ArticleParasites & vectors2023
Molecular detection of pathogens from ticks collected from dogs and cats at veterinary clinics in Finland.
Article in Parasites & vectors, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
13 citing papers in PubMed.
- Tick-borne pathogens in dogs and their ticks in France: Molecular and serological evidence from a multicenter participatory study.One health (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2026Article
- Article
- Identification and mapping of potential and highly likely vectors for selected vector-borne diseases in the EU and neighbouring countries.EFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority · 2026Article
- Ticks and associated pathogens recovered from dogs and cats during a longitudinal collection study at veterinary practices in France.Parasites & vectors · 2026Article
- High-throughput screening for tick-borne pathogens in Ixodid ticks collected through crowdsourcing in northern Sweden.Acta veterinaria Scandinavica · 2026Article
- Rickettsia spp. in finnish ixodid ticks.Parasites & vectors · 2025Article
- Seroprevalence ofVeterinary sciences · 2025Article
- Ticks and Tick-Borne Pathogens Encountered by Dogs and Cats: A North European Perspective.Transboundary and emerging diseases · 2025Article
- Clinical efficacy and safety of a single administration of fluralaner injectable suspension (BRAVECTOParasites & vectors · 2024Article
- Molecular Detection ofAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2024Article
- Hard Ticks as Vectors: The Emerging Threat of Tick-Borne Diseases in India.Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Co-Occurrence ofPathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Frequency of Anaplasma phagocytophilum, Borrelia spp., and coinfections in Ixodes ricinus ticks collected from dogs and cats in Germany.Parasites & vectors · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundTicks carry microbes, some of which are pathogenic for humans and animals. To assess this One Health challenge, 342 ticks were collected from pet dogs and cats at 10 veterinary clinics in Finland as part of the European project "Protect Our Future Too".
methodsThe tick species were identified, and ticks were screened with quantitative PCR (qPCR) for tick-borne pathogens, including Borrelia burgdorferi sensu lato, Borrelia miyamotoi, Ehrlichia canis, Anaplasma spp., Candidatus Neoehrlichia mikurensis, tick-borne encephalitis virus (TBEV), and Babesia spp. For comparison, a subset of tick DNA (20 qPCR-positive samples) was analysed with 16S next-generation sequencing (NGS).
resultsMost ticks were Ixodes ricinus (289, 84.5%), followed by Ixodes persulcatus (51, 14.9%). One hybrid tick (I. ricinus/I. persulcatus, 0.3%) and one Rhipicephalus sanguineus tick (0.3%) were identified. We found one or more of the analysed pathogens in 17% (59/342) of the ticks. The most prevalent pathogen was B. burgdorferi s.l. (36, 10.5%), followed by Anaplasma phagocytophilum (12, 3.5%), B. miyamotoi (5, 1.5%), Babesia venatorum (4, 1.2%), and TBEV (1, 0.3%). Candidatus Neoehrlichia mikurensis DNA was amplified from three (0.9%) ticks. Ehrlichia canis was not detected. In the 16S NGS, six samples produced enough reads for the analysis. In these six samples, we confirmed all the positive qPCR findings of Borrelia spp. and Ca. N. mikurensis.
conclusionsThe high prevalence of pathogenic microorganisms in the ticks of this study emphasizes the importance of awareness of ticks and tick-borne diseases and prevention. Furthermore, the results show that veterinary surveillance can facilitate early detection of tick-borne pathogens and new tick species and draw attention to possible co-infections that should be considered both in symptomatic humans and animals after tick bites.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.