Skip to main content
Microorganisms logoLink to Microorganisms
. 2021 Nov 23;9(12):2412. doi: 10.3390/microorganisms9122412

The Role of Ticks in the Emergence of Borrelia burgdorferi as a Zoonotic Pathogen and Its Vector Control: A Global Systemic Review

Sabir Hussain 1,*, Abrar Hussain 2, Umair Aziz 1, Baolin Song 1, Jehan Zeb 1, David George 3, Jun Li 1, Olivier Sparagano 1,*
Editor: Merle Margarete Böhmer
PMCID: PMC8709295  PMID: 34946014

Abstract

Ticks are widely distributed across the globe, serving as hosts for numerous pathogens that make them major contributors to zoonotic parasitosis. Borrelia burgdorferi is a bacterial species that causes an emerging zoonotic tick-borne disease known as Lyme borreliosis. The role of ticks in the transmission of this pathogen was explored in this study. According to this systematic review, undertaken according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, 19 tick species are known to carry Borrelia burgdorferi, with more than half of the recorded cases in the last two decades related to Ixodes ricinus and Ixodes scapularis ticks. Forty-six studies from four continents, Europe, North America, Asia, and Africa, reported this pathogen in ticks collected from vegetation, animals, and humans. This study highlights an increasing distribution of tick-associated Borrelia burgdorferi, likely driven by accelerated tick population increases in response to climate change coupled with tick dispersal via migratory birds. This updated catalogue helps in compiling all tick species responsible for the transmission of B. burgdorferi across the globe. Gaps in research exist on Borrelia burgdorferi in continents such as Asia and Africa, and in considering environmentally friendly vector control strategies in Europe and North America.

Keywords: ticks, tick-borne disease, Borrelia burgdorferi, Lyme disease, zoonoses, control

1. Introduction

Globally, one-third of the emergence in infectious diseases during last two decades is due to zoonotic vector-borne diseases, which have major devastating effects on human and veterinary health and welfare [1]. Especially, the incidence of Lyme disease in USA is expected to increase by about 20% in the next 1 or 2 decades due to climate change [2]. Ticks are considered as the second-most threatening vector for human health after mosquitoes, transmitting various pathogens [3]. Transmission channels of tick-borne infections must be well understood to mitigate livestock production losses and impacts on animal welfare and reduce disease exposure in humans [4]. This is especially important given that tick-borne zoonosis is increasing in the twenty-first century, driven largely by climate change impacts on tick lifecycles and the transboundary movement of tick-infested animals [5].

Lyme borreliosis (LB) is an example of a significant, and increasing, tick borne zoonosis, caused by the Borrelia burgdorferi sensu lato (s.l.) complex [6]. New species are still being identified within this complex, which contains 21 species to date [7]. It is primarily comprised of Borrelia burgdorferi sensu stricto (s.s.), Borrelia afzelii, and Borrelia garinii, which are common in Europe and Asia, and B. burgdorferi in North America but is also associated with other unknown pathogens that pose a threat to human health [8,9]. The overall burden of Borrelia burgdorferi (B. burgdorferi) is poorly understood [10], despite the CDC reporting over 476,000 cases annually in the United States alone [11]. A study conducted in Europe estimated more than 200,000 B. burgdorferi infections in humans annually [12].

Borrelia burgdorferi infection occurs in a wide variety of animals, along with humans, including small wild mammals and birds [13]. Typically, uninfected six-legged larvae feed on infected small mammals (domestic and wild) or birds, moulting into an infected eight-legged nymph, though unfed larvae are also a source of transovarial transmission. During the period of transformation from nymph to adult, infested ticks will feed upon small mammals, domestic animals, or humans as secondary hosts, potentially resulting in B. burgdorferi transmission. Adult ticks then seek a final host for mating, which may be either white-tailed deer (in case of Ixodes scapularis) or other animals, including humans [14]. If infected, Borrelia burgdorferi in humans causes fatigue, fever, musculoskeletal pain, erythema migrans, and the potential for cardiac and neurological symptoms, with an incubation period of 3–30 days [15]. In the case of Europe, Lyme neuroborreliosis (10–15% cases) is the neurological sign that may be observed in early stages of Lyme disease [16]. The most common sign observed is Bannwarth syndrome in Europe, in which individuals feel intense nerve pain radiating from the spine. That situation is uncommon in North America [9,17], though; arthritis is the most common complication observed in the US which is rarely seen in Europe [9].

Borrelia burgdorferi is the most prevalent tick-borne pathogen in temperate regions of the Northern Hemisphere, but the expansion of geographical boundaries of ticks makes this pathogen a significant health concern worldwide [6]. Ticks as a vector play a central role in geographical disease expansion and host-to-host transmission of B. burgdorferi [18]. This pathogen is vectored by the genus Ixodes, commonly by Ixodes scapularis (I. scapularis, Ixodes ricinus, Ixodes persulcatus, and Ixodes pacificus) species, but with other members of this genus also contributing to transmission [19]. The species of vector determines the range of host availability for B. burgdorferi, which can significantly affect transmission dynamics [20].

At present, attempts to control the transmission of Lyme disease relies on targeting ticks directly. Many of these control strategies give cause for concern, however, they risk damage to the natural environment through widespread deployment of various acaricides [21], and often only target ticks during an isolated stage of their lifecycle. Effective control of tick-borne pathogens can only be achieved if delivered to consider interrelated human, animal, and ecological perspectives, but the deployment of holistic approaches is hard to implement. For instance, biodiversity protection and creation of urban green areas are crucial for animal and human health but increase the burden of tick-borne diseases (TBDs). In contrast, a decreased population of wild animals carrying ticks, or implementation of measures such as fencing to exclude them from certain areas, will reduce the transmission of TBDs, but could have devastating effects on biodiversity that are socially unacceptable [22].

In this study, we aimed to systematically analyze the research on B. burgdorferi in ticks during the first two decades of the twenty-first century. We focused on the prevalence rate of ticks carrying B. burgdorferi, the method of detection, location of cases, and the changes in prevalence over time. In this way, we highlight the emerging trend of this zoonotic agent through ticks worldwide, also suggesting preventive strategies for its control.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Study Protocol

We collected data following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines [23]. Using this format, we systemically reviewed the relevant literature on Borrelia burgdorferi in ticks across the world.

2.2. Data Sources and Search Strategy

In the data-retrieving process, five search engines, namely Scopus, PubMed, Google Scholar, Science Direct, and Web of Science, were used between 1 March 2021 and 8 August 2021 to search for articles published on Borrelia burgdorferi in ticks from 1 January 2001 to 15 June 2021. The keywords used for the search included tick(s), zoonosis, borreliosis, and Borrelia burgdorferi. We used the library online search database of the City University of Hong Kong. We requested access to those articles also which were not available online with full text.

2.3. Data Extraction

To maximize accuracy, information was extracted and compiled in Microsoft Excel 2019 by two authors (S.H. and A.H.) independently, screened to remove repeated studies in individuals’ files, and then merged to avoid duplication. The discrepancy in extracted data from both authors (S.H. and A.H.) was double-checked by the third author (O.S.) and discussed to create the relevant article lists, which included authors, study title, year of publication, journal name, volume, issue, page number, DOI, author affiliations, abstract, and keywords.

2.4. Study Selection Criteria

Our screening strategy consisted of two steps. First, titles, abstracts, and keywords were used to eliminate duplicates, extraneous review studies, and those not published in English. In the second step, the full text of all relevant studies was thoroughly reviewed to screen and extract the necessary details. The key features that were taken into account for the inclusion of studies in the second step were (i) study included the detection of Borrelia burgdorferi in ticks (with tick species detection) or tick-infested animals/humans, (ii) study provided details about positive cases and total samples, (iii) study stated the location of sample collection sites, and (iv) study mentioned the techniques used for detection.

