| Literature DB >> 25533148 |
Sangmi Lee1,2, Madhavi L Kakumanu3, Loganathan Ponnusamy4, Meagan Vaughn5, Sheana Funkhouser6, Haley Thornton7, Steven R Meshnick8, Charles S Apperson9.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Tick-transmitted rickettsial diseases, such as ehrlichiosis and spotted fever rickettsiosis, are significant sources of morbidity and mortality in the southern United States. Because of their exposure in tick-infested woodlands, outdoor workers experience an increased risk of infection with tick-borne pathogens. As part of a double blind randomized-controlled field trial of the effectiveness of permethrin-treated clothing in preventing tick bites, we identified tick species removed from the skin of outdoor workers in North Carolina and tested the ticks for Rickettsiales pathogens.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2014 PMID: 25533148 PMCID: PMC4301950 DOI: 10.1186/s13071-014-0607-2
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Parasit Vectors ISSN: 1756-3305 Impact factor: 3.876
Figure 1Prevalence of tick species collected from subjects in 2011 ( = 423) and 2012 ( = 451).
Infection rates of bacteria detected in nested PCR assays and identified by sequencing for tick species
|
| ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
|
| 2011 | 257 (70.6) | 4 (57.1) | 2 (20.0) | 4 (100.0) | 267 (69.4) |
| 2012 | 202 (54.6) | - | 8 (29.6) | 2 (50.0) | 212 (52.7) | |
| Total | 459 (62.5) | 4 (50.0) | 10 (27.0) | 6 (75.0) | 479 (60.9) | |
|
| 2011 | 15 (4.1) | - | - | - | 15 (3.9) |
| 2012 | 37 (10.0) | - | 3 (11.1) | - | 40 (10.0) | |
| Total | 52 (7.1) | - | 3 (8.1) | - | 55 (7.0) | |
|
| 2011 | 5 (1.4) | 1 (14.3) | - | - | 6 (1.6) |
| 2012 | 8 (2.2) | - | - | - | 8 (2.0) | |
| Total | 13 (1.8) | 1 (12.5) | - | - | 14 (1.8) | |
|
| 2011 | - | - | - | - | - |
| 2012 | 2 (0.5) | - | - | - | 2 (0.5) | |
| Total | 2 (0.3) | - | - | - | 2 (0.3) | |
Numbers in the brackets represent the number of DNA samples tested for Rickettsiales bacteria. DNA samples were extracted from individual ticks and pools of A. americanum larvae. In 2011, 48 larvae ticks were pooled (9 and 1 pools containing five and three larvae, respectively). In 2012, 63 ticks were pooled (11, 2 and 1 pools containing five, three and two larvae, respectively). The number of the DNA extractions was used as a denominator to calculate infection rates shown in the table.
The minus symbol indicates that no positive specimens were found among the submitted specimens for this tick species.
Figure 2PCR-RLB hybridization results for 23S-5S IGS fragments amplified from genomic DNA extracted from controls and . ticks. Next to the identification code of tick samples, Rickettsia species identifications as determined by the RLB hybridization patterns are shown in parentheses. Ra = R. amblyommii and Rm = R. montanensis. An example of hybridization patterns for some biotin-labeled A. americanum 23S-5S DNAs are presented in the lower half the figure. All of the ticks exhibited strong hybridization to the Rickettsia genus level (GP-RICK) and SFG (GP-SFG) probes, indicating that they were infected with a spotted fever group Rickettsia species. All but one 23S-5S DNA samples hybridized with probe P-AMB, indicating that these ticks were infected with R. amblyommii. Tick DNA sample 2FT365 hybridized with probe P-MAS/MON, but failed to hybridize to P-MAS/RHIPI, indicating that the tick was infected with R. montanensis.
