Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32245520›Full record

ArticleParasites & vectors2020

Detection of DNA of Babesia canis in tissues of laboratory rodents following oral inoculation with infected ticks.

Alexandra Corduneanu, Teodor Dan Ursache, Marian Taulescu, Bogdan Sevastre, David Modrý, Andrei Daniel Mihalca

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 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 14% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Diversity of piroplasmids in wild animals in Brazil: a review.Revista brasileira de parasitologia veterinaria = Brazilian journal of veterinary parasitology : Orgao Oficial do Colegio Brasileiro de Parasitologia Veterinaria · 2025
    Review
  2. Article
  3. Canine Babesiosis Caused by LargeAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2023
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Microorganisms · 2021
    Article
  9. 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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Alexandra CorduneanuDepartment of Parasitology and Parasitic Diseases, University of Agricultural Sciences and Veterinary Medicine Cluj-Napoca, Cluj-Napoca, Romania. alexandra.corduneanu@usamvcluj.ro.
Teodor Dan UrsacheDepartment of Pathology, University of Agricultural Sciences and Veterinary Medicine Cluj-Napoca, Cluj-Napoca, Romania.
Marian TaulescuDepartment of Pathology, University of Agricultural Sciences and Veterinary Medicine Cluj-Napoca, Cluj-Napoca, Romania.
Bogdan SevastreDepartment of Physiopathology, University of Agricultural Sciences and Veterinary Medicine Cluj-Napoca, Cluj-Napoca, Romania.
David ModrýCEITEC-VFU, University of Veterinary and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Brno, Czech Republic.
Andrei Daniel MihalcaDepartment of Parasitology and Parasitic Diseases, University of Agricultural Sciences and Veterinary Medicine Cluj-Napoca, Cluj-Napoca, Romania.
University of Agricultural Sciences and Veterinary Medicine of Cluj-Napoca · ROInstitute of Parasitology · CZ

Funding

UEFISCDI PCCDI 57/2018
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundBabesia spp. are apicomplexan parasites which infect a wide range of mammalian hosts. Historically, most Babesia species were described based on the assumed host specificity and morphological features of the intraerythrocytic stages. New DNA-based approaches challenge the traditional species concept and host specificity in Babesia. Using such tools, the presence of Babesia DNA was reported in non-specific mammalian hosts, including B. canis in feces and tissues of insectivorous bats, opening questions on alternative transmission routes. The aim of the present study was to evaluate if B. canis DNA can be detected in tissues of laboratory rodents following oral inoculation with infected ticks.

methodsSeventy-five questing adult Dermacentor reticulatus ticks were longitudinally cut in two halves and pooled. Each pool consisted of halves of 5 ticks, resulting in two analogous sets. One pool set (n = 15) served for DNA extraction, while the other set (n = 15) was used for oral inoculation of experimental animals (Mus musculus, line CD-1 and Meriones unguiculatus). Blood was collected three times during the experiment (before the inoculation, at 14 days post-inoculation and at 30 days post-inoculation). All animals were euthanized 30 days post-inoculation. At necropsy, half of the heart, lung, liver, spleen and kidneys were collected from each animal. The presence of Babesia DNA targeting the 18S rRNA gene was evaluated from blood and tissues samples. For histopathology, the other halves of the tissues were used. Stained blood smears were used for the light microscopy detection of Babesia.

resultsFrom the 15 pools of D. reticulatus used for the oral inoculation, six were PCR-positive for B. canis. DNA of B. canis was detected in blood and tissues of 33.3% of the animals (4 out of 12) inoculated with a B. canis-positive pool. No Babesia DNA was detected in the other 18 animals which received B. canis-negative tick pools. No Babesia was detected during the histological examination and all blood smears were microscopically negative.

conclusionsOur findings demonstrate that B. canis DNA can be detected in tissues of mammalian hosts following ingestion of infected ticks and opens the question of alternative transmission routes for piroplasms.

Indexed as

Administration, OralAnimalsBabesiaBabesiosisDermacentorDNA, ProtozoanFemaleGerbillinaeMaleMiceRNA, Ribosomal, 18SRodentiaTick InfestationsDNA, ProtozoanRNA, Ribosomal, 18SBabesia canisDermacentor reticulatusGerbilMouseOral inoculation

Identifiers

PMID32245520
PMCPMC7118908
OpenAlexW3014852819

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.