2.5. Quality Assessment and Selection

During the first step of screening, data compiled in Microsoft Excel 2019 files by two authors independently included 574 and 603 studies, resulting in a total of 734 studies after merging into a single file. The third author removed the duplicate studies (n = 25). Subsequent screening on the basis of titles, abstracts, and keywords removed a further 390 studies, which were not focused on Borrelia burgdorferi, but on other aspects of Lyme disease, followed by removal of another 47 that did not contain original research (e.g., review articles, meta-analysis, and opinion pieces) to avoid the repetition in reported data. Only one study was removed in a language other than English (Chinese), with 152 studies excluded because they did not investigate ticks or tick-infested animals/humans for pathogen detection; rather, they focused on seroprevalence of Borrelia burgdorferi without including any history related to ticks. Those studies (n = 52) which did not investigate the prevalence of pathogen, and instead investigated some ecological, biological, and evolutionary aspects of the pathogen, were also eliminated, as were three studies that did not mention an exact location for sampling, and 18 studies where diagnostic methods were not given. A total of 46 studies were finalized, their references were reviewed by authors, and data from those studies were arranged in tabular form using Microsoft Word 2019, with details included for the title of study, year of data collection, year of publication, sites for sample collection, country of study, the continent of study, number of positive samples, total samples, prevalence, confidence interval (CI 95%), technique used, and reference of study (Figure 1).

Figure 1.

Figure 1

An overview of the selection procedure for studies recruited to this review according to PRISMA.

3. Results and Discussion

3.1. Spatial Distribution of Borrelia burgdorferi and Ticks

Several species of ticks reported positive for Borrelia burgdorferi from studies conducted in the previous two decades. The majority of these studies reported positive cases in Ixodes ricinus (n = 33; 71.7%) and Ixodes scapularis (n = 9; 19.5%), followed by the other 17 tick species shown in Figure 2. In many studies, more than one tick species was found to be positive for this pathogen; therefore, the percentages (Figure 2) are given with this in mind. The spatial distribution of B. burgdorferi in ticks was found to be global in nature, with B. burgdorferi reported from ticks in four out of the seven continents, namely Europe, North America, Asia, and Africa. The highest proportion of studies reported cases from Europe (n = 34; 73.9%) followed by North America (n = 9; 19.6%), Asia (n = 2; 4.3%), and Africa (n = 1; 2.2%). At a national level, the highest proportion of studies reporting Borrelia burgdorferi in ticks were from Italy (n = 8; 17.4%) and the US 17.4% (n = 8; 17.4%) (Figure 3).

Figure 2.

Figure 2

Reported proportions of tick species positive for Borrelia burgdorferi during the last two decades globally.

Figure 3.

Figure 3

Number of studies reporting Borrelia burgdorferi in different tick species across the world during the last two decades.

3.2. Distribution/Prevalence of Borrelia burgdorferi in Ticks of Different Continents

3.2.1. Europe

In the previous two decades, 34 studies have been conducted that report Borrelia burgdorferi from European ticks. Of these, the highest number of studies were from Italy (n = 8) followed by Finland (n = 3), the Netherlands (n = 2), Slovakia (n = 2), Serbia (n = 2), Romania (n = 2), Ukraine (n = 2), Belarus (n = 2), Latvia (n = 2), Sweden (n = 1), Germany (n = 1), Scotland (n = 1), England (n = 1), England and Scotland (n = 1), Denmark (n = 1), Luxembourg (n = 1), Switzerland (n = 1), Poland (n = 1), and Czech Republic, Estonia, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Netherland, Portugal, Slovenia, Spain, and Sweden (all combined) (n = 1). Out of these 34, in 44.1% (n = 15) of studies, ticks were collected from vegetation (e.g., parks, forest, and hilly areas), while 38.2% (n = 13) of studies involved collection of ticks from wild and domestic animals, and 17.6% (n = 6) collected ticks from both vegetation and animals (Figure 4 and Figure 5; Table 1). Almost 97% (n = 33) of studies conducted in Europe identified Ixodes ricinus ticks as being positive for Borrelia burgdorferi, which indicates that this species is the major transmitting source of this pathogen in this region. PCR was used to confirm the presence of Borrelia burgdorferi in all 34 studies, and a 17.7% prevalence of Borrelia burgdorferi was found in European ticks when taking the average of the prevalence mentioned in all studies.

Figure 4.

Figure 4

Number of studies on the basis of site of tick collection in Europe.

Figure 5.

Figure 5

Number of studies on the basis of site of tick collection in North America.

Table 1.

Literature focusing on detection of Borrelia burgdorferi in ticks during the last two decades across the world.

