Abstract
Examination of ticks collected from ehrlichiosis positive dogs revealed the occurrence of Rhipicephalus sanguineus. The distribution of ehrlichiosis in dogs is related to the spreading of vectors. Ehrlichia canis is the etiologic agent of canine monocytic ehrlichiosis (CME) and recognized as the most prevalent tick-borne disease affecting dogs and is transmitted by the brown dog tick Rhipicephalus sanguineus with an expanding global distribution. Infection of the vertebrate host occurred when an infected tick ingested a blood meal which in turn contaminated the feeding site with its salivary secretion. Blood transfusions from infected donors can also transmit the organisms. Hence, identification of ticks is necessary to detect the disease affecting dogs.
Keywords
- ticks
- ehrlichiosis
- Monocytosis
- canine
- Rhipicephalus sanguineus
1. Introduction
Ehrlichial diseases have emerged as significant problems for human and animals over the past two decades [1, 2, 3]. In 1935,
Canine ehrlichiosis or tropical pancytopenia is an acute, subacute or chronic tick borne disease caused by
Ticks are the most important ectoparasites in tropical and sub-tropical areas. They are also responsible for severe economic losses either through direct effects of blood sucking or indirectly as vectors of pathogens and toxins. Ticks (Acari: Ixodida) are blood feeding ectoparasites acts as vectors of human diseases next to mosquitoes, but comparatively more important as vectors of animal diseases [13, 14, 15]. Ticks belong to
Phylum: Arthropoda
Class: Arachnida
Subclass: Acari
Order: Parasitiformes
Suborder: Ixodida
Ixodida contains three families: Argasidae (soft ticks having dorsum without chitin), Ixodidae (hard ticks having dorsum totally or partially covered with chitin) and Nuttalliellidae (an ill known monotypic family represented by Nuttalliella namaqua), among which Argasidae and Ixodidae are more important. In turn, according to morphological characters, the family Ixodidae is subdivided into the Prostriata group (genus Ixodes) and Metastriata group (all other genera in Ixodidae).
Traditionally, classifications and phylogenetics inferences for Ixodida were based on morphological, biological and ecological characteristics [16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21]. Tick classification largely based on morphological characteristics, and the value given to differences and similarities among groups of ticks, resulting in non-homogeneous tick arrangements. The molecular taxonomy associated with conventional morphological cataloging will be useful to obtain a more homogeneous and independent criterion for classification, although in the short term this may not be obvious.
1.1 Importance of tick identification in dogs
Many ticks are responsible for causing various diseases. Among which the tick
Ticks able to survive in adverse conditions too as they have heavy protective, chitinous covering and can withstand long periods of starvation and also have wide host range. They can deposit large number of eggs at a time and are relatively free from natural enemies and are tenacious blood suckers.
Medical and veterinary importance of ticks based on their capability of disease transmission. The important diseases transmitted by ticks are Lyme borreliosis (
2. Materials and methods
The dogs presented to Teaching Veterinary Clinical Campus that were diagnosed for ehrlichiosis by nPCR were utilized for the study. Around 3 or 4 ticks collected from different sites of the affected dogs were fixed in a 70% ethanol solution. It was further processed and was identified as per the morphology described by [14] using stereomicroscope and magnifying lens. The stereomicroscope was used at a low magnification of 10× and magnifying lens was used at 40× magnification for identification of specific morphological features.
2.1 Collection of ticks
Unengorged/engorged male and female ticks were collected from dogs either by gently plucking from the body of the dog by hand manipulation or with the help of blunt pointed forceps without damaging their mouth parts. The specimen collected in a plastic container with ventilated cap was labeled appropriately as per host and sites of attachment. Label must contain information about date and place of collection, host, age and site of collection. These samples were transported to the laboratory for further studies.
2.2 Tick identification
These ticks were identified using standard keys [22, 23].
The ticks in the present study were identified as
2.3 Tick control measures
Economic losses can be reduced by adopting tick control measures like chemical acaricides [7]. The major reason to control ticks includes disease transmission, tick paralysis or toxicosis by
3. Results and discussion
Out of 46 dogs found positive for ehrlichiosis, 35 dogs (76.10%) were infested with ticks (Figure 2). The ticks collected from different sites of the dogs suffering from ehrlichiosis were identified as
4. Summary
The present study on ticks collected from 35 dogs affected with
References
- 1.
Moreira SM, Bastos CV, Araujo RB, Santos M, Passos LMF. Retrospective study (1998-2001) on canine ehrlichiosis in Belo Horizonte. Arquivo Brasileiro de Medicina Veterinária e Zootecnia. 2003; 55 :141-147 - 2.
Soneshine DE, Mather TN. Ecological Dynamics of Tick-borne Zoonoses. New York: Oxford University Press; 1994 - 3.
Wardrop KJ, Reine N, Birkenheuer A, Hale A, Hohenhaus A, Crawford C, et al. Canine and feline blood donor screening for infectious disease. Journal of Veterinary Internal Medicine. 2005; 19 :135-142 - 4.
Donatien A, Lestoquard F. Existence en Algérie d’une Rickettsia du chien. Le Bulletin de la Société de Pathologie Exotique. 1935; 28 :418-419 - 5.
Hoogstraal H, Aeschlimann A. Tick-host specificity. Bulletin de la Société Entomologique Suisse. 1982; 55 :5-32 - 6.
