Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31900233›Full record

ArticleParasites & vectors2020

Bovine ticks harbour a diverse array of microorganisms in Pakistan.

Abdul Ghafar, Alejandro Cabezas-Cruz, Clemence Galon, Dasiel Obregon, Robin B Gasser, Sara Moutailler, Abdul Jabbar

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Parasites & vectors, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 39 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
39citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
15.9field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

39 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 152 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Co-occurrence ofOpen veterinary journal · 2026
    Article
  4. Metagenomic Profile of Bacterial Communities ofPathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Article
  5. Distribution ofParasite epidemiology and control · 2025
    Review
  6. High Prevalence and Genetic Heterogeneity ofPathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Survey of tick-borne pathogens inCurrent research in parasitology & vector-borne diseases · 2025
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Investigation ofFrontiers in veterinary science · 2024
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. The Surveillance ofVeterinary sciences · 2023
    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 3 institutions in 4 countries.

Abdul GhafarDepartment of Veterinary Biosciences, Melbourne Veterinary School, The University of Melbourne, Werribee, VIC, 3030, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7714-0752
Alejandro Cabezas-CruzUMR BIPAR, INRAE, ANSES, Ecole Nationale Vétérinaire d'Alfort, Université Paris-Est, 94700, Maisons-Alfort, France.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8660-730X
Clemence GalonUMR BIPAR, INRAE, ANSES, Ecole Nationale Vétérinaire d'Alfort, Université Paris-Est, 94700, Maisons-Alfort, France.
Dasiel ObregonCenter for Nuclear Energy in Agriculture, University of Sao Paulo, Piracicaba, 13400-970, Brazil.
Robin B GasserDepartment of Veterinary Biosciences, Melbourne Veterinary School, The University of Melbourne, Werribee, VIC, 3030, Australia.
Sara MoutaillerUMR BIPAR, INRAE, ANSES, Ecole Nationale Vétérinaire d'Alfort, Université Paris-Est, 94700, Maisons-Alfort, France. sara.moutailler@anses.fr.
Abdul JabbarDepartment of Veterinary Biosciences, Melbourne Veterinary School, The University of Melbourne, Werribee, VIC, 3030, Australia. jabbara@unimelb.edu.au.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8888-0046
École Nationale Vétérinaire d'Alfort · FRThe University of Melbourne · AUUniversidade de São Paulo · BR

Funding

Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research LPS/2016/011The University of Melbourne Research Initiative FundUniversity of Melbourne Australian Government Research Training Scholarship
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTicks and tick-borne pathogens (TTBP) are a major constraint to livestock production in Pakistan; despite a high prevalence of TTBPs, knowledge on the capacity of Pakistani ticks to carry pathogens and endosymbionts is limited. Furthermore, mixed infections with multiple microorganisms further complicate and limit the detection potential of traditional diagnostic methods. The present study investigated the tick-borne microorganisms in bovine ticks in Pakistan, employing a high-throughput microfluidic real-time PCR based technique.

methodsTicks were collected from clinically healthy cattle (n = 116) and water buffaloes (n = 88) from 30 villages across six districts located in five agro-ecological zones (AEZs) of Pakistan from September to November 2017. The microfluidic real-time PCR was used to test the genomic DNA of individual ticks for the presence of 27 bacterial and eight parasitic microorganisms. Phylogenetic methods were used to assess the genetic relationship of DNA sequences determined herein.

resultsPCR detected DNA of at least one microorganism in each of 221 ticks tested (94.4%, 221/234). DNA-based detection inferred that single pathogens/endosymbionts were the most common (43.4%, 96/221) followed by double (38.9%, 86/221), triple (14.5%, 32/221), quadruple (2.3%, 5/221) and quintuple (0.9%, 2/221) mixed infections. Piroplasms (Babesia/Theileria spp.) were the most prevalent (31.6%, 74/234), followed by Ehrlichia spp. (20%, 47/234) and Anaplasma marginale (7.7%, 18/234). Anaplasma phagocytophilum, A. ovis, A. centrale, Babesia ovis, Borrelia spp., Rickettsia spp., R. massiliae, Bartonella spp. and Hepatozoon spp. were also detected. Endosymbionts such as Francisella-like (91.5%, 214/234) and Coxiella-like (1.3%, 3/234) organisms were also detected in ticks. The highest diversity of microorganisms was detected in Hyalomma anatolicum ticks (test-positive for 14/14 microorganisms), followed by Rhipicephalus microplus (4/14), Hy. hussaini (3/14) and Rh. annulatus (2/14). Ticks collected from cattle carried significantly more frequently piroplasms (41.2%, 54/131; P < 0.05) than those from buffaloes (19.4%, 20/103). However, the overall prevalence of microorganisms did not vary significantly among ticks from the two host species as well as across different AEZs.

conclusionsTo our knowledge, this is the first study to investigate a wide range of tick-borne microorganisms in bovine ticks using a high-throughput diagnostic method from different AEZs in Pakistan. These findings will aid in establishing the distribution patterns and the control of tick-borne pathogens of bovines in Pakistan.

Indexed as

AnimalsBacteriaBuffaloesCattleDisease ReservoirsPakistanParasitesPhylogenyTicksBuffaloesCattleCo-infectionsMicrofluidicsPakistanTick-borne pathogensTicks

Identifiers

PMID31900233
PMCPMC6942265
OpenAlexW3001812421

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.