Continent Country Region Host/Sampling Site Tick Species Total Ticks Collected Positive (n) Prevalence % 95% CI Molecular Technique Year of Study Refs.
Europe
Europe Slovakia Western Slovakia Vegetation (Parks) Ixodes scapularis 1294 420 33% Not given PCR 1999–2000 [24]
Birds
(Parus major,
Turdus merula,
Turdus philomelos)
Ixodes scapularis 57 16 28% Not given PCR
Serbia Vojvodina Vegetation
(Forest)
Ixodes ricinus 764 169 22.1% 11–29 PCR 2006–2008 [25]
Luxemburg Not mentioned Vegetation (Forest) Ixodes ricinus 1394 157 11.3% Not given PCR 2007 [26]
Switzerland 11 sites located between 400 and 900 m above sea level Vegetation (Parks) Ixodes ricinus 1458 328 22.5% Not given PCR 2009–2010 [27]
Sweden Southern Sweden Rodents (Myodes glareolus, Apodemus flavicollis) Ixodes ricinus 276 137 49.6% Not given q-PCR 2008-2010 [28]
Belarus Brest, Gomel, Grodno, Minsk, Mogilev, Vitebsk Vegetation (Parks) Ixodes ricinus 553 52 9.4% Not given PCR 2009 [29]
Italy Borzonasca, Chiavari Vegetation (Forest) Ixodes ricinus 170 31 18.2% Not given PCR 1998–1999 [30]
Denmark South Jut land Dogs Ixodes ricinus 661 99 15% Not given PCR 2011 [31]
Italy Emilia-Romagna Vegetation (Forest) Ixodes ricinus 284 78 27.5% Not given Real-time PCR 2010 [32]
Italy Ossola Valley Province of Verbano–Cusio–Ossola Vegetation and Wild animals (chamois, roe deer, red deer) Ixodes ricinus 1766 530 30% Not given PCR 2011 [33]
Scotland and Northern England Not mentioned Gray squirrel Ixodes ricinus 1585 189 11.9% 9.7–14.6 PCR 2012–2013 [34]
Italy Belluno, Perugia Vegetation (Forest) Ixodes ricinus 447 17 3.8% Not given PCR 2007–2010 [35]
Italy Tuscany Wild animals (Dama dama, Cervus elaphus) Ixodes ricinus 420 6 1.4% Not given PCR 2015–2019 [36]
Netherlands Flevoland, Gelderland, Noord-Holland, Utrecht, and Zuid-Holland Hedgehogs Ixodes ricinus 460 67 14% Not given q-PCR 2010–2014 [37]
Netherlands Not mentioned Horse Ixodes ricinus 120 52 43.3% Not given PCR 2018 [38]
Serbia Forests (Lipovica, Bojčinska, Avala, Miljakovačk, Makiš), Park-forests (Ada Ciganlija, Zvezdara, Banjica, Košutnjak, Jajinci) Parks (Hajd park, Belevode, Usće, Šumice, Kalemegdan, Topčider, Tašmajdan, Banovobrdo, Pionirski park) Vegetation (Forest) Ixodes ricinus 3199 704 22% Not given PCR 2009 [39]
Finland Southwestern Finland Vegetation (Forest) Ixodes ricinus 3169 217 6.8% Not given PCR 2013–2014 [40]
Poland Goleniowska Forest Shetland ponies Ixodes ricinus 1737 333 19% Not given PCR 2010–2012 [41]
Vegetation (Parks) Ixodes ricinus 371 18 4.8% Not given PCR
Romania Eastern Romania Vegetation (Forest) Ixodes ricinus 534 138 25.8% Not given PCR 2014 [42]
UK Not mentioned Cat Ixodes ricinus, Ixodes hexagonus, Ixodes trianguliceps 541 15 2.8% Not given PCR 2016 [43]
Germany Saxony Small mammals (Apodemus agrarius, Apodemus flavicollis, Microtus arvalis, Microtus agrestis, Mustela nivalis, Myodes glareolus Sorex araneus,
Talpa europaea)
Ixodes ricinus 2802 154 5.5 3.5–8.3 PCR 2012–2016 [44]
Slovakia Bratislava Birds
(Parus major,
Sitta europaea,
Turdus merula,
Erithacus rubecula,
Dendrocopos major,
Parus montanus,
Fringilla coelebs,
Parus caeruleus,
Muscicapa striata)
Ixodes ricinus 295 37 12.5% Not given PCR 2011–2012 [45]
Italy Dolomiti Bellunesi National Park in the Province of Bellun Red foxes (Parks) Ixodes ricinus 2248 28 1.25% Not given Real-time PCR 2011–2016 [46]
Scotland Loch Lomond and Trossachs National Park Vegetation (Forest) Ixodes ricinus 6567 91 1.4% 1.1–1.7 PCR 2011–2015 [47]
Latvia Not mentioned Dog Ixodes ricinus, Dermacentor reticulatus 608 48 7.9% Not given Nested-PCR 2011–2016 [48]
Italy Aosta Valley, western Alps Vegetation (Forest) Ixodes scapularis 30 12 40% 22.5–57.5 PCR 2016 [49]
Latvia All regions of Latvia Vegetation (Parks) Ixodes ricinus, Ixodes persulcatus, Dermacentor reticulatus 4593 657 14% Not given PCR 2017–2019 [50]
Italy 64 Italian provinces Dog Ixodes ricinus, Ixodes hexagonous 723 3 0.4% 0.2–0.8 PCR 2016–2017 [51]
Finland 8 sites on the coast of Bothnian Bay Vegetation (Forest) Ixodes persulcatus 163 101 62% 55–70 PCR 2019 [52]
Czech Republic, Estonia, Finland, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Netherlands, Portugal, Slovenia, Spain and Sweden 11 European countries Birds Ixodes ricinus, Ixodes arboricola, Ixodes frontalis 656 244 37.2% Not given PCR 2005–2008 2013–2014 and 2016 [53]
Ukraine Chernivtsi, Khmelnytskyi, Kyiv, Ternopil, Vinnytsia regions Vegetation, wild and domestic animals (brown bear, raccoon, red fox, lynx, cats, cattle dogs) Ixodes ricinus 99 25 25% Not given PCR 2019–2020 [54]
Belarus Brest Gomel, Grodno, Minsk, Mogilev and Vitebsk Vegetation and Cow Ixodes ricinus, Dermacentor reticulatus 4070 253 6.2% Not given PCR 2012–2019 [55]
Romania Luliu Haţieganu Park,
Alexandru Borza Botanical Garden,
Mănăştur Cemetery
Hoia,
Făget
forest
Vegetation (Forest) Ixodes ricinus, Haemaphysalis punctata 148 39 26.35% 19.46–34.22 PCR 2018 [56]
Rodents, birds, and hedgehogs Ixodes ricinus, Ixodes hexagonus, Haemaphysalis punctata, Haemaphysalis concinna 222 81 36.5% 29.29–42.27 PCR
Ukraine Southeastern Ukraine (Zaporizhzhya region) Vegetation (Forest) Ixodes ricinus 358 115.6 32.3% Not given PCR 2014–2018 [57]
North America
North America US Southern coastal Maine Pets, chipmunks, white-footed mice Ixodes scapularis 394 88 22.3% Not given PCR 1995–1997 [58]
US University of California Hopland Research and
Extension Center (HREC)
Vegetation (Forest) Ixodes pacificus 181 7 3.9% Not given PCR 2003 [59]
US Southwestern Michigan Birds Ixodes dentatus, Haemaphysalis leporispalustris, Ixodes scapularis, Dermacentor variabilis 12,301 517 4.2% Not given PCR 2004–2007 [60]
US Southwestern suburban Chicago Wild birds Ixodes scapularis, Haemaphysalis leporispalustris 120 5 4% Not given PCR 2005–2010 [61]
US Hudson Valley Vegetation (Forest) Ixodes ricinus 1245 760 61% Not given PCR 2011 [62]
US New Castle County, Delaware Vegetation (Parks) Ixodes scapularis 441 46 10.4% Not given PCR 2013–2014 [63]
US New York State Vegetation (Forest) Ixodes scapularis 677 346 51% 39.3–63.3 rt-PCR 2018 [64]
US Marin County California Vegetation (Parks) Ixodes pacificus 1419 41 2.9% 2.3–3.7 rt-PCR 2015–2018 [65]
Canada Ontario Human Ixodes scapularis 17,230 3015 17.5% 16.97–18.09 PCR 2011–2017 [66]
Companion animals (dogs) Ixodes scapularis 4375 433 9.9% 9.15–10.78 PCR
Asia
Asia Korea Pocheon, Donghae, Sejong, Boryeong, Uiseong, Jeongup, Geoje, Goheung, and Jeju Island Wild rodents Ixodes nipponensis, Ixodes angustus, Haemaphysalis longicornis 738 248 33.6% Not given PCR 2017 [67]
China Great Xingan Mountains, Small Xingan Mountains Vegetation (parks) Ixodes persulcatus 1345 454 33.8% Not given PCR 1999–2001 [68]
Africa
Africa Egypt Cairo, Giza, Al-Buhayrah, and Matrouh govern Dog Rhipicephalus sanguineus 60 1 1.67% Not given PCR 2017 [69]

The consideration of associations of B. burgdorferi with ticks and the environment is inevitable. Thus, any change in these associated factors will create a major impact on this pathogen’s distribution, and unexpected consequences may result [70]. According to our literature review, the tick species most associated with B. burgdorferi was I. ricinus, which is continuously expanding its latitudinal and altitudinal range in Europe [71]. Environmental factors play a vital role in the distribution of ticks, as most of I. ricinus lifecycle is spent off-host, where factors such as growth, reproduction, survival, and activity can be affected by environmental changes. It is predicted that the annual temperature of Europe will rise 1.5–2.5 °C in the coming few decades due to climate change, which may contribute to further expansion of tick distribution boundaries [72]. In more than 40% studies, ticks were collected from vegetation, so this habitat and the seasonal changes affecting it can be viewed as important. Free-living stages of I. ricinus, for example, require their vegetative habitats to retain 80% humidity to aid tick survival, with this, therefore, also promoting B. burgdorferi transmission. In contrast, areas with low humidity may reduce tick survival rates, activity, and distribution of I. ricinus. Understanding such microclimatic factors is crucial to understanding tick distribution and their role in the spread of the pathogens, and persistent monitoring is needed to observe the dynamic changes in tick habitats, the distribution of ticks, and the pathogens they carry.

