ArticleVeterinary research communications2024
Molecular detection of some zoonotic tick-borne pathogens in ticks collected from camels (Camelus dromedarius) as hosts and wild rodents as potential reservoirs.
Article in Veterinary research communications, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- 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
- The impact of parasitic diseases on dromedary camel (Frontiers in veterinary science · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Ticks and tick-borne pathogens pose a great threat to human and animal health. The present study aimed to determine the prevalence of ticks that infest camels and investigate the presence of tick-borne pathogens in the blood of camels, associated ticks, and surrounding rodents as reservoirs. From 100 inspected camels, from different localities in the Giza governorate, 1000 ixodid ticks were collected; these ticks belonged to three genera: Hyalomma, Amblyomma, and Rhipicephalus. The genus Hyalomma was represented by four species, Hyalomma dromedarii was the most prevalent species (55.4%), followed by Hyalomma excavatum (22%), Hyalomma impeltatum (11.6%) and Hyalomma rufipes (2.8%). The genus Amblyomma was represented by two species, Amblyomma gemma (2.8%) and Amblyomma marmoreum (2.7%), while the genus Rhipicephalus was represented by only one species, Rhipicephalus pulchellus (2.7%). Ticks, camel blood, and rodents (total number 100 brown rats) are screened for tick-borne pathogens (Borrelia burgdorferi, Borrelia miyamotoi, Babesia sp., and Coxiella burnetii) using PCR. Camel blood was found to be infected with Borrelia burgdorferi (66.6%), Borrelia miyamotoi (55%), and Babesia sp. (11.6%). Coxiella burnetii DNA was detected in all the collected ticks but was not detected in the blood of camels or rodents. Borrelia miyamotoi was detected in 12.5% of H. impeltatum, 55% of Camels, and 6% of the rodents, which may indicate a proposed risk of dispersal of B. miyamotoi, the agent of tick-borne relapsing fever.
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.