Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30176918›Full record

ArticleParasites & vectors2018

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

Emanuela Olivieri, Michiel Wijnveld, Marise Bonga, Laura Berger, Maria T Manfredi, Fabrizia Veronesi, Frans Jongejan

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Parasites & vectors, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 18% of its field
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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 26 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Molecular Evidence ofMicroorganisms · 2023
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Molecular Survey and Spatial Distribution ofPathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
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

7 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Emanuela OlivieriDepartment of Veterinary Medicine, University of Perugia, 06126, Perugia, Italy.
Michiel WijnveldInstitute for Hygiene and Applied Immunology, Center for Pathophysiology, Infectiology and Immunology, Medical University of Vienna, Kinderspitalgasse 15, 1090, Vienna, Austria.
Marise BongaUtrecht Centre for Tick-borne Diseases, FAO Reference Centre for Ticks and Tick-borne Diseases, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Utrecht University, Yalelaan 1, 3584 CL, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Laura BergerUtrecht Centre for Tick-borne Diseases, FAO Reference Centre for Ticks and Tick-borne Diseases, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Utrecht University, Yalelaan 1, 3584 CL, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Maria T ManfrediDepartment of Veterinary Medicine, Università degli Studi di Milano, 20133, Milan, Italy.
Fabrizia VeronesiDepartment of Veterinary Medicine, University of Perugia, 06126, Perugia, Italy.
Frans JongejanUtrecht Centre for Tick-borne Diseases, FAO Reference Centre for Ticks and Tick-borne Diseases, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Utrecht University, Yalelaan 1, 3584 CL, Utrecht, The Netherlands. F.Jongejan@uu.nl.
Utrecht University · NLUniversity of Perugia · ITMedical University of Vienna · ATUniversity of Milan · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTick-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.

methodsAn 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.

resultsThe 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.

conclusionsRhipicephalus 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.

Indexed as

Feeding BehaviorAnimalsBloodBlood Chemical AnalysisCattleDermacentorDNA, BacterialFemaleHumansIn Vitro TechniquesMaleMembranesPolymerase Chain ReactionRhipicephalus sanguineusRickettsiaRickettsia InfectionsDNA, BacterialSiliconesDermacentor reticulatusIn vitro feedingRhipicephalus sanguineusRickettsia massiliaeRickettsia raoultiiSilicone membranesTransmission

Identifiers

PMID30176918
PMCPMC6122679
OpenAlexW2892327865

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.