Regendanz P, Muniz J. O Rhipicephalus sanguineus como transmissor da piroplasmose canina no Brasil. Memórias do Instituto Oswaldo Cruz. 1936;31 :81-84 - 7.
Drummond RO. Tick-borne livestock diseases and their vectors. Chemical control of ticks. World Animal Review (FAO). 1983; 36 :28-33 - 8.
Andereg PI, Passos LMF. E. canis —Revisao. La Clinica Veterinaria. 1999;19 :31-39 - 9.
Karthika K, Vijayalakshmi P, Sreekrishnan R, Das SS, Antony PX. Identification of ticks recovered from dogs affected with ehrlichiosis in Puducherry. The Indian Veterinary Journal. 2014; 91 (11):95-96 - 10.
Jongejan F, Uilenberg G. The global importance of ticks. Parasitology. 2004; 129 :S1-S12 - 11.
Walker JS, Rundquist JD, Taylor R, Wilson BL, Andrews MR, Barck J, et al. Clinical and clinicopathologic findings in tropical canine pancytopenia. Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association. 1970; 157 :43-55 - 12.
Hoogstraal H, Kim KC. Tick and mammal coevolution, with emphasis on Haemaphysalis. In: Kim KC, editor. Coevolution of Parasitic Arthropods and Mammals. New York: John Wiley & Sons; 1985. pp. 505-568 - 13.
Dumler JS, Barbet AF, Bekker CP, Dasch GA, Palmer GH, Ray SC, et al. Reorganization of genera in the families Rickettsiaceae and Anaplasmataceae in the order Rickettsiales: unification of some species of Ehrlichia withAnaplasma ,Cowdria withEhrlichia andEhrlichia withNeorickettsia , descriptions of six new species combinations and designation ofEhrlichia equi and ‘HGE agent’ as subjective synonyms ofEhrlichia phagocytophila . International Journal of Systematic and Evolutionary Microbiology. 2001;51 :2145-2165 - 14.
Huxsoll DL. The historical background and global importance of ehrlichiosis. In: Williams JC, Kakoma I, editors. Ehrlichiosis: A Vector-Borne Disease of Animals and Humans. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic; 1990. p. 164 - 15.
Saito TB, Cunha-Filho NA, Pacheco RC, Ferreira F, Pappen FG, Farias NAR, et al. Canine infection by Rickettsiae and Ehrlichiae in Southern Brazil. American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene. 2008; 79 :102-108 - 16.
Camicas JL, Morel PC. Position systématique et classification des tiques (Acarida: Ixodida). Acarologia. 1977; 18 :410-420 - 17.
Clifford CM, Kohls GM, Sonenshine DE. The systematics of the subfamily Ornithodorinae (Acarina: Argasidae) I. The genera and subgenera. Annals of the Entomological Society of America. 1964; 57 :429-437 - 18.
Fivaz B, Petney T, Horak I. Tick Vector Biology: Medical & Veterinary Aspects. Brimingham, England: Wrox Press, Computer Book Publisher, Springer Verlag; 1992 - 19.
Higuchi S, Fujimori M, Hoshi F, Kawamura S, Yasuda Y. Development of Babesia gibsoni in the salivary glands of the larval tickRhipicephalus sanguineus . The Journal of Veterinary Medical Science. 1995;57 :117-119 - 20.
Jeyathilakan N, Kowsigan A, Kiruthika K, Abdul Basith S. Occurrence of tick infestation in a wild bison ( Bos gaurus indicus ) in Tamilnadu. The Indian Veterinary Journal. 2012;89 :116 - 21.
Klompen JSH, Oliver JH. Systematic relationships in the soft ticks (Acari: Ixodida: Argasidae). Systematic Entomology. 1993; 18 :313-331 - 22.
Pospelova-Shtrom MV. On the system of classification of ticks of the family Argasidae Can., 1890. Acarologia. 1969; 11 :1-22 - 23.
Shaw SE, Day MJ, Birtles RJ, Breitschwerdt EB. Tick-borne infectious diseases of dogs. Trends in Parasitology. 2001; 17 :74-80 - 24.
Sen SK, Fletcher TB. Veterinary Entomology and Acarology for India. New Delhi: Indian Council of Agricultural Research; 1962. p. 457 - 25.
Bashir IN, Chaudhry ZI, Ahmed S, Saeed MA. Epidemiological and vector identification studies on canine babesiosis. Pakistan Veterinary Journal. 2009; 29 :51-54 - 26.
van der Krogt JS. An overview of the clinical picture and current diagnostics and therapies. In: Jongejan F, editor. Ehrlichia canis infection on the Island of Curacao. A Research Report. February 2010 - 27.
Filippova NA. Classification of the subfamily Amblyomminae (Ixodidae) in connection with a reinvestigation of the chaetotaxy of the anal valves. Parazitologiya. 1994; 28 :3-12 - 28.
Abd Rani PAM, Irwin PJ, Coleman GT, Gatne M, Traub RJ. A survey of canine tick-borne diseases in India. Parasites and Vectors . 2011;4 :141 - 29.
Tilak R, Gupta KKD, Verma AK. Vector data bank in the Indian Armed Forces. Medical Journal Armed Forces India. 2008; 64 :36-39