ArticleParasites & vectors2026
Ticks and associated pathogens recovered from dogs and cats during a longitudinal collection study at veterinary practices in France.
Article in Parasites & vectors, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDocumented changes in spatial and seasonal tick distribution highlight the importance of continuous surveillance. This paper documents results of a year-round sampling campaign in France, including identification of ticks and associated pathogens recovered from dogs and cats, as part of the European project "Protect Our Future Too."
methodsTicks were collected from dogs and cats presented to 35 veterinary practices from 27 administrative French departments between April 2021 and July 2022. DNA extracted from each tick sample was amplified by polymerase chain reaction (PCR) for simultaneous detection of 18 types of protozoan or bacterial microorganisms.
resultsAmong 777 collected ticks, 6 species were morphologically identified in descending prevalence order as: Ixodes ricinus (58.3%), Dermacentor reticulatus (24.2%, mainly on dogs), I. hexagonus (7.2%, mainly on cats), Rhipicephalus sanguineus sensu lato (3.6%, mainly on dogs), I. canisuga (one tick collected from a cat), and Haemaphysalis punctata (one tick from a dog). Geographical distribution varied by tick species: I. ricinus and D. reticulatus were more frequent in northeast France, whereas R. sanguineus (s.l.) was predominant in southeast France. Ticks were collected throughout the study period but peaked in spring and early summer for I. ricinus and late winter and spring for D. reticulatus. The ticks R. sanguineus (s.l.) were collected only during summer. In total, 71.0% of the ticks were positive for DNA of at least one microorganism. Anaplasma bacteria were most frequent (up to 75.3% in I. ricinus) followed by Rickettsia (up to 49.5% in D. reticulatus). Piroplasm DNA (Babesia/Theileria/Cytauxzoon spp.) was found in 6.4% of I. ricinus, 5.3% of D. reticulatus, and 3.6% of both I. hexagonus and R. sanguineus (s.l). Borrelia burgdorferi sensu lato DNA was detected in 10.2% of I. ricinus. Mycoplasma haemominutum/haematoparvum DNA was detected in 21.8% of D. reticulatus, whereas M. turicensis DNA was detected in 14.3% of I. hexagonus.
conclusionsResults of this study show that ticks are a year-round risk for dogs and cats in France, and tick-borne pathogens are present as mono- or coinfections at high frequencies. Tick control recommendations for veterinarians and dog and cat owners should incorporate these risks.
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.