Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27329450›Full record

ArticleParasites & vectors2016

Detection of selected pathogens in ticks collected from cats and dogs in the Wrocław Agglomeration, South-West Poland.

Nina Król, Anna Obiegala, Martin Pfeffer, Elżbieta Lonc, Dorota Kiewra

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Parasites & vectors, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

34 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Co-Occurrence ofPathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024
    Article
  11. Prevalence ofJournal of veterinary research · 2024
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Molecular Survey ofVeterinary sciences · 2023
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023
    Article
  16. The First Records of Canine Babesiosis in Dogs fromPathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Nina KrólDepartment of Microbial Ecology and Environmental Protection, Institute of Genetics and Microbiology, University of Wrocław, Przybyszewskiego 63/77, 51-148, Wrocław, Poland. nina.krol2@uwr.edu.pl.
Anna ObiegalaInstitute of Animal Hygiene and Veterinary Public Health, University of Leipzig, An den Tierkliniken 1, 04103, Leipzig, Germany.
Martin PfefferInstitute of Animal Hygiene and Veterinary Public Health, University of Leipzig, An den Tierkliniken 1, 04103, Leipzig, Germany.
Elżbieta LoncDepartment of Microbial Ecology and Environmental Protection, Institute of Genetics and Microbiology, University of Wrocław, Przybyszewskiego 63/77, 51-148, Wrocław, Poland.
Dorota KiewraDepartment of Microbial Ecology and Environmental Protection, Institute of Genetics and Microbiology, University of Wrocław, Przybyszewskiego 63/77, 51-148, Wrocław, Poland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTick-borne infections are no longer confined to rural areas, they are documented with increasing frequency in urban settlements across the world. They are known to cause diseases in humans as well as in their companion animals.

methodsDuring a period of 2 years, from January 2013 until December 2014, ticks were collected from dogs and cats in 18 veterinary clinics in the Wrocław Agglomeration, Poland. In total, 1455 ticks were found on 931 pets: 760 domestic dogs and 171 cats. For molecular examinations 127 I. ricinus ticks (115 females and 12 males) were randomly selected, all collected I. hexagonus (n = 137, 32 females, 98 nymphs, 7 larvae) and all collected D. reticulatus (n = 46, 31 females, 15 males) were taken. Ixodes ricinus and I. hexagonus ticks were tested for Rickettsia spp., Anaplasma phagocytophilum, Candidatus Neoehrlichia mikurensis and Babesia spp., while D. reticulatus ticks were investigated for Rickettsia spp. and Babesia spp. only.

resultsIn total, 65.4 % I. ricinus ticks were infected with at least one pathogen. Over 50 % of I. ricinus were positive for Rickettsia spp. (R. helvetica and R. monacensis). The infection level with A. phagocytophilum was 21.3 %. DNA of Cand. N. mikurensis was detected in 8.1 % I. ricinus ticks. Interestingly only female ticks were infected. The prevalence of Babesia spp. was confirmed in 9.0 % of I. ricinus involving the species B. microti and B. venatorum. A total of nineteen double, one triple and two quadruple infections were found in I. ricinus ticks only. Almost 11 % of I. hexagonus ticks were positive for at least one of the tested pathogens. Rickettsia spp. infection was found in 2.2 %, while A. phagocytophilum was detected in 8.1 % of I. hexagonus ticks. Only one nymph was positive for Cand. N. mikurensis and none of I. hexagonus ticks harbored a Babesia spp. Over 60 % of D. reticulatus ticks were positive for rickettsial DNA, exclusively belonging to the species R. raoultii.

conclusionThe high tick infestation rates and the prevalence of pathogens found in these ticks demonstrate a serious level of encounter to tick-borne diseases in urban dogs in the Wroclaw area, and provide evidence that dogs and cats themselves may substantially contribute to the circulation of the ticks and pathogens in the urban area.

Indexed as

AnaplasmataceaeAnimalsArachnid VectorsBabesiaCat DiseasesCatsDog DiseasesDogsFemaleIxodidaeMalePolandRickettsiaTick InfestationsUrban PopulationAnaplasma phagocytophilumBabesia spp.Candidatus Neoehrlichia mikurensisCatsDermacentor reticulatusDogsIxodes hexagonusIxodes ricinusRickettsia spp.Ticks

Identifiers

PMID27329450
PMCPMC4915085

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.