Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35057829›Full record

ArticleParasites & vectors2022

Patterns of deer ked (Diptera: Hippoboscidae) and tick (Ixodida: Ixodidae) infestation on white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) in the eastern United States.

Karen C Poh, Jesse R Evans, Michael J Skvarla, Cody M Kent, Pia U Olafson, Graham J Hickling, Jennifer M Mullinax, Erika T Machtinger

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Parasites & vectors, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. The role of deer keds (Diptera: Hippoboscidae: Lipoptena and Neolipoptena) in occupational and public health.Journal of occupational medicine and toxicology (London, England) · 2025
    Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Detection ofInsects · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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

8 authors.

Karen C PohDepartment of Entomology, Penn State University, University Park, PA, 16802, USA. kpp5400@psu.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1608-6879
Jesse R EvansDepartment of Entomology, Penn State University, University Park, PA, 16802, USA.
Michael J SkvarlaDepartment of Entomology, Penn State University, University Park, PA, 16802, USA.
Cody M KentDepartment of Environmental Science and Technology, University of Maryland, College Park, MD, 20742, USA.
Pia U OlafsonLivestock Arthropod Pests Research Unit, United States Department of Agriculture, Kerrville, TX, 78028, USA.
Graham J HicklingThe Center for Wildlife Health, University of Tennessee Institute of Agriculture, Knoxville, TN, 37996, USA.
Jennifer M MullinaxDepartment of Environmental Science and Technology, University of Maryland, College Park, MD, 20742, USA.
Erika T MachtingerDepartment of Entomology, Penn State University, University Park, PA, 16802, USA.

Funding

Agricultural Research Service 3094-32000-042-00-DNational Institute of Food and Agriculture 1012932National Institute of Food and Agriculture PEN04670National Institute of Food and Agriculture TEN00516
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWhite-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) host numerous ectoparasitic species in the eastern USA, most notably various species of ticks and two species of deer keds. Several pathogens transmitted by ticks to humans and other animal hosts have also been found in deer keds. Little is known about the acquisition and potential for transmission of these pathogens by deer keds; however, tick-deer ked co-feeding transmission is one possible scenario. On-host localization of ticks and deer keds on white-tailed deer was evaluated across several geographical regions of the eastern US to define tick-deer ked spatial relationships on host deer, which may impact the vector-borne disease ecology of these ectoparasites.

methodsTicks and deer keds were collected from hunter-harvested white-tailed deer from six states in the eastern US. Each deer was divided into three body sections, and each section was checked for 4 person-minutes. Differences in ectoparasite counts across body sections and/or states were evaluated using a Bayesian generalized mixed model.

resultsA total of 168 white-tailed deer were inspected for ticks and deer keds across the study sites. Ticks (n = 1636) were collected from all surveyed states, with Ixodes scapularis (n = 1427) being the predominant species. Counts of I. scapularis from the head and front sections were greater than from the rear section. Neotropical deer keds (Lipoptena mazamae) from Alabama and Tennessee (n = 247) were more often found on the rear body section. European deer keds from Pennsylvania (all Lipoptena cervi, n = 314) were found on all body sections of deer.

conclusionsThe distributions of ticks and deer keds on white-tailed deer were significantly different from each other, providing the first evidence of possible on-host niche partitioning of ticks and two geographically distinct deer ked species (L. cervi in the northeast and L. mazamae in the southeast). These differences in spatial distributions may have implications for acquisition and/or transmission of vector-borne pathogens and therefore warrant further study over a wider geographic range and longer time frame.

Indexed as

AlabamaAnimalsBayes TheoremDeerDipteraIxodidaePennsylvaniaTennesseeTick InfestationsDeer kedsIxodes scapularisLipoptena cerviLipoptena mazamaeNiche partitioningOdocoileus virginianusTicksWhite-tailed deer

Identifiers

PMID35057829
PMCPMC8772158

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.