Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32185559›Full record

ArticleExperimental & applied acarology2020

A genetic and immunological comparison of tick-resistance in beef cattle following artificial infestation with Rhipicephalus ticks.

J K Marima, C L Nel, M C Marufu, N N Jonsson, B Dube, K Dzama

Open access · greenAbstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Experimental & applied acarology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
4.9field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 28 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Dietary Fermentation withInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2025
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. 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

6 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

J K MarimaDepartment of Animal Sciences, Faculty of AgriSciences, Stellenbosch University, Private Bag X1, Matieland, 7602, South Africa.
C L NelDepartment of Animal Sciences, Faculty of AgriSciences, Stellenbosch University, Private Bag X1, Matieland, 7602, South Africa.
M C MarufuDepartment of Veterinary Tropical Diseases, University of Pretoria, Private Bag X4, Onderstepoort, 0110, South Africa.
N N JonssonCollege of Medical, Veterinary and Life Sciences, University of Glasgow, Bearsden, G61 1QH, UK.
B DubeDepartment of Animal Breeding and Genetics, Agricultural Research Council - Animal Production, Private Bag X2, Irene, 0062, South Africa.
K DzamaDepartment of Animal Sciences, Faculty of AgriSciences, Stellenbosch University, Private Bag X1, Matieland, 7602, South Africa. kdzama@sun.ac.za.
Stellenbosch University · ZAAgricultural Research Council of South Africa · ZAUniversity of Glasgow · GBUniversity of Pretoria · ZA

Funding

National Research Foundation 94606
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Host resistance to ticks can be explored as a possible approach of combating tick infestations to complement the existing unsustainable tick control methods. Thirty-six beef cattle animals were used, consisting of Angus, Brahman and Nguni breeds, with each breed contributing 12 animals. Half of the animals per breed were artificially challenged with Rhipicephalus microplus and the other half with R. decoloratus unfed larvae per animal. Skin biopsies and blood samples were collected pre-infestation and 12 h post-infestation from the feeding sites of visibly engorging ticks. The success rate of the ticks was high and had an influence even at the early time point. Increased lymphocytes and blood urea nitrogen levels as well as decreased levels of segmented neutrophils were observed in the Angus, which were the opposite of those in the Brahman and Nguni. The increase in cholesterol, which was highest in the Angus and lowest in the Nguni, may be due to altered protein metabolism. The expression profiles of genes TRAF6, TBP, LUM and B2M were significantly different among breeds. Five genes (CCR1, TLR5, TRAF6, TBP, BDA20) had increased or constant expression post-infestation, whereas the expression of CXCL8, IL-10 and TNF-α decreased or remained the same after tick challenge. Genes that showed variation are involved in discouraging long-term supply of blood meal to the tick and those associated with immune responses. The gene LUM is a potential biomarker for tick resistance in cattle. The response to infestation by the breeds was consistent across the tick species.

Indexed as

Disease ResistanceRhipicephalusAnimalsBlood Urea NitrogenCattleCattle DiseasesCytokinesLymphocytesNeutrophilsSkinTick InfestationsTranscriptomeCytokinesGene expressionHaematologySerum biochemistryTick-resistance

Identifiers

PMID32185559
OpenAlexW3010734110

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.