4.3 Article

Range Expansion and Increasing Borrelia burgdorferi Infection of the Tick Ixodes scapularis (Acari: Ixodidae) in Iowa, 1990-2013

Journal

JOURNAL OF MEDICAL ENTOMOLOGY
Volume 54, Issue 6, Pages 1727-1734

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1093/jme/tjx121

Keywords

tick; Rickettsia buchneri; Anaplasma phagocytophilum; Lyme disease

Funding

  1. Iowa Department of Public Health
  2. Agriculture and Home Economics Experiment Station (Ames, IA) project 5111 - Hatch Act fund
  3. Agriculture and Home Economics Experiment Station (Ames, IA) project 5111 - State of Iowa fund
  4. NSF [0914390]
  5. Direct For Biological Sciences
  6. Division Of Environmental Biology [0914390] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

A passive surveillance program monitored ticks submitted by the public in Iowa from 1990-2013. Submitted ticks were identified to species and life stage, and Ixodes scapularis Say nymphs and adults were tested for the presence of Borrelia burgdorferi. An average of 2.6 of Iowa's 99 counties submitted first reports of I. scapularis per year over the surveillance period, indicating expansion of this tick species across the state. The proportion of vector ticks infected by B. burgdorferi increased over time between 1998 and 2013. In 2013, 23.5% of nymphal and adult I. scapularis were infected with B. burgdorferi, the highest proportion of any year. Active surveillance was performed at selected sites from 2007-2009. Ixodes scapularis nymphs collected at these sites were tested for the presence of B. burgdorferi, Anaplasma phagocytophilum, and spotted fever group Rickettsia spp. (likely representing Rickettsia buchneri). Nymphs tested were 17.3% positive for B. burgdorferi, 28.9% for A. phagocytophilum, and 67.3% for Rickettsia spp. The results of these surveillance programs indicate an increasing risk of disease transmission by I. scapularis in Iowa.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available