Results of PCR-RLB hybridization assays or cloning and sequencing of 23S-5S IGS amplicons for identification of species in 17-kDa-positive ticks
|
|
| |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 2011 | 228 (89.8) | 2 (28.6) | 1 (50.0) | 1 (10.0) | 232 (85.0) |
| 2012 | 184 (92.5) | - | - | - | 184 (90.2) | |
| Total | 412 (90.9) | 2 (28.6) | 1 (20.0) | 1 (8.3) | 416 (87.2) | |
|
| 2011 | 1 (0.4) | 1 (14.3) | - | - | 2 (0.7) |
| 2012 | 3 (1.5) | - | 1 (33.3) | - | 4 (1.9) | |
| Total | 4 (0.9) | 1 (14.3) | 1 (20.0) | - | 6 (1.2) | |
|
| 2011 | 1 (0.4) | - | - | - | 1 (0.4) |
| 2012 | - | - | - | - | - | |
| Total | 1 (0.2) | - | - | - | 1 (0.2) | |
|
| 2011 | - | 1 (14.3) | - | 1 (10.0) | 2 (0.7) |
| 2012 | - | - | 1 (33.3) | - | 1 (0.5) | |
| Total | - | 1 (14.3) | 1 (20.0) | 1 (8.3) | 3 (0.6) | |
|
| 2011 | 5 (2.0) | 2 (28.6) | - | 3 (30.0) | 10 (3.7) |
| 2012 | 4 (2.0) | - | - | - | 4 (2.0) | |
| Total | 9 (2.0) | 2 (28.6) | - | 3 (25.0) | 14 (2.9) | |
|
| 2011 | - | - | - | - | - |
| 2012 | 1 (0.5) | - | - | - | 1 (0.5) | |
| Total | 1 (0.2) | - | - | - | 1 (0.2) | |
|
| 2011 | 7 (2.8) | - | - | - | 7 (2.6) |
| 2012 | 3 (1.5) | - | 1 (33.3) | - | 4 (2.0) | |
| Total | 10 (2.2) | - | 1 (20.0) | - | 11 (2.3) | |
|
| 2011 | - | - | - | - | - |
| 2012 | 2 (1.0) | - | - | - | 2 (1.0) | |
| Total | 2 (0.4) | - | - | - | 2 (0.4) | |
|
| 2011 | 2 (0.8) | - | - | 1 (10.0) | 3 (1.1) |
| 2012 | - | - | - | 2 (100) | 2 (1.0) | |
| Total | 2 (0.4) | - | - | 3 (27.3) | 5 (1.0) | |
|
| 2011 | 1 (0.4) | - | - | - | 1 (0.4) |
| 2012 | - | - | - | - | - | |
| Total | 1 (0.2) | - | - | - | 1 (0.2) | |
| Unknown | 2011 | 3 (1.2) | 1 (14.3) | - | 4 (40.0) | 8 (3.0) |
| 2012 | 1 (0.5) | - | - | - | 1 (0.5) | |
| Total | 4 (0.9) | 1 (14.3) | - | 4 (33.3) | 9 (1.9) | |
| Unknown SFG | 2011 | 6 (2.4) | - | 1 (50.0) | - | 7 (2.6) |
| 2012 | 1 (0.5) | - | - | - | 1 (0.5) | |
| Total | 7 (1.5) | - | 1 (20.0) | - | 8 (1.7) | |
| Total infections | 2011 | 254 | 7 | 2 | 10 | 273 |
| 2012 | 199 | 0 | 3 | 2 | 204 | |
| Total | 453 | 7 | 5 | 12 | 477g | |
Percentage in parenthesis was calculated using the total number of infections detected/identified for Rickettsia in each tick species as the denominator.
Numbers in the brackets represent the total number of 17-kDA–positive samples that were successfully amplified and hybridized in 23S-5S PCR-RLB assay from both years of the study for each tick species.
Rickettsia species identified by reverse line blot hybridization. R. massiliae was identified based on hybridization to the P-MAS/MON and P-MAS/RHIPI probes but not to the P-RHIPI probe.
Rickettsia species identified by cloning and sequencing 23S-5S IGS amplicons.
The minus symbol indicates that no positive specimens were found among the tested specimens for this tick species.
fOf 461 23S-5S positive samples,20 samples were not identified by RLB hybridization or through cloning and sequencing. These samples were not included in the table.
gTotal number of infections (n = 477) exceeds the total number of DNA samples (n = 441) because some ticks were infected with more than one Rickettsia species.
Includes Rickettsia sp. E shown in the phylogenetic tree constructed of 23S-5S IGS gene sequences (Figure 3).
Figure 3Neighbor-joining tree showing phylogenetic relationship of partial 23S-5S IGS sequences of known and species identified after cloning of tick genomic DNA samples that were initially classified as unknown and/or were identified as co-infected samples in RLB hybridization assays. Sequence homologies <99% are indicated in parentheses after the sequence identity. The scale bar indicates an estimated change of 5% 23S-5S IGS. Sequences beginning with “FT” or “2FT” were generated in this study. Bootstrap values below 50% are not shown in the tree branch. Accessions numbers for study samples are given in parentheses. *Unpublished GenBank sequences.