ArticleBMC veterinary research2024
Molecular detection of Anaplasma bovis, Candidatus Anaplasma boleense and Rickettsia spp. in ticks infesting small ruminants.
Article in BMC veterinary research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Genetic diversity and co-circulation of tick-borne pathogens in Haemaphysalis spp. from Pakistan.Parasitology research · 2026Article
- Anaplasmataceae circulation in wild mammals and ticks from Goiás state, midwestern Brazil.Revista brasileira de parasitologia veterinaria = Brazilian journal of veterinary parasitology : Orgao Oficial do Colegio Brasileiro de Parasitologia Veterinaria · 2026Article
- Haplotype network analyses, genetic diversity, and population structure of Hyalomma anatolicum based on cytochrome c oxidase subunit I (COI) and the large subunit ribosomal RNA (16S rRNA).Parasitology research · 2025Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Anaplasma spp. and Rickettsia spp. are intracellular vector-borne pathogens and harbored by a wide range of ticks and vertebrate hosts. Aim of this study was to molecularly characterize Anaplasma spp. and Rickettsia spp. in different ticks collected from livestock hosts in nine districts of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KP), Pakistan. In total, 862 ticks were collected from cattle, goats and sheep. Highest tick's infestation was observed on cattle 56.14% (32/57), followed by goats 45.45% (40/88), and sheep 42.05% (45/107). Rhipicephalus microplus (305/862, 35.38%) was predominant species, followed by Haemaphysalis sulcata (243/862, 28.19%), Hyalomma anatolicum (133/862, 15.42%), Haemaphysalis bispinosa (120/862, 13.92%), and Hyalomma kumari (61/862, 7.07%). A subset of 135 ticks were screened for Anaplasma spp. and Rickettsia spp. based on the amplification of partial 16 S rDNA and outer-membrane protein A (ompA) fragments, respectively. In total, 16 ticks (11.85%) were positive for Anaplasma spp. and Rickettsia spp. Obtained 16 S rDNA sequences for Anaplasma spp. detected in Ha. bispinosa and Ha. sulcata showed 99.98% identity with Anaplasma bovis, while other detected in Rh. microplus showed 99.84% identity with Candidatus Anaplasma boleense. Similarly, detected ompA sequence in Ha. sulcata showed 100% identity with Rickettsia sp. and 97.93% with Rickettsia slovaca, and another sequence detected in Rh. microplus showed 100% identity with Candidatus Rickettsia shennongii. In phylogenetic trees, these sequences clustered with corresponding species from Pakistan, China, Turkey, South Korea, South Africa, and Herzegovina. This is the first study reporting detection of A. bovis in Ha. bispinosa and Ha. sulcata, Ca. A. boleense in Rh. microplus collected from goats, and R. slovaca-like in Ha. sulcata. Our results enforce the need for regular surveillance of Rickettsiales in hard ticks infesting livestock in the region.
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.