Mark P Nelder1, Curtis B Russell2, Antonia Dibernardo3, Katie M Clow4, Steven Johnson5, Kirby Cronin6,7, Samir N Patel8,9, L Robbin Lindsay3. 1. Enteric, Zoonotic and Vector-Borne Diseases, Health Protection, Operations and Response, Public Health Ontario, Toronto, ON, Canada. mark.nelder@oahpp.ca. 2. Enteric, Zoonotic and Vector-Borne Diseases, Health Protection, Operations and Response, Public Health Ontario, Toronto, ON, Canada. 3. Field Studies, Zoonotic Diseases and Special Pathogens, National Microbiology Laboratory, Public Health Agency of Canada, Winnipeg, MB, Canada. 4. Ontario Veterinary College, University of Guelph, Guelph, ON, Canada. 5. Informatics, Knowledge Services, Public Health Ontario, Toronto, ON, Canada. 6. Laboratory Surveillance and Data Management, Public Health Ontario, Toronto, ON, Canada. 7. National Microbiology Laboratory, Public Health Agency of Canada, Winnipeg, MB, Canada. 8. Bacteriology, Public Health Ontario, Toronto, ON, Canada. 9. Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathobiology, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The universal nature of the human-companion animal relationship and their shared ticks and tick-borne pathogens offers an opportunity for improving public and veterinary health surveillance. With this in mind, we describe the spatiotemporal trends for blacklegged tick (Ixodes scapularis) submissions from humans and companion animals in Ontario, along with pathogen prevalence. METHODS: We tested tick samples submitted through passive surveillance (2011-2017) from humans and companion animals for Borrelia burgdorferi, Borrelia miyamotoi, Anaplasma phagocytophilum and Babesia microti. We describe pathogen prevalence in ticks from humans and from companion animals and constructed univariable Poisson and negative binomial regression models to explore the spatiotemporal relationship between the rates of tick submissions by host type. RESULTS: During the study, there were 17,230 blacklegged tick samples submitted from humans and 4375 from companion animals. Tick submission rates from companion animals were higher than expected in several public health units (PHUs) lacking established tick populations, potentially indicating newly emerging populations. Pathogen prevalence in ticks was higher in PHUs where established blacklegged tick populations exist. Borrelia burgdorferi prevalence was higher in ticks collected from humans (maximum likelihood estimate, MLE = 17.5%; 95% confidence interval, CI 16.97-18.09%) than from companion animals (9.9%, 95% CI 9.15-10.78%). There was no difference in pathogen prevalence in ticks by host type for the remaining pathogens, which were found in less than 1% of tested ticks. The most common co-infection B. burgdorferi + B. miyamotoi occurred in 0.11% of blacklegged ticks from humans and animals combined. Borrelia burgdorferi prevalence was higher in unengorged (21.9%, 95% CI 21.12-22.65%) than engorged ticks (10.0%, 95% CI 9.45-10.56%). There were no consistent and significant spatiotemporal relationships detected via regression models between the annual rates of submission of each host type. CONCLUSIONS: While B. burgdorferi has been present in blacklegged ticks in Ontario for several decades, other tick-borne pathogens are also present at low prevalence. Blacklegged tick and pathogen surveillance data can be used to monitor risk in human and companion animal populations, and efforts are under consideration to unite surveillance efforts for the different target populations.