Out of the 34 studies from Europe, 55% (n = 19) collected ticks from animals, with a high percentage of these (36.8%, n = 7) detecting B. burgdorferi in ticks from wild mammals (e.g., hedgehog, deer, brown bear, raccoon, and red foxes). Of the remaining studies, 21% (n = 4) collected B. burgdorferi-positive ticks from cats and dogs, 16% (n = 3) from birds, 10.5% (n = 2) from rodents, 10.5% (n = 2) from horses, and 5.2% (n = 1) from cows (Figure 3). Almost 95% (n = 18) of studies detected B. burgdorferi in Ixodes ricinus, which supports this tick’s importance as a major transmission risk of the pathogen in animals (Table 1). According to our literature review, a large proportion of studies reported that B. burgdorferi was circulating in ticks associated with wild animals, covering a vast range of hosts that could facilitate the movement of ticks. The contribution of wild animals in tick movement is also supported by another study conducted in the UK, where heavy infestation of ticks carrying B. burgdorferi were reported on gray squirrels [34]. The same authors also recovered ticks present on cats and dogs that were positive for this pathogen, thus posing a threat to the owners of these pets in terms of their risk of acquiring Lyme disease. According to a study by TickNET (a collaborative public health effort established by the CDC in 2007 which fosters coordinated surveillance, research, education, and prevention of tick-borne diseases), tick bite risk is increased nearly twofold through owning a pet [73], where companion animals that are allowed to roam freely can present a particular risk of bringing ticks into the home, creating both animal and public health concerns. Almost 16% of studies reported this pathogen’s detection in ticks from birds, among which Ixodes scapularis was the major vector after Ixodes ricinus. Infested birds, especially migratory birds, have potential to carry tick species over large distances, including from one continent to another, with this dispersal mechanism being at least partly responsible for increases in the distribution of ticks and the zoonotic pathogens they carry. According to a recent study, migratory birds were considered as a major factor in the expansion of Ixodes scapularis and its pathogen Borrelia burgdorferi [74]. As already discussed, climate change is another cause of enzootic transmission of B. burgdorferi and tick expansion, but yearly bidirectional migration of songbirds carrying ticks infected with zoonotic pathogens such as B. burgdorferi, Borrelia mayonii, Borrelia miyamotoi, and Bartonella in spring and fall may be even more significant, where it has been shown that birds infested with Ixodes ricinus and Ixodes scapularis can start new foci of this tick on islands [9,75,76,77,78] (Table 1).

3.2.2. North America

In the previous two decades, a total of nine studies reported B. burgdorferi from ticks in North America; 88.9% (n = 8) studies reported this pathogen from the US and 11.1% (n = 1) from Canada. More than 50% (n = 5) of studies collected ticks from vegetation, and 44.4% (n = 4) from animals (e.g., pets, chipmunks, white-footed mice, dogs, and birds). Of these four, in one case, tick collection was from humans and found to be positive for B. burgdorferi (Figure 5 and Figure 6). PCR was used to confirm the presence of Borrelia burgdorferi in all of these studies and found an average of 19.2% prevalence of Borrelia burgdorferi in ticks of North America in all studies. In 66.7% (n = 6) of studies, the tick species testing positive for the pathogen was Ixodes scapularis (I. scapularis), while in 22.2% (n = 2) of studies, it was Ixodes pacificus (I. pacificus). This demonstrates the significant contribution of both ticks for transmission of B. burgdorferi in North America (Table 1). According to a study from Michigan State University, B. burgdorferi was typically transmitted by black-legged ticks (Ixodes scapularis) in the east of the Rocky Mountains and by I. pacificus in the Western United States [79], which aligns with the findings of this review. A study in Canada based on passive surveillance data revealed that I. scapularis ticks are more common than previously suspected in this country [80]. In two studies from North America reviewed here, ticks collected from birds provided positive results for B. burgdorferi, with the role of migratory birds in spreading B. burgdorferi and I. scapularis reported in a study conducted in Ontario, Canada [81].

Figure 6.

Figure 6

Number of studies on the basis of site of tick collection in Asia and Africa.

As with other tick species, climate change also exerts effects on the expansion of I. scapularis distributions; this is reported to be increasing where warmer conditions are prevailing [82], supporting claims of higher risks of Lyme disease in these areas in the future. Two studies have been conducted in North America which found B. burgdorferi in ticks collected from pets (cats and dogs), and in one study conducted in Ontario, Canada, pathogen-positive tick samples were collected from both humans and companion animals, reporting prevalence of the pathogen in I. scapularis at 17.5% and 9.9% respectively. The presence of ticks on companion animals is a significant risk factor for spread of the pathogens they carry. Studies considered in this review revealed the presence of B. burgdorferi carrying I. scapularis on pets, which is not only a source of transmission of B. burgdorferi to the pets themselves, but also poses a threat to humans with regard to Lyme disease transmission. The increasing population of black-legged ticks is also contributing to the transmission of other zoonotic pathogens such as Anaplasma phagocytophilum, Babesia microti, Powassan virus, and Ehrlichia muris [76]. In North America, this expansion of black-legged tick distribution, attributed to changes in land usage and climate change, is the major factor predicting the increased prevalence of zoonotic tick-borne diseases such as Lyme disease.

3.2.3. Asia and Africa

In Asia, B. burgdorferi prevalence is quite low. In this review, China and Korea were the only countries in which this pathogen was reported in ticks, collected from vegetation and wild rodents, respectively. A study published in 2003 detected B. burgdorferi from Chinese Ixodes persulcatus collected from vegetation (Great Xingan Mountains, Small Xingan Mountains), with a prevalence of 33.8% (454/1345), while a 2020 study detected this pathogen in Ixodes nipponensis, I. angustus, and H. longicornis collected from wild rodents in Korea (Pocheon, Donghae, Sejong, Boryeong, Uiseong, Jeongup, Geoje, Goheung, and Jeju Island), with a prevalence of 33.6% (248/738) (Figure 5 and Figure 7) (Table 1).

Figure 7.

Figure 7

Geographical distribution of tick species carrying Borrelia burgdorferi across the world.

Ixodes persulcatus are widely distributed from Russia to Eastern Asia, where one-fifth of the world’s human population resides. The study results conducted in China demonstrated that B. burgdorferi poses a health threat not only to animals, but also to humans, where I. persulcatus is prevalent [83]. Ixodes persulcatus is the most abundant tick species in China and is the major cause of tick bites in humans. I. persulcatus infests a range of nonhuman animal hosts as well, providing the opportunity to acquire more than one pathogen from different reservoirs [83]. In the case of Korea, the study reviewed here is the only one from this country evidencing B. burgdorferi in ticks, in this case taken from wild rodents, where these ticks had a high prevalence of pathogen, presenting a high risk of causing Lyme disease. Agriculture workers, hikers, and people living near tick-infested areas in Korea are thus at high risk of exposure to Borrelia due to proximity to wild rodents and the ticks they carry. Hence, continuous surveillance of tick species in various geographical regions of Korea can be considered important to minimizing possible disease transmission to humans.

In the case of Africa, prevalence of B. burgdorferi was unknown. Nevertheless, a recent 2021 study conducted in Egypt (Cairo, Giza, Al-Buhayrah, and Matrouh governorates) reported this pathogen in Rhipicephalus sanguineus ticks collected from dogs with a prevalence of 1.67% (Figure 6; Table 1). In Egypt, domestic animals are often highly infested with hard ticks. Although the rate of B. burgdorferi infection in dogs and ticks is low, dogs act as sentinel carriers for this pathogen. From a public health perspective, researchers should be aware of tick activity under various climatic conditions, which is often more than expected. The current data regarding B. burgdorferi transmission related to tick bites remains quite scarce, and its occurrence is thus likely underestimated.

3.3. Vector Control

Effective management of ticks is required for control of B. burgdorferi, as well as a range of other TBDs. Ixodes ricinus, for example, acts as a major vector responsible for spreading not only B. burgdorferi, but also other pathogens, including Borrelia miyamotoi, Rickettsia slovaca, Rickettsia helvetica, Rickettsia monacensis, Anaplasma phagocytophilum, Babesia divergens, Babesia venatorum, Babesia microti, Bartonella henselae, Coxiella burnetii, and Francisella tularensis, across the world [84]. In Europe, more than 90% of studies detected B. burgdorferi in this tick, which indicates the critical demand for control strategies against I. ricinus. Leveraging the low tolerance of this species for relative humidity levels below 85% could offer significant potential in managing this species and the diseases it spreads [85]. At low humidity, I. ricinus is unable to survive, and this intolerance can be used as a target to prevent tick infestations [86]. The second most important tick for B. burgdorferi transmission is I. scapularis, especially in the US. A retrospective review of I. scapularis has demonstrated significant range expansion over the last century in the US, which has had to be mitigated through appropriate control strategies to reduce the chances of transmission of B. burgdorferi [87].

