Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Analysis reveals diverse tick-borne pathogens in free-ranging animals on an eco-tourism farm, indicating health risks.
Free-ranging animals may serve as sentinels for the occurrence of ticks and tick-borne pathogens within a given habitat. Between 2020 and 2022, ticks were collected from domestic animals and vegetation on a family-operated agrotouristic farm in Western Slovakia. A total of 391 ticks were obtained (163 host-feeding and 228 questing). Ixodes ricinus predominated (94.9%), followed by Dermacentor reticulatus (4.9%) and Haemaphysalis concinna (one specimen). All ticks were screened for Borrelia burgdorferi sensu lato (s.l.), Borrelia miyamotoi, Anaplasma phagocytophilum, Babesia spp., and Rickettsia spp. by using PCR-based methods and subsequent sequencing. Borrelia burgdorferi s.l. was detected in 15.9% of I. ricinus. Six species were identified, with Borrelia afzelii dominating. Borrelia miyamotoi was detected in 1.62% of questing I. ricinus. Anaplasma phagocytophilum was identified in 20.49% of I. ricinus, mainly in host-feeding specimens. Babesia spp. were detected in I. ricinus (2.7%), represented by Babesia microti, Babesia venatorum, and Babesia capreoli. Rickettsia spp. were detected in 5.39% of I. ricinus and 31.58% of D. reticulatus. They comprised Rickettsia helvetica, Rickettsia monacensis, and Rickettsia raoultii. Co-infections involving two or three pathogens were observed in several ticks. Our results underscore the considerable diversity of tick-borne pathogens in a rural area where humans and domestic animals are in close contact to wildlife.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Mangová et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: