ArticleExperimental & applied acarology2008
Co-phylogenetic analysis of Anaplasma phagocytophilum and its vectors, Ixodes spp. ticks.
Article in Experimental & applied acarology, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Demographic Expansions and the Emergence of Host Specialization in Genetically Distinct Ecotypes of the Tick-Transmitted Bacterium Anaplasma phagocytophilum.Applied and environmental microbiology · 2022Article
- Microtomography of the Baltic amber tick Ixodes succineus reveals affinities with the modern Asian disease vector Ixodes ovatus.BMC evolutionary biology · 2016Article
- Mini-review: Strategies for Variation and Evolution of Bacterial Antigens.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2015Review
- Anaplasma phagocytophilum in ticks in Slovenia.Parasites & vectors · 2010Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The coevolutionary history of Ixodes spp. ticks, the obligately tick-transmitted bacterial pathogen Anaplasma phagocytophilum, and its various rodent reservoir hosts world-wide is not known. According to coevolution theory, the most recently evolved of tick-bacterial complexes could have difficulty maintaining A. phagocytophilum in nature, because transmissibility has not been efficiently maximized. This study was intended to examine the phylogeographic history of I. ricinus-subgroup ticks and A. phagocytophilum, provide an estimate for the date of the divergence of A. marginale and A. phagocytophilum, and evaluate whether there is correspondence between tick and Anaplasma spp. trees. Analysis of Ixodes spp. ticks showed a New World clade consisting of I. scapularis and I. pacificus, European I. ricinus as a sister group to this clade, and Asian I. persulcatus as basal. Of the three A. phagocytophilum genes evaluated, the most resolution was provided by the ankA gene. ankA sequences formed an Old World clade with eastern North America strains as a sister clade. California strains were highly diverse and did not form a clade. Base substitution rates were very comparable along both A. marginale and A. phagocytophilum lineages. Based on 16S rDNA analysis, maximum and minimum divergence times of A. phagocytophilum and A. marginale were calculated to be 78,296,703 and 43,415,708 years, respectively. If A. phagocytophilum did closely coevolve with specific I. ricinus-subgroup tick species, then A. phagocytophilum strains could have specialized on local tick species and optimized local infectivity in the Old World and eastern US. However, lack of absolute resolution of tick trees and conflicting prevalence data (with low prevalence in Asia and western North America) preclude us from inferring a tight coevolutionary relationship of tick species from this phylogeographic analysis.
Indexed as
Identifiers
18648997What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.