4.5 Article

Transstadial and intrastadial experimental transmission of Ehrlichia canis by male Rhipicephalus sanguineus

期刊

VETERINARY PARASITOLOGY
卷 131, 期 1-2, 页码 95-105

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.vetpar.2005.04.030

关键词

Ehrlichia canis; canine monocytic ehrlichiosis; tick transmission; Rhipicephalus sanguineus; metastriata

资金

  1. NIAID NIH HHS [R01 AI047932-03, R01 AI047932-02, AI47932, R01 AI047932-04, R01 AI047932] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The acquisition and transmission of rickettsial pathogens by different tick developmental stages has important epidemiological implications. The purpose of this study was to determine if male Rhipicephalus sanguineus can experimentally acquire and transmit Ehrlichia canis in the absence of female ticks. Two trials were performed where nymphal and male R. sanguineus were simultaneously acquisition fed on the same infected donor hosts, and transstadially or intrastadially exposed male ticks were fed on separate pathogen-free dogs as a test for transmission. A single-step p30-based PCR assay was used to test canine and tick hosts for E. canis infections before and after tick feeding. E. canis was detected after either intrastadial or transstadial passage in male ticks, the organism remained detectable in both tick groups after transmission feeding, and both tick groups transmitted the rickettsia to susceptible dogs. Infection of dogs via tick feeding resulted in milder clinical signs and lower antibody titers than intravenous inoculation of carrier blood, but further investigation is needed to understand the mechanisms responsible for this observation. These results demonstrate that male R. sanguineus can take multiple feedings, and that they can both acquire and transmit E. canis in the absence of female ticks. This tick development stage could be important in transmission of E. canis, and perhaps related pathogens, between vertebrate hosts under natural and experimental conditions. (c) 2005 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

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

4.5
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