There are various tick-control strategies used worldwide, many of which are associated with negative effects on the environment. A wide variety of chemical products in different compositions are effective against ticks such as I. ricinus and are commonly used to control ticks on domestic animals [88]. More environmentally considerate approaches are relatively rare, though advances in this space should be possible with increased research into delivering tick control through habitat management/manipulation, interrupting the tick lifecycle, or obtrusion of associated pathogenic transmission. In some cases, such measures should be relatively practical to deploy at scale, even utilizing existing animal management/husbandry techniques such as fencing, grazing, and mowing [89]. Nevertheless, the utility of environmental-friendly tick control approaches has received little attention, whilst, in contrast, the use of acaricides has been widespread. During the period from 1970 to 1980, for example, wide-ranging and extensive spraying of acaricides was carried out in Russia to control I. persulcatus, the main vector of the tick-borne encephalitis virus (TBEV) [90]. Such extensive acaricide use remains commonplace but is now increasingly considered as socially unacceptable, primarily due to the damaging effects of these chemicals on the environment and the biodiversity it contains [91]. Alternative and integrated approaches of controlling ticks should therefore be prioritized to reduce tick and TBD incidence on humans and animals whilst safeguarding the environment and better aligning to shifting societal needs. Design and development of such strategies is likely to benefit from cross-disciplinary collaboration, drawing from ecology, epidemiology, entomology, and the social sciences.

4. Conclusions

This review demonstrates that the number of tick species vectoring B. burgdorferi is increasing, reaching 19 to date. Ixodes ricinus is the most common tick found to be positive for this pathogen, in more than 70% of the studies considered, followed by I. scapularis (almost 19%). The wide distribution of these tick species is a concern, with this threatening to extend the geographic boundaries of emerging zoonotic diseases, including Lyme disease. Climate change and migratory birds with more exposure to ticks are playing a significant role in increasing the zoonotic transmission of B. burgdorferi across the world. Whilst recent research has clearly depicted this increased distribution (Figure 8), more comprehensive studies are still needed to better quantify the extent of this expansion and the prevalence of pathogens in tick species in some areas, especially on continents such as Asia and Africa. Advances in our understanding of effective nonchemical tick control measures are also needed if we are to address increasing threats from ticks and TBDs in an environmentally considerate manner.

Figure 8.

Figure 8

Timewise studies focusing on tick for Borrelia burgdorferi in the last two decades.

Acknowledgments

We are thankful to all authors whose articles are included in this study. We also appreciate the facility of Run Shaw Shaw library provided by City University of Hong Kong.

Author Contributions

S.H. and A.H. conceived the study, searched literature, identified articles, screened articles, and extracted data which was reviewed by O.S., S.H., A.H., U.A. and B.S. J.Z. drafted the manuscript. O.S., D.G. and J.L. critically revised the manuscript. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

O.S. is a Principal Investigator of an internal research fund of the Department of Infectious Diseases and Public Health of the City University of Hong Kong (Project number 9380108).

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Conflicts of Interest

This study was conducted in the absence of any commercial relationship, and the authors declare that they have no competing interest.

