Abstract
Objective
Bartonellosis is a global vector-borne zoonosis caused by Bartonella, a genus of intracellular Gram-negative bacteria. It is one of 14 emerging infectious diseases that have recently been identified in China, and the prevalence varies by region. A more in-depth understanding is needed regarding the role and influencing factors of ticks in the transmission of Bartonella, including the infection rate of ticks with Bartonella in different regions. This study explored the prevalence of Bartonella in ticks and the factors that influence it.
Methods
Databases (PubMed, Embase, Elsevier ScienceDirect, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, CNKI, VIP, CBM, and WanFang) were searched to review the preliminary research on Bartonella-carrying ticks in China.
Results
We identified and included 22 articles. Bartonella infection rates in ticks varied from 0 to 22.79% examined by the included studies. Our meta-analysis revealed that the prevalence of Bartonella in ticks was 3.15% (95% CI: 1.22 − 5.82%); the prevalence was higher in parasitic ticks (4.90%; 95% CI: 1.39 -10.14%) than ticks seeking hosts (1.42%; 95% CI: 0.62 − 2.50%) (P = 0.047).
Conclusion
The prevalence of Bartonella in the southern region of China (6.45%) was higher than that in the northern region (1.28%) (P = 0.030). Knowledge of ticks’ vectors and reservoir competence is crucial to reduce the disease burden.
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
Introduction
Bartonellosis is a vector-borne zoonosis caused by the Gram-negative and facultative intracellular bacteria Bartonella (family Bartonellaceae, order Rhizobiales, class Alphaproteobacteria, and phylum Proteobacteria) [1] that can affect the health of both animals and humans [2]. All Bartonella species found in animals can cause infections in humans, emphasizing the zoonotic relevance of these bacteria. Blood-sucking arthropods (fleas, ticks, lice, etc.) are the main carriers of these bacteria, which colonize the endothelial and red blood cells of mammals, including carnivores, ruminants, rodents, and bats [3,4,5].
Bartonellosis is one of the 14 newly identified emerging infectious diseases in China; it has been detected in all provinces except Qinghai Province, the Ningxia Hui Autonomous Region, and Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region [6]. At least 13 Bartonella species are recognized for their ability to infect humans, leading to various diseases. Infection is common in both immunocompetent and immunocompromised patients [7]. Bartonella infections can incite inflammation and various complications, including Cat Scratch Disease (CSD), Oroya Fever, Peruvian Warts, Bacillary Angiomatosis, and Trench Fever. Three main pathogens - Bartonella henselae (B. henselae), Bartonella quintana (B. quintana), and Bartonella bacilliformis (B. bacilliformis) - are responsible for most infections. Bartonella is found in mammalian hosts worldwide, and it can be transmitted between hosts by hematophagous arthropod vectors or directly by infecting hosts [8]. B. henselae is primarily transmitted by fleas, B. quintana is mainly transmitted by lice, and B. bacilliformis is transmitted by sandflies. Although CSD is mainly transmitted by fleas, studies have shown that tick exposure has been identified as a risk factor for human CSD [9, 10].
Ticks belong to the phylum Arthropoda, class Arachnida, subclass Acarina, order Parasitiformes, and superfamily Ixodida [11]. Hematophagous arthropods, such as ticks, are responsible for parasitizing vertebrates, including livestock, wild animals, and humans [12]. Ticks belong to three families, Argasidae, Ixodidae, and Nuttalliellidae, and the numerous species within these families exhibit considerable genetic diversity [13, 14]. Ticks transmit bacterial, parasitic, and viral pathogens and often carry multiple agents simultaneously. Tick-borne pathogens have a global presence with expanding ranges. The tick population is currently expanding. Furthermore, the geographical range and the number of suitable habitats of these arthropod vectors are increasing, accompanied by a proliferation in their associated pathogens [15]. Although research indicates that ticks and tick-borne illnesses are region-specific, they have the potential to occur worldwide because of the international movement of people, animals, and cargo from endemic to nonendemic regions [13]. According to the evidence, there has been a rise in the incidence of tick-borne diseases (TBD) worldwide. Studies have established Bartonella can be isolated and cultured from ticks, and Chang et al. confirmed the presence of human pathogens Bartonella in ticks [16].
The primary threat ticks pose to human and animal health stems from their pivotal role as vectors in the transmission of various pathogens; their epidemiological and epizootic significance ranks second only to mosquitoes [17,18,19]. The escalating prevalence and transmission of TBD represent significant public health concerns. Global attention has been drawn to the continuing geographical expansion of tick species, which could be influenced by climatic and environmental changes [20]. To control these emerging diseases, tick populations must be addressed, and the infections caused by the pathogens they carry must be identified and treated [21]. The globalization trend of ticks coupled with the increasing diversity of TBD underscores the need for in-depth research into the spatial distributions of both ticks and tick-borne pathogens, along with an exploration of their underlying risk factors. In recent years, scholars have been investigating ticks and TBD extensively because of the growing awareness of emerging tick-borne pathogens [22].
