English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Background  Tick-borne rickettsial pathogens are emerging worldwide and pose an increased health risk to both humans and animals. A plethora of rickettsial species has been identified in ticks recovered from human and animal patients. However, the detection of rickettsial DNA in ticks does not necessarily mean that these ticks can act as vectors for these pathogens. Here, we used artificial feeding of ticks to confirm transmission of  Rickettsia massiliae  and  Rickettsia raoultii  by  Rhipicephalus sanguineus  ( sensu lato ) and  Dermacentor reticulatus  ticks, respectively. The speed of transmission was also determined.    Methods  An artificial feeding system based on silicone membranes were used to feed adult  R. sanguineus  ( s . l .) and  D. reticulatus  ticks. Blood samples from  in vitro  feeding units were analysed for the presence of rickettsial DNA using PCR and reverse line blot hybridisation.    Results  The attachment rate of  R. sanguineus  ( s . l .) ticks were 40.4% at 8 h post-application, increasing to 70.2% at 72 h.  Rickettsia massiliae  was detected in blood samples collected 8 h after the  R. sanguineus  ( s . l .) ticks were placed into the  in vitro  feeding units.  D. reticulatus  ticks were pre-fed on sheep and subsequently transferred to the  in vitro  feeding system. The attachment rate was 29.1 % at 24 h post-application, increasing to 43.6 % at 96 h.  Rickettsia raoultii  was detected in blood collected 24 h after  D. reticulatus  was placed into the feeding units.    Conclusions   Rhipicephalus sanguineus  ( s . l .) and  D. reticulatus  ticks are vectors of  R. massiliae  and  R. raoultii,  respectively. The transmission of  R. massiliae  as early as 8 h after tick attachment emphasises the importance of removing ticks as soon as possible to minimise transmission. This study highlights the relevance of  in vitro  feeding systems to provide insight into the vectorial capacity of ticks and the dynamics of tick-borne pathogen transmission.

parasites and vectors

Transmission of Rickettsia raoultii and Rickettsia massiliae DNA by Dermacentor reticulatus and Rhipicephalus sanguineus (s.l.) ticks during artificial feeding