Footnotes

Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

References

  • 1.de la Fuente J., Estrada-Peña A., Cabezas-Cruz A., Brey R. Flying ticks: Anciently evolved associations that constitute a risk of infectious disease spread. Parasites Vectors. 2015;8:538. doi: 10.1186/s13071-015-1154-1. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Dumic I., Severnini E. “Ticking bomb”: The impact of climate change on the incidence of Lyme disease. Can. J. Infect. Dis. Med. Microbiol. 2018;2018:5719081. doi: 10.1155/2018/5719081. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Toledo Á., Olmeda A.S., Escudero R., Jado I., Valcárcel F., Casado-Nistal M.A., Casado-Nistal M., Rodríguez-Vargas H., Gil P., Anda P. Tick-borne zoonotic bacteria in ticks collected from central Spain. Am. J. Trop. Med. Hyg. 2009;81:67–74. doi: 10.4269/ajtmh.2009.81.67. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Tamzali Y. Equine piroplasmosis: An updated review. Equine Vet. Educ. 2013;25:590–598. doi: 10.1111/eve.12070. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Parola P., Paddock C.D., Socolovschi C., Labruna M.B., Mediannikov O., Kernif T., Abdad M.Y., Stenos J., Bitam I., Fournier P.E. Update on tick-borne rickettsioses around the world: A geographic approach. Clin. Microbiol. Rev. 2013;26:657–702. doi: 10.1128/CMR.00032-13. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Rizzoli A., Hauffe H.C., Carpi G., Vourc’h G., Neteler M., Rosa R. Lyme borreliosis in Europe. Eurosurveillance. 2011;16:19906. doi: 10.2807/ese.16.27.19906-en. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Rudenko N., Golovchenko M., Grubhoffer L., Oliver J.H., Jr. Updates on Borrelia burgdorferi sensu lato complex with respect to public health. Ticks Tick-Borne Dis. 2011;2:123–128. doi: 10.1016/j.ttbdis.2011.04.002. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Margos G., Fedorova N., Kleinjan J.E., Hartberger C., Schwan T.G., Sing A., Fingerle V. Borrelia lanei sp. nov. extends the diversity of Borrelia species in California. Int. J. Syst. Evol. Microbiol. 2017;67:3872. doi: 10.1099/ijsem.0.002214. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Dumic I., Vitorovic D., Spritzer S., Sviggum E., Patel J., Ramanan P. Acute transverse myelitis–A rare clinical manifestation of Lyme neuroborreliosis. IDCases. 2019;15:e00479. doi: 10.1016/j.idcr.2018.e00479. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Rosenberg R., Lindsey N.P., Fischer M., Gregory C.J., Hinckley A.F., Mead P.S., Paz-Bailey G., Waterman S.H., Drexler N.A., Kersh G.H. Vital signs: Trends in reported vectorborne disease cases—United States and Territories, 2004–2016. Morb. Mortal. Wkly. Rep. 2018;67:496. doi: 10.15585/mmwr.mm6717e1. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Schwartz A.M., Kugeler K.J., Nelson C.A., Marx G.E., Hinckley A.F. Use of commercial claims data for evaluating trends in Lyme disease diagnoses, United States, 2010–2018. Emerg. Infect. Dis. 2021;27:499. doi: 10.3201/eid2702.202728. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Sykes R.A., Makiello P. An estimate of Lyme borreliosis incidence in Western Europe. J. Public Health. 2017;39:74–81. doi: 10.1093/pubmed/fdw017. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Slatculescu A.M., Clow K.M., McKay R., Talbot B., Logan J.J., Thickstun C.R., Jardine C.M., Ogden N.H., Knudbury A.J., Kulkarni M.A. Species distribution models for the eastern blacklegged tick, Ixodes scapularis, and the Lyme disease pathogen, Borrelia burgdorferi, in Ontario, Canada. PLoS ONE. 2020;15:e0238126. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0238126. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Kurokawa C., Lynn G.E., Pedra J.H., Pal U., Narasimhan S., Fikrig E. Interactions between Borrelia burgdorferi and ticks. Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 2020;18:587–600. doi: 10.1038/s41579-020-0400-5. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Kugeler K.J., Schwartz A.M., Delorey M.J., Mead P.S., Hinckley A.F. Estimating the frequency of Lyme disease diagnoses, United States, 2010–2018. Emerg. Infect. Dis. 2021;27:616. doi: 10.3201/eid2702.202731. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Halperin J.J. Diagnosis and management of Lyme neuroborreliosis. Expert Rev. Anti-Infect. Ther. 2018;16:5–11. doi: 10.1080/14787210.2018.1417836. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Shah A., O’Horo J.C., Wilson J.W., Granger D., Theel E.S., editors. An Unusual Cluster of Neuroinvasive Lyme Disease Cases Presenting with Bannwarth Syndrome in the Midwest United States (U.S). Open Forum Infectious Diseases. Oxford University Press; Oxford, UK: 2018. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Margos G., Fingerle V., Reynolds S. Borrelia bavariensis: Vector switch, niche invasion, and geographical spread of a tick-borne bacterial parasite. Front. Ecol. Evol. 2019;7:401. doi: 10.3389/fevo.2019.00401. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Eisen L. Vector competence studies with hard ticks and Borrelia burgdorferi sensu lato spirochetes: A review. Ticks Tick-Borne Dis. 2020;11:101359. doi: 10.1016/j.ttbdis.2019.101359. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Craine N., Randolph S., Nuttall P. Seasonal variation in the role of grey squirrels as hosts of Ixodes ricinus, the tick vector of the Lyme disease spirochaete, in a British. Folia Parasitol. 1995;42:73–80. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Sprong H., Azagi T., Hoornstra D., Nijhof A.M., Knorr S., Baarsma M.E., Hovius J. W Control of Lyme borreliosis and other Ixodes ricinus-borne diseases. Parasites Vectors. 2018;11:145. doi: 10.1186/s13071-018-2744-5. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Wassermann M., Selzer P., Steidle J.L., Mackenstedt U. Biological control of Ixodes ricinus larvae and nymphs with Metarhizium anisopliae blastospores. Ticks Tick-Borne Dis. 2016;7:768–771. doi: 10.1016/j.ttbdis.2016.03.010. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Moher D., Liberati A., Tetzlaff J., Altman D.G. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement. Int. J. Surg. 2010;8:336–341. doi: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2010.02.007. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Hanincová K., Taragelová V., Koci J., Schafer S.M., Hails R., Ullmann A.J., Piesman J., Labuda M., Kurtenbach K. Association of Borrelia garinii and B. valaisiana with songbirds in Slovakia. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 2003;69:2825–2830. doi: 10.1128/AEM.69.5.2825-2830.2003. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Savić S., Vidić B., Lazić S., Lako B., Potkonjak A., Lepšanović Z. Borrelia burgdorferi in ticks and dogs in the province of Vojvodina, Serbia. Parasite. 2010;17:357–361. doi: 10.1051/parasite/2010174357. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Reye A.L., Hubschen J.M., Sausy A., Muller C.P. Prevalence and seasonality of tick-borne pathogens in questing Ixodes ricinus ticks from Luxembourg. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 2010;76:2923–2931. doi: 10.1128/AEM.03061-09. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Lommano E., Bertaiola L., Dupasquier C., Gern L. Infections and coinfections of questing Ixodes ricinus ticks by emerging zoonotic pathogens in Western Switzerland. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 2012;78:4606–4612. doi: 10.1128/AEM.07961-11. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Råberg L. Infection intensity and infectivity of the tick-borne pathogen Borrelia afzelii. J. Evol. Biol. 2012;25:1448–1453. doi: 10.1111/j.1420-9101.2012.02515.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Reye A.L., Stegniy V., Mishaeva N.P., Velhin S., Hübschen J.M., Ignatyev G., Muller C.P. Prevalence of tick-borne pathogens in Ixodes ricinus and Dermacentor reticulatus ticks from different geographical locations in Belarus. PLoS ONE. 2013;8:e54476. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0054476. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Mannelli A., Boggiatto G., Grego E., Cinco M., Murgia R., Stefanelli S., De Meneghi D., Rosati S. Acarological risk of exposure to agents of tick-borne zoonoses in the first recognized Italian focus of Lyme borreliosis. Epidemiol. Infect. 2003;131:1139–1147. doi: 10.1017/S0950268803001328. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Stensvold C.R., Al Marai D., Andersen L.O.B., Krogfelt K.A., Jensen J.S., Larsen K.S., Nielsen H.V. Babesia spp. and other pathogens in ticks recovered from domestic dogs in Denmark. Parasites Vectors. 2015;8:262. doi: 10.1186/s13071-015-0843-0. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Aureli S., Galuppi R., Ostanello F., Foley J.E., Bonoli C., Rejmanek D., Rocchi G., Orlandi E., Tampieri M. P Abundance of questing ticks and molecular evidence for pathogens in ticks in three parks of Emilia-Romagnaregion of Northern Italy. Ann. Agric. Environ. Med. 2015;22:459–466. doi: 10.5604/12321966.1167714. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Pintore M., Ceballos L., Iulini B., Tomassone L., Pautasso A., Corbellini D., Rizzo F., Mandola M., Bardelli M., Peletto S. Detection of invasive Borrelia burgdorferi strains in north-eastern Piedmont, Italy. Zoonoses Public Health. 