, the striped field mouse, accounted for 93.1% (2,637/2,833) of all small mammals captured, followed by Crocidura lasiura (3.1%), Mus musculus (1.3%), Microtus fortis (0.7%), Myodes regulus (0.7%), Micromys minutus (0.5%), Rattus norvegicus (0.4%), Tscherskia triton (0.1%), Apodemus peninsulae (<0.1%), Rattus rattus (<0.1%), and Mogera robusta (<0.1%). A total of 6/11 species of mammals captured were infested with fleas with infestation rates ranging from a high of 26.3% (A. agrarius and M. regulus) to a low of 5.3% (M. fortis). Flea indices among infested mammals were highest for R. norvegicus (2.50), followed by C. lasiura (2.20), A. agrarius (1.71), M. regulus (1.20), M. musculus (1.0), and M. fortis (1.0). The predominant flea species collected were Stenoponia sidimi (56.5%), followed by Ctenophthalmus congeneroides (38.3%) and Rhadinopsylla insolita (3.9%). The minimum field infection rates [ number of positive pools/total number of fleas (600)] for Rickettsia typhi and for Rickettsia felis were 1.7% and 1.0%, respectively.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据