4.6 Article

Molecular epidemiology and phylogeny of spotted fever group Rickettsia in camels (Camelus dromedarius) and their infesting ticks from Tunisia

期刊

TRANSBOUNDARY AND EMERGING DISEASES
卷 67, 期 2, 页码 733-744

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/tbed.13392

关键词

Camelus dromedarius; Hyalomma spp; ticks; molecular epidemiology; phylogeny; Rickettsia spp; Tunisia

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Rickettsia species are adapted to a wide range of specific animal hosts. Camels (Camelus dromedarius) have been identified as a carrier of various zoonotic pathogens and became a focus of growing public health interest. This study reported the occurrence of rickettsial infection in camels and infesting ticks from five Tunisian governorates. Based on ompB PCR, eight out of 293 camels (2.7%) were found to be infected with Rickettsia spp. Furthermore, 13 tick specimens of Hyalomma impeltatum (10.4%) and 9 of H. dromedarii (8.0%) harboured DNA of Rickettsia bacteria with an overall prevalence rate of 9.2% (22/237). Molecular prevalence of Rickettsia infection varied significantly according to tick infestation for camels and among tick genders. Five rickettsial species, showing a potential public health interest, were revealed by sequencing. Based on ompB partial sequences, five species were identified corresponding to R. aeschlimannii, R. monacensis, R. helvetica and R. massiliae in camels and to R. africae, R. aeschlimannii, R. monacensis and R. helvetica in ticks. Based on ompA typing, three species were revealed corresponding to R. africae and R. monacensis in camels and to R. africae, R. aeschlimannii and R. monacensis in ticks. This is the first report consolidating the hypothesis that camels may serve as potential hosts for Rickettsia spp. and Hyalomma spp. ticks as possible vectors in arid and Saharan areas of Tunisia. The present data highlight the importance of preventive measures and survey that must be implemented in camel herds in order to limit the spread of these vector-borne bacteria to animals and humans.

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

4.6
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