ArticleParasites & vectors2025
Contact between soft tick vectors of African swine fever virus and invasive wild pigs in the southeastern USA.
Article in Parasites & vectors, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Range Modeling and Surveillance ofEcology and evolution · 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAfrican swine fever virus is a transboundary pathogen of high economic impact to the global pork industry. Florida has multiple factors that contribute to the high risk of introduction of African swine fever virus (ASFV) including high levels of commerce and human migration between Florida and Caribbean nations with ASFV, established backyard swine production, abundant populations of invasive wild pigs (Sus scrofa), and the presence of a soft tick species (Ornithodoros turicata americanus) that has been found to be a competent vector of ASFV in laboratory experiments. To better assess the hazard of ASFV vector-borne transmission in Florida, we documented contact between invasive wild pigs and O. t. americanus throughout Florida.
methodsWe surveyed gopher tortoise (Gopherus polyphemus) burrows throughout Florida and collected O. t. americanus from infested burrows. To identify definitive contact between invasive wild pigs and soft ticks, we used established real time polymerase chain reaction primers and a probe to detect the deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) of invasive wild pigs in the bloodmeals of O. t. americanus.. To detect potential wild pig-soft tick contact, we surveyed for evidence of pig activity within 5 m of an infested burrow entrance.
resultsAcross 61 sites, we found that 203 of 591 burrows (34%) were infested with the soft tick, O. t. americanus. Ten burrows across 57 sites (18%) had soft ticks with wild pig DNA in their abdomens. In total, 6 of 591 burrows (1%) had evidence of invasive wild pigs near the entrance. Three infested burrows had evidence of wild pigs near the entrance, one of these burrows also had soft ticks that were positive for wild pig DNA. Including both definitive and potential wild pig-soft tick contact, 12 of 61 sites (20%) had evidence of wild pig-soft tick association.
conclusionsIn Florida, contact between invasive wild pigs, a potential reservoir for ASFV, and O. t. americanus, a competent vector, was measurable and occurred throughout the distribution of the vector. Florida is at risk not only for ASFV emergence but establishment of this pathogen in a sylvatic cycle. In addition to managing invasive wild pigs, future ASFV response planning needs to include plans for surveying and managing vector populations should an outbreak occur.
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.