Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41808045›Full record

ArticleBMC microbiology2026

Comparative tissue-specific microbiome analyses identify keystone endosymbionts shaping pathogen interactions in dromedary camel ticks.

Rua Khogali, Armanda Bastos, Fathiya M Khamis, Dennis Getange, James Kabii, Epaphrus Yuko, Daniel Masiga, Jandouwe Villinger

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMC microbiology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Rua KhogaliInternational Centre of Insect Physiology and Ecology (icipe), P.O. Box 30772-00100, Nairobi, Kenya. rua.khogali@gmail.com.
Armanda BastosDepartment of Zoology and Entomology, University of Pretoria, Private Bag 20, Pretoria, 0028, South Africa.
Fathiya M KhamisInternational Centre of Insect Physiology and Ecology (icipe), P.O. Box 30772-00100, Nairobi, Kenya.
Dennis GetangeInternational Centre of Insect Physiology and Ecology (icipe), P.O. Box 30772-00100, Nairobi, Kenya.
James KabiiInternational Centre of Insect Physiology and Ecology (icipe), P.O. Box 30772-00100, Nairobi, Kenya.
Epaphrus YukoInternational Centre of Insect Physiology and Ecology (icipe), P.O. Box 30772-00100, Nairobi, Kenya.
Daniel MasigaInternational Centre of Insect Physiology and Ecology (icipe), P.O. Box 30772-00100, Nairobi, Kenya.
Jandouwe VillingerInternational Centre of Insect Physiology and Ecology (icipe), P.O. Box 30772-00100, Nairobi, Kenya. jandouwe@icipe.org.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTicks are blood-feeding arthropods that carry diverse pathogenic and nonpathogenic microorganisms, yet their dynamics within tick tissues remain poorly understood. We compared the microbial communities in the haemolymph, saliva, ovaries, midgut, and salivary glands of individual Amblyomma gemma and Hyalomma rufipes sampled from dromedary camel using V1-V2 16S rRNA gene metabarcoding.

resultsThe haemolymph exhibited the highest bacterial diversity, followed by the saliva and ovaries, while the midgut and salivary glands had lower diversities. Keystone taxa exhibited varied connectivity across different tissues and played a crucial role in structuring microbial communities in both tick species. We exclusively detected Rickettsia africae in Am. gemma and Rickettsia aeschlimannii in Hy. rufipes. Both Rickettsia species showed negative correlations with dominant endosymbionts and environmental bacteria across multiple tissues. Coxiella endosymbionts were detected solely in Am. gemma and were most abundant in the salivary glands, while Francisella endosymbionts were dominant in Hy. rufipes’ salivary glands. Francisella endosymbionts were less abundant when R. aeschlimannii was high. In Am. gemma’s haemolymph and saliva, Wolbachia endosymbionts were prevalent, where they were inversely associated with R. africae at the individual tick level. In Hy. rufipes, Wolbachia endosymbionts were present in the ovaries, but not in the midgut. Candidatus Midichloria mitochondrii was found in all tissues of Hy. rufipes and predominantly in saliva, but was only detected in the ovaries, midgut, and salivary glands of Am. gemma. Positive interactions were found between Ca. Midichloria mitochondrii and R. aeschlimannii in Hy. rufipes’ saliva and ovaries, and Ca. Midichloria mitochondrii and Francisella endosymbionts in Am. gemma’s ovaries. Rickettsiella spp. were found in the saliva and haemolymph but not the midgut in both tick species. Environmental bacteria, such as Pseudomonas, Acinetobacter, Staphylococcus, and Corynebacterium, whilst abundant in the haemolymph and saliva were scarce in other tissues.

conclusionsTick tissue significantly influences bacterial composition, with tissue-specific interactions between pathogens and endosymbionts suggesting bacterial functional specialization. The complex interactions observed between key endosymbionts and Rickettsia pathogens across tissues, including negative correlations with Coxiella, Francisella, and Wolbachia endosymbionts, and positive correlations between Ca. Midichloria mitochondrii and R. aeschlimannii, require further investigation. Identified keystone taxa may serve as targets for anti-microbiota vaccines.

Indexed as

BacteriaCamelusHost-Pathogen InteractionsIxodidaeMicrobiotaSymbiosisTicksAnimalsCoxiellaDNA, BacterialFemaleHemolymphOvaryPhylogenyRickettsiaRNA, Ribosomal, 16SDNA, BacterialRNA, Ribosomal, 16SAmblyomma gemmaCo-occurrence networkEndosymbiontsHyalomma rufipesKeystone taxaRickettsiaTick tissues

Identifiers

PMID41808045
PMCPMC13088656

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.