BACKGROUND: The universal nature of the human-companion animal relationship and their shared ticks and tick-borne pathogens offers an opportunity for improving public and veterinary health surveillance. With this in mind, we describe the spatiotemporal trends for blacklegged tick (Ixodes scapularis) submissions from humans and companion animals in Ontario, along with pathogen prevalence. METHODS: We tested tick samples submitted through passive surveillance (2011-2017) from humans and companion animals for Borrelia burgdorferi, Borrelia miyamotoi, Anaplasma phagocytophilum and Babesia microti. We describe pathogen prevalence in ticks from humans and from companion animals and constructed univariable Poisson and negative binomial regression models to explore the spatiotemporal relationship between the rates of tick submissions by host type. RESULTS: During the study, there were 17,230 blacklegged tick samples submitted from humans and 4375 from companion animals. Tick submission rates from companion animals were higher than expected in several public health units (PHUs) lacking established tick populations, potentially indicating newly emerging populations. Pathogen prevalence in ticks was higher in PHUs where established blacklegged tick populations exist. Borrelia burgdorferi prevalence was higher in ticks collected from humans (maximum likelihood estimate, MLE = 17.5%; 95% confidence interval, CI 16.97-18.09%) than from companion animals (9.9%, 95% CI 9.15-10.78%). There was no difference in pathogen prevalence in ticks by host type for the remaining pathogens, which were found in less than 1% of tested ticks. The most common co-infectionB. burgdorferi + B. miyamotoi occurred in 0.11% of blacklegged ticks from humans and animals combined. Borrelia burgdorferi prevalence was higher in unengorged (21.9%, 95% CI 21.12-22.65%) than engorged ticks (10.0%, 95% CI 9.45-10.56%). There were no consistent and significant spatiotemporal relationships detected via regression models between the annual rates of submission of each host type. CONCLUSIONS: While B. burgdorferi has been present in blacklegged ticks in Ontario for several decades, other tick-borne pathogens are also present at low prevalence. Blacklegged tick and pathogen surveillance data can be used to monitor risk in human and companion animal populations, and efforts are under consideration to unite surveillance efforts for the different target populations.
Entities:
Keywords:
Anaplasma; Babesia; Borrelia; One Health; Surveillance; Veterinary health; Zoonotic
Authors: Christina A Nelson; Shubhayu Saha; Kiersten J Kugeler; Mark J Delorey; Manjunath B Shankar; Alison F Hinckley; Paul S Mead Journal: Emerg Infect Dis Date: 2015-09 Impact factor: 6.883
Authors: Mark P Nelder; Curtis B Russell; Nina Jain Sheehan; Beate Sander; Stephen Moore; Ye Li; Steven Johnson; Samir N Patel; Doug Sider Journal: Parasit Vectors Date: 2016-05-05 Impact factor: 3.876
Authors: Meryl P Littman; Bernhard Gerber; Richard E Goldstein; Mary Anna Labato; Michael R Lappin; George E Moore Journal: J Vet Intern Med Date: 2018-03-22 Impact factor: 3.333
Authors: N H Ogden; C Bouchard; J Badcock; M A Drebot; S P Elias; T F Hatchette; J K Koffi; P A Leighton; L R Lindsay; C B Lubelczyk; A S Peregrine; R P Smith; D Webster Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2019-06-28 Impact factor: 3.295
Authors: Michelle Evason; Jason W Stull; David L Pearl; Andrew S Peregrine; Claire Jardine; Jesse S Buch; Zachary Lailer; Tom O'Connor; Ramaswamy Chandrashekar; J Scott Weese Journal: Parasit Vectors Date: 2019-01-28 Impact factor: 3.876
Authors: Kiersten J Kugeler; Amy M Schwartz; Mark J Delorey; Paul S Mead; Alison F Hinckley Journal: Emerg Infect Dis Date: 2021-02 Impact factor: 6.883
Authors: M P Nelder; S Wijayasri; C B Russell; K O Johnson; A Marchand-Austin; K Cronin; S Johnson; T Badiani; S N Patel; D Sider Journal: Can Commun Dis Rep Date: 2018-10-04
Authors: Mark P Nelder; Curtis Russell; L Robbin Lindsay; Badal Dhar; Samir N Patel; Steven Johnson; Stephen Moore; Erik Kristjanson; Ye Li; Filip Ralevski Journal: PLoS One Date: 2014-08-29 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: S Gasmi; N H Ogden; L R Lindsay; S Burns; S Fleming; J Badcock; S Hanan; C Gaulin; M A Leblanc; C Russell; M Nelder; L Hobbs; S Graham-Derham; L Lachance; A N Scott; E Galanis; J K Koffi Journal: Can Commun Dis Rep Date: 2017-10-05