Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2017 Oct 27.
Published in final edited form as: J Med Entomol. 2014 Jul;51(4):868–872. doi: 10.1603/me13225

Table 2.

Prevalence of infection in ticks collected from field sites in Georgia, USA

Field site Life stagea No. ticks No. poolsb No. infected (% infected)

E. ewingii E. chaffeensis R. amblyommii PME B. lonestari
CLYBEL WMA N 100 20 0 (0) 0 (0) 19 (19) 0 (0) 2 (2)
A 42 1 (2.4) 1 (2.4) 25 (60) 0 (0) 0 (0)
Ossabaw Island N 333 67 3 (0.9) 3 (0.9) 59 (17.7) 1 (0.3) 1 (0.3)
A 326 10 (3.1) 8 (2.5) 271 (83.1) 1 (0.3) 4 (1.2)
Panola Mountain State Park L 99 0 (0) 0 (0) 61 (61.6) 0 (0) 2 (2)
N 2421 491 21 (0.9) 17 (0.7) 421 (17.4) 15 (0.6) 25 (1.0)
A 764 15 (2) 10 (1.3) 327 (42.8) 15 (2) 24 (3.1)
Rum Creek WMA N 100 20 0 (0) 0 (0) 20 (20) 2 (2.2)c 0 (0)
A 51 2 (3.9) 1 (2) 21 (41.2) 0 (0) 1 (2)
Total N 2954 598 24 (0.8) 20 (0.7) 519 (17.6) 18 (0.6) 28 (0.9)
A 1183 25 (2.1) 23 (1.9) 644 (54.4) 16 (1.4) 29 (2.5)
a

N, nymphs; A, adults; L, larvae.

b

For pooled nymphs, minimum infection prevalence is given.

c

Not enough extracted DNA for two of the samples, prevalence is given from 18 pools.