2015;62:365–374. doi: 10.1111/zph.12156. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Millins C., Magierecka A., Gilbert L., Edoff A., Brereton A., Kilbride E., Denwood M., Birtles R., Biek R. An invasive mammal (the gray squirrel, Sciurus carolinensis) commonly hosts diverse and atypical genotypes of the zoonotic pathogen Borrelia burgdorferi sensu lato. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 2015;81:4236–4245. doi: 10.1128/AEM.00109-15. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Castro L.R., Gabrielli S., Iori A., Cancrini G. Molecular detection of Rickettsia, Borrelia, and Babesia species in Ixodes ricinus sampled in northeastern, central, and insular areas of Italy. Exp. Appl. Acarol. 2015;66:443–452. doi: 10.1007/s10493-015-9899-y. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Ebani V.V., Bertelloni F., Turchi B., Filogari D., Cerri D. Molecular survey of tick-borne pathogens in Ixodid ticks collected from hunted wild animals in Tuscany, Italy. Asian Pac. J. Trop. Med. 2015;8:714–717. doi: 10.1016/j.apjtm.2015.07.033. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Krawczyk A.I., van Leeuwen A.D., Jacobs-Reitsma W., Wijnands L.M., Bouw E., Jahfari S., Van-Hoek A.H., Van Der Giessen J.W., Roelfsema J.H., Kroes M. Presence of zoonotic agents in engorged ticks and hedgehog faeces from Erinaceus europaeus in (sub) urban areas. Parasites Vectors. 2015;8:210. doi: 10.1186/s13071-015-0814-5. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Butler C.M., van Oldruitenborgh-Oosterbaan M.M.S., Werners A.H., Stout T.A., Nielen M., Jongejan F., Houwers D.J. Borrelia burgdorferi and Anaplasma phagocytophilum in ticks and their equine hosts: A prospective clinical and diagnostic study of 47 horses following removal of a feeding tick. Pferdeheilkunde. 2016;32:335. doi: 10.21836/PEM20160406. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Krstić M., Stajković N., Lazić S. Prevalence of Borrelia burgdorferi sensu lato in Ixodes ricinus ticks and assessment of entomological risk index at localities in Belgrade. Vojnosanit. Pregl. 2016;73:817–824. doi: 10.2298/VSP150115069K. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Sormunen J.J., Penttinen R., Klemola T., Hänninen J., Vuorinen I., Laaksonen M., Sääksjärvi I.E., Ruohomäki K., Vesterinen E.J. Tick-borne bacterial pathogens in southwestern Finland. Parasites Vectors. 2016;9:168. doi: 10.1186/s13071-016-1449-x. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41.Skotarczak B., Wodecka B., Rymaszewska A., Adamska M. Molecular evidence for bacterial pathogens in Ixodes ricinus ticks infesting Shetland ponies. Exp. Appl. Acarol. 2016;69:179–189. doi: 10.1007/s10493-016-0027-4. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42.Raileanu C., Moutailler S., Pavel I., Porea D., Mihalca A.D., Savuta G., Vaussier M. Borrelia diversity and co-infection with other tick borne pathogens in ticks. Front. Cell. Infect. Microbiol. 2017;7:36. doi: 10.3389/fcimb.2017.00036. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 43.Davies S., Abdullah S., Helps C., Tasker S., Newbury H., Wall R. Prevalence of ticks and tick-borne pathogens: Babesia and Borrelia species in ticks infesting cats of Great Britain. Vet. Parasitol. 2017;244:129–135. doi: 10.1016/j.vetpar.2017.07.033. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 44.Obiegala A., Król N., Oltersdorf C., Nader J., Pfeffer M. The enzootic life-cycle of Borrelia burgdorferi (sensu lato) and tick-borne rickettsiae: An epidemiological study on wild-living small mammals and their ticks from Saxony, Germany. Parasites Vectors. 2017;10:115. doi: 10.1186/s13071-017-2053-4. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 45.Chvostáč M., Špitalská E., Václav R., Vaculová T., Minichová L., Derdáková M. Seasonal patterns in the prevalence and diversity of tick-borne Borrelia burgdorferi sensu lato, Anaplasma phagocytophilum and Rickettsia spp. in an urban temperate forest in south western Slovakia. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health. 2018;15:994. doi: 10.3390/ijerph15050994. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 46.Da Rold G., Ravagnan S., Soppelsa F., Porcellato E., Soppelsa M., Obber F., Citterio C.V., Carlin S., Danesi P., Montarsi F. Ticks are more suitable than red foxes for monitoring zoonotic tick-borne pathogens in northeastern Italy. Parasites Vectors. 2018;11:137. doi: 10.1186/s13071-018-2726-7. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 47.Millins C., Dickinson E.R., Isakovic P., Gilbert L., Wojciechowska A., Paterson V., Tao F., Jahn M., Kilbride E., Birtles R. Landscape structure affects the prevalence and distribution of a tick-borne zoonotic pathogen. Parasites Vectors. 2018;11:621. doi: 10.1186/s13071-018-3200-2. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 48.Namina A., Capligina V., Seleznova M., Krumins R., Aleinikova D., Kivrane A., Akopjana S., Lazovska M., Berzina I., Ranka R. Tick-borne pathogens in ticks collected from dogs, Latvia, 2011–2016. BMC Vet. Res. 2019;15:398. doi: 10.1186/s12917-019-2149-5. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 49.Millet I., Ragionieri M., Tomassone L., Trentin C., Mannelli A. Assessment of the exposure of people to questing ticks carrying agents of zoonoses in Aosta Valley, Italy. Vet. Sci. 2019;6:28. doi: 10.3390/vetsci6010028. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 50.Capligina V., Seleznova M., Akopjana S., Freimane L., Lazovska M., Krumins R., Kivrane A., Namina A., Aleinikova D., Kimsis J. Large-scale countrywide screening for tick-borne pathogens in field-collected ticks in Latvia during 2017–2019. Parasites Vectors. 2020;13:351. doi: 10.1186/s13071-020-04219-7. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 51.Zanet S., Battisti E., Pepe P., Ciuca L., Colombo L., Trisciuoglio A., Ferroglio E., Cringoli G., Rinaldi L., Maurelli M.P. Tick-borne pathogens in Ixodidae ticks collected from privately-owned dogs in Italy: A country-wide molecular survey. BMC Vet. Res. 2020;16:46. doi: 10.1186/s12917-020-2263-4. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 52.Pakanen V.-M., Sormunen J.J., Sippola E., Blomqvist D., Kallio E.R. Questing abundance of adult taiga ticks Ixodes persulcatus and their Borrelia prevalence at the north-western part of their distribution. Parasites Vectors. 2020;13:384. doi: 10.1186/s13071-020-04259-z. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 53.Norte A.C., Margos G., Becker N.S., Albino Ramos J., Núncio M.S., Fingerle V., Araújo P.M., Adamík P., Alivizatos H., Barba E. Host dispersal shapes the population structure of a tick-borne bacterial pathogen. Mol. Ecol. 2020;29:485–501. doi: 10.1111/mec.15336. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 54.Levytska V.A., Mushinsky A.B., Zubrikova D., Blanarova L., Długosz E., Vichova B., Slivinska K.A., Gajewski Z., Gizinski S., Liu S. Detection of pathogens in ixodid ticks collected from animals and vegetation in five regions of Ukraine. Ticks Tick-Borne Dis. 2021;12:101586. doi: 10.1016/j.ttbdis.2020.101586. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 55.Kniazeva V., Baysal O., Krasko A., Iwaniak W., Higgs S. The Prevalence and Genetic Characterization of Strains of Borrelia Isolated from Ixodes Tick Vectors in Belarus (2012–2019) Vector-Borne Zoonotic Dis. 2021;21:566–572. doi: 10.1089/vbz.2021.0006. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 56.Borşan S.-D., Ionică A.M., Galon C., Toma-Naic A., Peştean C., Sándor A.D., Moutailler S., Mihalca A.D. High Diversity, Prevalence, and Co-infection Rates of Tick-Borne Pathogens in Ticks and Wildlife Hosts in an Urban Area in Romania. Front. Microbiol. 2021;12:645002. doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2021.645002. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 57.Kovryha N., Tsyhankova A., Zelenuchina O., Mashchak O., Terekhov R., Rogovskyy A.S. Prevalence of Borrelia burgdorferi and Anaplasma phagocytophilum in Ixodid Ticks from Southeastern Ukraine. Vector-Borne Zoonotic Dis. 2021;21:242–246. doi: 10.1089/vbz.2020.2716. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 58.Holman M.S., Caporale D.A., Goldberg J., Lacombe E., Lubelczyk C., Rand P.W., Smith R.P. Anaplasma phagocytophilum, Babesia microti, and Borrelia burgdorferi in Ixodes scapularis, southern coastal Maine. Emerg. Infect. Dis. 2004;10:744. doi: 10.3201/eid1004.030566. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 59.Lane R.S., Steinlein D.B., Mun J. Human behaviors elevating exposure to Ixodes pacificus (Acari: Ixodidae) nymphs and their associated bacterial zoonotic agents in a hardwood forest. J. Med. Entomol. 2004;41:239–248. doi: 10.1603/0022-2585-41.2.239. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 60.Hamer S.A., Hickling G.J., Sidge J.L., Rosen M.E., Walker E.D., Tsao J.I. Diverse Borrelia burgdorferi strains in a bird-tick cryptic cycle. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 2011;77:1999–2007. doi: 10.1128/AEM.02479-10. