Table 3.
Tick and flea prevalence and intensity in infested dogs of six African countries
| Ticks and Fleas | Overall prevalence (%) | Tanzania (%) | Kenya (%) | Uganda (%) | Nigeria (%) | Ghana (%) | Namibia (%) | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Rural | Urban | P | Rural | Urban | P | Rural | Urban | P | Rural | Urban | P | Rural | Urban | P | Rural | Urban | P | ||
| Ticks | |||||||||||||||||||
| Rhipicephalus sanguineus | 67.5 | 71.1 | 91.5 | ns | 27.6 | 61.5 | ** | 2.3 | 47.5 | ** | 94.7 | 96.1 | ns | 78.4 | 85.7 | * | 90.3 | 83.3 | ns |
| R. appendiculatus | 0.4 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 2.3 | 2.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | ||||||
| R. simus | 2.0 | 0.0 | 2.1 | 9.2 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 1.8 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 5.6 | ||||||
| R. microplus | 0.2 | 2.2 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | ||||||
| R. senegalensis | 0.2 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 2.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | ||||||
| Rhipicephalus spp. | 6.7 | 26.7 | 6.4 | ** | 0.0 | 0.0 | 2.3 | 17.5 | * | 3.5 | 0.0 | 2.7 | 0.0 | 9.7 | 19.4 | ns | |||
| Haemaphysalis elliptica | 6.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 18.4 | 3.9 | * | 11.4 | 10.0 | ns | 8.8 | 7.8 | 5.4 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | ||||
| H. leachi | 0.6 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 5.3 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | ||||||
| H. spinulosa | 1.5 | 2.2 | 2.1 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 11.4 | 2.5 | ns | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | |||||
| Haemaphysalis spp. | 17.3 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 56.6 | 26.9 | * | 54.6 | 22.5 | ** | 3.5 | 0.0 | 18.9 | 2.0 | * | 0.0 | 0.0 | |||
| Amblyomma variegatum | 0.4 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 1.8 | 0.0 | 2.7 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | ||||||
| Amblyomma spp. | 0.9 | 2.2 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 2.3 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 8.1 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | ||||||
| Ixodes sp. | 0.6 | 2.2 | 2.1 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 2.7 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | ||||||
| Tick | 95.5 | 100.0 | 100.0 | ns | 94.7 | 88.5 | ns | 81.8 | 95.0 | ns | 100.0 | 100.0 | ns | 97.3 | 87.8 | ns | 100.0 | 100.0 | ns |
| Intensity | 6.8 | 21.2 | ns | 22.5 | 13.0 | ns | 12.2 | 19.2 | ns | 28.1 | 49.0 | * | 8.1 | 46.3 | * | 19.4 | 4.7 | ns | |
| Shannon index | 0.9 | 0.5 | * | 1.2 | 0.8 | *** | 1.2 | 1.4 | *** | 0.8 | 0.4 | ns | 1.2 | 0.1 | ** | 0.3 | 0.7 | ns | |
| Fleas | |||||||||||||||||||
| Ctenocephalides felis | 53.7 | 71.1 | 51.0 | ns | 75.4 | 48.2 | ns | 85.1 | 41.7 | *** | 52.5 | 5.9 | *** | 53.3 | 45.8 | ns | 12.5 | 28.6 | ns |
| Echidnophaga gallinacea | 0.2 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 3.3 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | ||||||
| Echidnophaga sp. | 3.7 | 0.0 | 2.0 | 8.7 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 6.7 | 2.1 | 0.0 | 20.0 | *** | |||||
| Flea | 55.6 | 71.1 | 51.0 | * | 76.8 | 48.2 | ** | 85.1 | 41.7 | *** | 52.5 | 5.9 | *** | 56.7 | 47.9 | * | 12.5 | 45.7 | ** |
| Intensity | 6.45 | 31.8 | * | 13.6 | 40.0 | * | 2.3 | 5.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 9.5 | 14.3 | ns | 0.0 | 0.0 | ||||
| Shannon index | 0.00 | 0.2 | ns | 0.3 | 0.0 | ns | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.2 | ns | 0.0 | 0.7 | ns | |||
| Co-infestation | 47.3 | 71.7 | 50.9 | ** | 71.1 | 37.0 | ** | 68.0 | 36.0 | ** | 52.6 | 5.9 | * | 54.8 | 35.7 | ** | 12.5 | 45.5 | *** |
| Shannon indexa | 1.25 | 1.0 | ns | 1.5 | 1.1 | ** | 1.3 | 1.6 | *** | 1.2 | 0.4 | *** | 1.6 | 0.8 | ** | 0.5 | 1.3 | * | |
| Investigated dogs (N) | 584 | 46 | 53 | 76 | 27 | 50 | 50 | 57 | 51 | 42 | 56 | 32 | 44 | ||||||
For each dog, a single extraction was made of a pooled set of ticks and/or fleas that was subsequently screened for the presence of DNA belonging to a particular tick and flea species. Next, the percentage of extracts (i.e. dogs) containing DNA of a specific taxon was derived, within the population of infested dogs. For statistical outcomes on pairwise macrogeographic differences, see Fig. 2
***P < 0.001, **P < 0.01, *P < 0.05, ns (not-significant) P > 0.05
Habitat differences (rural vs urban) are investigated for countries with a presence of at least 10% in one of its habitats
aAs a measure of species diversity, a Shannon diversity index and accompanying significance level of Fisher’s exact test are provided