2012
DOI: 10.1128/aem.05762-11
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Association of Different Genetic Types of Francisella-Like Organisms with the Rocky Mountain Wood Tick (Dermacentor andersoni) and the American Dog Tick (Dermacentor variabilis) in Localities Near Their Northern Distributional Limits

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

2
26
1

Year Published

2013
2013
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

2
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 38 publications
(29 citation statements)
references
References 43 publications
2
26
1
Order By: Relevance
“…This difference, however, might be explained by method sensitivity, or the possibility that FLE have a different importance in Hyalomma ticks from different areas. In H. dromedarii, we found higher FLE prevalence in males, which is in contrast to other studies that reported the prevalence of symbionts to be typically higher in females (8,(30)(31)(32). The sampling effort (17 females and 62 males) could explain this deviation, and a quantitative approach may ascertain the accuracy of this observation.…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 56%
“…This difference, however, might be explained by method sensitivity, or the possibility that FLE have a different importance in Hyalomma ticks from different areas. In H. dromedarii, we found higher FLE prevalence in males, which is in contrast to other studies that reported the prevalence of symbionts to be typically higher in females (8,(30)(31)(32). The sampling effort (17 females and 62 males) could explain this deviation, and a quantitative approach may ascertain the accuracy of this observation.…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 56%
“…Other members of the Francisellaceae family are Francisellalike endosymbionts (FLEs), with currently unknown pathogenic potential (Dergousoff and Chilton, 2012). FLEs are widespread in hard and soft ticks (Sun et al, 2000;Michelet et al, 2013).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The bacterial load in each tick tissue was estimated as described previously (Budachetri and Karim, 2015; Narasimhan et al, 2014). A slightly modified published protocol was used to estimate FLE (Dergousoff and Chilton, 2012) and CMM numbers (Sassera et al, 2006). For each gene standard curves were constructed for quantifying the total bacterial load, the Rp load, the CMM load and the FLE load using the method of Budachetri et al (2017).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%