| Literature DB >> 31622384 |
Pierre H Boyer1, Lionel Almeras2,3,4, Olivier Plantard5, Antoine Grillon1, Émilie Talagrand-Reboul1, Karen McCoy6, Benoît Jaulhac1,7, Nathalie Boulanger1,7.
Abstract
Ticks are vectors of infectious diseases of major importance in human and veterinary medicine. For epidemiological studies, accurate identification of ticks is crucial to define their potential role as vectors and to develop control and prevention strategies. Although morphological and molecular methods are widely used to identify ticks, an innovative approach using MALDI-TOF MS technology recently emerged as an alternative tool. Previous works showed that MALDI-TOF MS was highly effective in identifying ticks, but these works mainly tested tick specimens of different genera. To confirm the accuracy of this new tool for tick identification, nine closely related tick species belonging to the Ixodes genus were analysed, specimens of the Dermacentor reticulatus species were also included in the analysis as an outer group. Three of the species used for the present study belonged to the I. ricinus species complex, which are known to transmit Borrelia burgdorferi sensu lato, the causative agent of Lyme borreliosis. A total of 246 tick specimens were submitted to MALDI-TOF MS analysis, and two body parts (half-idiosoma and four legs) were individually investigated. For each body part, intraspecies reproducibility and interspecies specificity of the MS profiles were determined. The profile analysis revealed that the main determinant for spectra clustering was the tick species for both legs and half-idiosoma. For each body part, a reference database of spectra was set up including 2 to 5 specimens per species randomly selected, and genotyped using 16s rDNA and COI genes to confirm their morphological identification. Both created spectral databases were individually blind tested with their respective body part using the remaining specimens, which were correctly identified in 98.5% of the cases. MALDI-TOF MS is a reliable tool for tick identification, including specimens belonging to closely related species and hardly distinguishable using morphology. The 4-legs as well as the half-idiosoma of ticks can now be applied for specimen identification using two different databases. The combined use of these two body parts improves the rate of tick identification and their confidence level.Entities:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31622384 PMCID: PMC6797106 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0223735
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Details of tick collection classified by species.
| Geographical origin | Number of specimens | Tick stages (Adult (sex | Number of specimens engorged | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nantes region, France | 17 | 15 (8M/7F)/ 2 / 0 | 7 | |
| Alsace & Ain, France | 109 | 13 (6M/7F) / 93 / 3 | 14 | |
| Riga, Latvia | 18 | 14 (9M/5F) / 4 / 0 | 0 | |
| Rhode Island, USA | 27 | 27 (10M/17F) / 0 / 0 | 0 | |
| Nantes region, France | 13 | 4 (0M/4F) / 9 / 0 | 0 | |
| Hornøya, Norway | 13 | 8 (4M/4F) / 5 / 0 | 0 | |
| Nantes region, France | 4 | 4 (2M/2F) / 0 / 0 | 0 | |
| Nantes region, France | 28 | 16 (0M/16F) / 12 / 0 | 28 | |
| Nantes region, France | 4 | 2 (0M/2F) / 2 / 0 | 4 | |
| Alsace & Ain, France | 13 | 13 (7M/6F) / 0 / 0 | 0 | |
| 246 | 116 (40M/76F)/127/3 | 53 |
#M (male), F (female).
Fig 1Unrooted maximum–likelihood trees based on the sequences of the 16s rDNA gene (A) and the COI gene (B) of the 44 specimens included in the database and GenBank sequences. *A GenBank sequence attributed to I. ricinus (Accession number JN248424.2) clustered with I. acuminatus on the 16s rDNA gene tree.
Details of the 44 specimens included in the reference database and homology to the reference sequences using BLAST.
| Tick species | Tick stages (Adult (sex | Status | Origin | 16s rDNA interrogation | COI interrogation | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Identified species | % of identity | Accession number | Identified species | % of identity | Accession number | ||||
| 3F/2M/0N | Unengorged | Field | 99–100% | KR870969.1-KX881100.1 | 99–100% | AF132829.1 | |||
| 2F/0M/3N | Unengorged | Lab breed | 100% | JN248424.2 | 98% | JX394202.1 | |||
| 1F/0M/1N | Engorged | Animal | 99–100% | KP769862.1 | 99% | KU170492.1 | |||
| 2F/0M/3N | Engorged | Animal | 99–100% | KJ414454.1-KP769862.1 | 99–100% | MG432679.1-AF081828.1 | |||
| 1F/4M/0N | Unengorged | Field | 99–100% | KP283020.1 | 99–100% | AB073725.1 | |||
| 2F/2M/1N | Unengorged | Field | 99–100% | AB819253.1-KP283020.1 | 99–100% | KF197132.1-KF197134.1 | |||
| 3F/2M/0N | Unengorged | Field | 99–100% | KF146643.1-KR092230.1 | 100% | KC488301.1-KC488313.1 | |||
| 2F/0M/3N | Unengorged | Field | 100% | AB087746.1-D88298.1 | 99–100% | AB087746.1-KX360345.1 | |||
| 0F/5M/0N | Unengorged | Field | 100% | MG210720.1-KY231931.1 | 99% | KU178964.1 | |||
| 1F/1M/0N | Unengorged | Field | 99% | KM455967.1 | 99% | KR902758.1 | |||
#M (male), F (female)
Fig 2Comparison of MALDI–TOF MS spectra from the four legs (in red) and half–idiosoma (in blue). Representative MS spectra of legs and half–idiosoma of ticks, automatically standardized using FastPrep–24, are shown. Respective tick species and body parts are indicated on the right part of each spectrum. a.u., arbitrary units; m/z, mass–to–charge ratio.
Fig 3MSP dendrograms of MALDI–TOF MS spectra from legs (A) and half–idiosoma (B) of ticks. Two to five specimens per tick species were used to construct MSP dendrograms. Dendrograms were created using MALDI Biotyper Compass Explorer v4.1.40 software, and distance units represent the relative similarity of MS spectra. The same color code is used for each tick species. Genders of adult ticks are indicated by symbols and “n” corresponds to the nymphal stage.
Fig 4Assessment of MS spectra specificity according to species and body parts using principal component analysis.
MS spectra from the legs and half–idiosoma of ticks were analyzed by species using the PCA tool. Red dots represent spectra of the four legs and green dots represent spectra of the half–idiosoma. (A) D. reticulatus (B) I. acuminatus (C) I. persulcatus (D) I. ricinus (E) I. scapularis (F) I. uriae (G) I. ventalloi (H) I. vespertilionis.
Performance of the genetic algorithm based on the presence or absence of discriminatory peaks of the Ixodes species.
The analysis was not performed for I. frontalis and I. hexagonus for the half–idiosoma because all specimens were engorged.
| 4 legs | Half-idiosoma | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Species | Recognition | Cross validation | Recognition capability | Cross validation |
| 100% | 100% | |||
| 100% | 89.66% | |||
| 100% | 97.62% | 100% | 100% | |
| 100% | 96.55% | 100% | 96.67% | |
| 100% | 90.7% | 100% | 100% | |
| 100% | 90% | 100% | 100% | |
| 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | |
| 100% | 97.5% | 100% | 100% | |
| 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | |
Results of the blind test procedure against the four legs and half–idiosoma database.
| Species | No. of specimens used for the blind test | LSVs | Top species identified | Differences in LSVs between the first and second top species |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 12 | [1.92–2.30] (11) | 0.81±0.21 | ||
| / | ||||
| 104 | [1.8–2.41] (99) | 0.73±0.15 | ||
| / | ||||
| 13 | [2.02–2.43] (13) | 0.97±0.15 | ||
| 22 | [1.80–2.84] (22) | 0.94±0.29 | ||
| 8 | [2.24–2.65] (8) | 1.15±0.19 | ||
| 8 | [1.98–2.46] (7) | 2.28±0.17 | ||
| / | ||||
| 2 | [2.19–2.45] (2) | 1.33±0.22 | ||
| 23 | [1.87–2.54] (23) | 1.14±0.35 | ||
| 2 | [2.15–2.43] (2) | 1.14±0.29 | ||
| 8 | [2.23–2.51] (8) | 1.42±0.16 | ||
| 5 | [1.81–2.13] (5) | 0.22±0.31 | ||
| 90 | [1.92–2.64] (87) | 0.51±0.19 | ||
| / | ||||
| 13 | [1.81–2.41] (11) | 0.67±0.39 | ||
| / | ||||
| 22 | [1.81–2.29] (15) | 0.43±0.17 | ||
| / | ||||
| 8 | [2.25–2.67] (8) | 0.82±0.41 | ||
| 8 | [1.90–2.21] (6) | 1.28±0.14 | ||
| / | ||||
| 2 | [2.06–2.08] (2) | 1.44±0.21 | ||
| 8 | [2.11–2.53] (8) | 1.53±0.41 | ||
Incorrect identifications are shown in italics
*Range of log score values (LSVs), the number of specimens included in each range of LSVs (above and below 1.8) are indicated into brackets
$Names of the first top hit species identified with relevant LSVs (LSVs >1.8)
§Mean and standard deviation of the differences in log score values between the first and second top species identified by MS
Fig 5Comparison of LSVs from MS spectra of the 10 tick species according to body part.
Specimens, for which the four legs and half–idiosoma were available, are presented (n = 156). The dashed line represents the threshold value for relevant identification (LSVs >1.8). LSV, log score value.