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 61.Hamer S.A., Goldberg T.L., Kitron U.D., Brawn J.D., Anderson T.K., Loss S.R., Walker E.D., Hamer G.L. Wild birds and urban ecology of ticks and tick-borne pathogens, Chicago, Illinois, USA, 2005–2010. Emerg. Infect. Dis. 2012;18:1589. doi: 10.3201/eid1810.120511. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 62.Aliota M.T., Dupuis A.P., Wilczek M.P., Peters R.J., Ostfeld R.S., Kramer L.D. The prevalence of zoonotic tick-borne pathogens in Ixodes scapularis collected in the Hudson Valley, New York State. Vector-Borne Zoonotic Dis. 2014;14:245–250. doi: 10.1089/vbz.2013.1475. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 63.Adalsteinsson S.A., Shriver W.G., Hojgaard A., Bowman J.L., Brisson D., D’Amico V., Buler J.J. Multiflora rose invasion amplifies prevalence of Lyme disease pathogen, but not necessarily Lyme disease risk. Parasites Vectors. 2018;11:54. doi: 10.1186/s13071-018-2623-0. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 64.Yuan Q., Llanos-Soto S.G., Gangloff-Kaufmann J.L., Lampman J.M., Frye M.J., Benedict M.C., Tallmadge R.L., Mitchell P.K., Anderson R.R., Cronk B.D. Active surveillance of pathogens from ticks collected in New York State suburban parks and schoolyards. Zoonoses Public Health. 2020;67:684–696. doi: 10.1111/zph.12749. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 65.Salkeld D.J., Lagana D.M., Wachara J., Porter W.T., Nieto N.C. Examining prevalence and diversity of tick-borne pathogens in questing Ixodes pacificus ticks in California. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 2021;87:e00319-21. doi: 10.1128/AEM.00319-21. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 66.Nelder M.P., Russell C.B., Dibernardo A., Clow K.M., Johnson S., Cronin K., Patel S.N., Lindsay L.R. Monitoring the patterns of submission and presence of tick-borne pathogens in Ixodes scapularis collected from humans and companion animals in Ontario, Canada (2011–2017) Parasites Vectors. 2021;14:260. doi: 10.1186/s13071-021-04750-1. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 67.Kim S.Y., Kim T.-K., Kim T.Y., Lee H.I. Geographical Distribution of Borrelia burgdorferi sensu lato in Ticks Collected from Wild Rodents in the Republic of Korea. Pathogens. 2020;9:866. doi: 10.3390/pathogens9110866. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 68.Cao W.-C., Zhao Q.-M., Zhang P.-H., Yang H., Wu X.-M., Wen B.-H., Zhang X.T., Habbedema J.D.F. Prevalence of Anaplasma phagocytophila and Borrelia burgdorferi in Ixodes persulcatus ticks from northeastern China. Am. J. Trop. Med. Hyg. 2003;68:547–550. doi: 10.4269/ajtmh.2003.68.547. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 69.Elhelw R., Elhariri M., Hamza D., Abuowarda M., Ismael E., Farag H. Evidence of the presence of Borrelia burgdorferi in dogs and associated ticks in Egypt. BMC Vet. Res. 2021;17:49. doi: 10.1186/s12917-020-02733-5. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 70.Medlock J.M., Hansford K.M., Bormane A., Derdakova M., Estrada-Peña A., George J.-C., Golovjova T.G., Jaenson J.K., Jensen P.M. Driving forces for changes in geographical distribution of Ixodes ricinus ticks in Europe. Parasites Vectors. 2013;6:1. doi: 10.1186/1756-3305-6-1. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 71.Bugmyrin S.V., Bespyatova L.A., Korotkov Y.S., Burenkova L.A., Belova O.A., Romanova L.I., Kozlovskaya L.I., Karganova G.G., Ieshko E.P. Distribution of Ixodes ricinus and I. persulcatus ticks in southern Karelia (Russia) Ticks Tick-Borne Dis. 2013;4:57–62. doi: 10.1016/j.ttbdis.2012.07.004. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 72.Jaenson T.G., Eisen L., Comstedt P., Mejlon H., Lindgren E., Bergström S., Olsen B. Risk indicators for the tick Ixodes ricinus and Borrelia burgdorferi sensu lato in Sweden. Med. Vet. Entomol. 2009;23:226–237. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2915.2009.00813.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 73.Jones E., Hinckley A., Hook S., Meek J., Backenson B., Kugeler K., Feldman K. Pet ownership increases human risk of encountering ticks. Zoonoses Public Health. 2018;65:74–79. doi: 10.1111/zph.12369. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 74.Schutzer S.E., Berger B.W., Krueger J.G., Eshoo M.W., Ecker D.J., Aucott J.N. Atypical erythema migrans in patients with PCR-positive Lyme disease. Emerg. Infect. Dis. 2013;19:815. doi: 10.3201/eid1905.120796. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 75.Scott J., Scott C., Anderson J. The establishment of a blacklegged tick population by migratory songbirds in Ontario, Canada. J. Vet. Sci. Med. 2014;2:5. doi: 10.13188/2325-4645.1000005. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 76.Eisen R.J., Eisen L. The blacklegged tick, Ixodes scapularis: An increasing public health concern. Trends Parasitol. 2018;34:295–309. doi: 10.1016/j.pt.2017.12.006. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 77.Regier Y., Ballhorn W., Kempf V.A. Molecular detection of Bartonella henselae in 11 Ixodes ricinus ticks extracted from a single cat. Parasites Vectors. 2017;10:105. doi: 10.1186/s13071-017-2042-7. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 78.Cotté V., Bonnet S., Le Rhun D., Le Naour E., Chauvin A., Boulouis H.-J., Lecuelle B., Lillin T., Vayssier-Taussat M. Transmission of Bartonella henselae by Ixodes ricinus. Emerg. Infect. Dis. 2008;14:1074. doi: 10.3201/eid1407.071110. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 79.Tsao J.I. Reviewing molecular adaptations of Lyme borreliosis spirochetes in the context of reproductive fitness in natural transmission cycles. Vet. Res. 2009;40:36. doi: 10.1051/vetres/2009019. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 80.Ogden N., Trudel L., Artsob H., Barker I., Beauchamp G., Charron D., Drebot M., Galloway T., O’Handley R., Thompson R. Ixodes scapularis ticks collected by passive surveillance in Canada: Analysis of geographic distribution and infection with Lyme borreliosis agent Borrelia burgdorferi. J. Med. Entomol. 2006;43:600–609. doi: 10.1093/jmedent/43.3.600. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 81.Ogden N.H., Lindsay L.R., Hanincová K., Barker I.K., Bigras-Poulin M., Charron D.F., Heagy A., Francis C.M., O’Callaghan C.J., Schwartz I. Role of migratory birds in introduction and range expansion of Ixodes scapularis ticks and of Borrelia burgdorferi and Anaplasma phagocytophilum in Canada. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 2008;74:1780–1790. doi: 10.1128/AEM.01982-07. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 82.Alekseev A.N., Dubinina H.V., Van De Pol I., Schouls L.M. Identification of Ehrlichia spp. and Borrelia burgdorferi in Ixodes ticks in the Baltic regions of Russia. J. Clin. Microbiol. 2001;39:2237–2242. doi: 10.1128/JCM.39.6.2237-2242.2001. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 83.Cao W.-C., Zhao Q.-M., Zhang P.-H., Dumler J.S., Zhang X.-T., Fang L.-Q., Yang H. Granulocytic Ehrlichiae in Ixodes persulcatus ticks from an area in China where Lyme disease is endemic. J. Clin. Microbiol. 2000;38:4208–4210. doi: 10.1128/JCM.38.11.4208-4210.2000. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 84.Parola P., Raoult D. Tick-borne bacterial diseases emerging in Europe. Clin. Microbiol. Infect. 2001;7:80–83. doi: 10.1046/j.1469-0691.2001.00200.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 85.Černý J., Lynn G., Hrnková J., Golovchenko M., Rudenko N., Grubhoffer L. Management options for Ixodes ricinus-associated pathogens: A review of prevention strategies. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health. 2020;17:1830. doi: 10.3390/ijerph17061830. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 86.Alkishe A.A., Peterson A.T., Samy A.M. Climate change influences on the potential geographic distribution of the disease vector tick Ixodes ricinus. PLoS ONE. 2017;12:e0189092. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0189092. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 87.Spielman A., Wilson M.L., Levine J.F., Piesman J. Ecology of Ixodes dammini-borne human babesiosis and Lyme disease. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 1985;30:439–460. doi: 10.1146/annurev.en.30.010185.002255. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 88.Deplazes P., Eckert J., Mathis A., Samson-Himmelstjerna G., Zahner H. Parasitology in Veterinary Medicine. Wageningen Academic Publishers; Wageningen, The Netherlands: 2016. [Google Scholar]
  • 89.Braks M.A., van Wieren S.E., Takken W., Sprong H. Ecology and Prevention of Lyme Borreliosis. Wageningen Academic Publishers; Wageningen, The Netherlands: 2016. [Google Scholar]
  • 90.Uspensky I. Ticks as the main target of human tick-borne disease control: Russian practical experience and its lessons. J. Vector Ecol. J. Soc. Vector Ecol. 1999;24:40–53. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 91.Piesman J., Eisen L. Prevention of tick-borne diseases. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 2008;53:323–343. doi: 10.1146/annurev.ento.53.103106.093429. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Microorganisms are provided here courtesy of Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute (MDPI)

RESOURCES