| Literature DB >> 26414283 |
Jonas Moraes-Filho1, Felipe S Krawczak1, Francisco B Costa1, João Fábio Soares2, Marcelo B Labruna1.
Abstract
This study compared the vector competence of four populations of Rhipicephalus sanguineus group ticks for the bacterium Ehrlichia canis, the agent of canine monocytic ehrlichiosis (CME). Ticks (larvae and nymphs) from the four populations-one from São Paulo state, southeastern Brazil (BSP), one from Rio Grande do Sul state, southern Brazil (BRS), one from Argentina (ARG), and one from Uruguay (URU)-were exposed to E. canis infection by feeding on dogs that were experimentally infected with E. canis. Engorged ticks (larvae and nymphs) were allowed to molt to nymphs and adults, respectively, which were tested by molecular analysis (E. canis-specific PCR assay) and used to infest naïve dogs. Through infestation of adult ticks on naïve dogs, after nymphal acquisition feeding on E. canis-infected dogs, only the BSP population was shown to be competent vectors of E. canis, i.e., only the dogs infested with BSP adult ticks developed clinical illness, seroconverted to E. canis, and yielded E. canis DNA by PCR. This result, demonstrated by two independent replications, is congruent with epidemiological data, since BSP ticks were derived from São Paulo state, Brazil, where CME is highly endemic. On the other hand, BRS, ARG, and URU ticks were derived from a geographical region (South America southern cone) where CME has never been properly documented. Molecular analysis of unfed adults at 30 days post molting support these transmission results, since none of the BRS, ARG, and URU ticks were PCR positive, whereas 1% of the BSP nymphs and 31.8% of the BSP adults contained E. canis DNA. We conclude that the absence or scarcity of cases of CME due to E. canis in the South America southern cone is a result of vector incompetence of the R. sanguineus group ticks that prevail on dogs in this part of South America.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26414283 PMCID: PMC4587558 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0139386
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Fig 1Diagram illustrating experimental procedures of tick transmission trial I in the present study.
Fig 2Diagram illustrating experimental procedures of tick transmission trial II in the present study.
Fig 3Diagram illustrating experimental procedures of tick transmission trial III in the present study.
Real-time PCR results of unfed ticks (nymphs or adults) after molting from ticks (engorged larvae or nymphs, respectively) that had fed on Ehrlichia canis-infected dogs (Dogs 1, 8 or 15) or on uninfected control dogs (Dogs 2, 9 or 16).
| Tick transmission trial | Tick acquisition feeding | Tick population | Real-time PCR results for | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tick stage | Days post molting | No. positive (%) | |||
| I | Fed as larvae on the | BSP | Nymph | 30 | 1 (1.0) |
| BRS | 30 | 0 (0) | |||
| ARG | 30 | 0 (0) | |||
| URU | 30 | 0 (0) | |||
| I | Fed as larvae on the uninfected dog 2 | BSP | Nymph | 30 | 0 (0) |
| BRS | 30 | 0 (0) | |||
| ARG | 30 | 0 (0) | |||
| URU | 30 | 0 (0) | |||
| II | Fed as nymphs on the | BSP | Adult | 30 | 7 (7) |
| BRS | 30 | 0 (0) | |||
| ARG | 30 | 0 (0) | |||
| URU | 30 | 0 (0) | |||
| II | Fed as nymphs on the uninfected dog 9 | BSP | Adult | 30 | 0 (0) |
| BRS | 30 | 0 (0) | |||
| ARG | 30 | 0 (0) | |||
| URU | 30 | 0 (0) | |||
| III | Fed as nymphs on the | BSP | Adult | 7 | 46 (46.0) |
| BRS | 7 | 16 (16.0) | |||
| ARG | 7 | 0 (0) | |||
| URU | 7 | 0 (0) | |||
| BSP | 30 | 27 (31.8) | |||
| BRS | 30 | 0 (0) | |||
| BRS | 90 | 0 (0) | |||
| III | Fed as nymphs on the uninfected dog 16 | BSP | Adult | 7 | 0 (0) |
| BRS | 7 | 0 (0) | |||
| ARG | 7 | 0 (0) | |||
| URU | 7 | 0 (0) | |||
*In all cases, 100 molted ticks were tested, except for BSP adults 30 days post molting in trial III, from which only 85 adult ticks were available for testing.
Results of the vector competence experiments of four populations of Rhipicephalus sanguineus sensu lato (BSP, BRS, ARG, URU) for Ehrlichia canis transmission to susceptible dogs.
| Dog No. | Tick infestation data | Canine data during 63 days after tick infestation | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tick population | Tick stage | No. ticks infested per tick feeding cotton sleeve | No. ticks that engorged | PCR for | Seroconvertion to | Clinical data | |||||
| Fever | Low hemoglobin concentration | Low package cell volume | Low erythrocyte count | Low platelet counts | |||||||
| 3 | BSP | Nymph | 300 | 269 | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| 4 | BRS | 185 | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | ||
| 5 | ARG | 219 | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | ||
| 6 | URU | 250 | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | ||
| 10 | BSP | Adult | 100 | 68 | + | + | - | + | + | + | + |
| 11 | BRS | 58 | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | ||
| 12 | ARG | 72 | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | ||
| 13 | URU | 59 | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | ||
| 17 | BSP | Adult | 100 | 71 | + | + | - | + | + | + | + |
| 18 | BRS | 75 | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | ||
| 19 | ARG | 61 | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | ||
| 20 | URU | 74 | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | ||
Nymphs were exposed to E. canis infection by feeding as larvae on the E. canis-infected Dog 1 (trial I).
Adult ticks were exposed to E. canis infection by feeding as nymphs on the E. canis-infected Dog 8 (trial II).
Adult ticks were exposed to E. canis infection by feeding as nymphs on the E. canis-infected Dog 15 (trial III).
Refer to naturally detached engorged females, plus male ticks that fed on the dogs until the natural detachment of the last engorged female.
-: negative or absent
+: positive or present
Fig 4Deduced distribution area of the ‘tropical species’ and the ‘temperate species’ of Rhipicephalus sanguineus group in Latin America. Ticks used in the present study were BSP (from São Paulo state, Brazil), BRS (from Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil), ARG (from Argentina), and URU (from Uruguay). The map is reprinted from http://www.usgs.gov/, and edited with Microsoft PowerPoint and Paint.