The current evidence indicates a global rise in the incidence of TBD; this necessitates a comprehensive understanding of the ecological niches occupied by major tick species and tick-borne pathogens to effectively monitor and control TBD [23]. This study investigated the presence of Bartonella-carrying ticks in China. The surveillance of Bartonella in ticks is a valuable tool for assessing the risk of human exposure in susceptible populations.
Materials and Methods
Search Strategy
Following the formulation of an initial research question, a systematic search was conducted to identify pertinent publications. The following databases were searched to identify original studies addressing the detection of Bartonella in ticks: PubMed, Embase, Elsevier ScienceDirect, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), China Science and Technology Journal Database (VIP), SinoMed (Chinese Biomedical Literature Database, CBM), and WanFang. The literature search involved the input of the specific terms in the title or keyword, abstract, and topic fields. The following keywords were utilized: bartonellosis, Bartonella infections, Cat Scratch Disease, Trench Fever, ticks, Ixodes, tick-borne diseases, prevalence, and China (detailed search strategies are documented in Table 1 in the Supplement).
After identifying potentially relevant articles, the studies were analyzed based on key characteristics, including the study setting, agent of interest, and study design. Original articles published between 1994 and 2023 were included. Title and abstract screening were performed using EndNote X9, and publications in Chinese and English were considered. Two authors independently reviewed all titles and abstracts and retrieved full-text articles if the screening suggested that they contained data on the prevalence of Bartonella in ticks. Data extraction was carried out and recorded in Excel (Microsoft Corporation, Redmond, WA, United States). The final study selection was determined through a thorough examination of titles, abstracts, and the full text, adhering to predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria. This meta-analysis ensures that a standardized approach is used to conduct and report on systematic reviews and meta-analyses.
Literature Screening and Quality Assessment
The following criteria were used to select eligible publications: (1) the study was performed on ticks; (2) ticks were collected from animals and/or the environment; (3) the detection method was polymerase chain reaction (PCR) or Real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR). After the selection process, an assessment of the data extracted from the eligible studies to ensure quality. The following information was extracted: the lead author, year of publication, study area, sample size, number of cases, detection method, vector species, and the presence of other pathogenic agents. The following exclusion criteria were applied: (1) the study type was ineligible (systematic reviews or meta-analyses, case reports, guidelines, or recommendations); (2) the full-text article was not available; (3) the study did not include China; (4) the study was a duplicate (it was published in English and Chinese); (5) studies with fewer than 10 samples. Extracted data were checked by two reviewers. The AHQR (Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality) scale was used to evaluate the quality of the original literature.
Statistical Analysis
A meta-analysis of the data was conducted utilizing R 4.3.2 (Biostat, Englewood, NJ, USA). All tests were 2-tailed, and P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Nonparametric tests were employed to compare tick infestation rates across regions and ticks with different living habits. Studies exhibiting heterogeneity were analyzed using a random effects model. The forest plot provided a 95% confidence interval (CI), and publication bias was assessed with the Peters test and funnel charts.
Results
Summary of the Papers Used for the Meta-analysis
We identified 22 papers focusing on ticks infected with Bartonella to include in the meta-analysis. The study flow chart is presented in Fig. 1, and the comprehensive details of the studies included in this review are listed in Table 1. Of these publications, 6 are in English and 16 are in Chinese.
The geographic range of the tick samples in the included studies covered most of China, but most tick samples originated from Heilongjiang and Zhejiang Provinces. The sample size of the studies ranged from 24 to 1343 ticks. The tick species composition in each province is represented by pie charts, which show that the distribution of tick species differed between regions (Fig. 2). The ticks infected with Bartonella belonged to 14 species, the full list of species is presented in Fig. 2.
The random effect model was used for the meta-analysis because of the heterogeneity of the data in the included studies (I2 = 97.4%, Chi-square = 801.48, df = 21, and P < 0.001). The overall estimated prevalence of 3.15% (95% CI: 1.22 − 5.82%) (Fig. 3).
Comparison of Bartonella Infection Rates in Different Periods
The data extracted from the studies obtained from a comprehensive literature search were statistically analyzed to estimate the Bartonella infection rates in ticks, including the annual rates and trends of infection in China. The annual Bartonella infection rates in ticks ranged from 0 to 22.79% across the years examined by the included studies. Figure 4 presents the annual Bartonella infection trend in ticks in China. Notably, the infection trend did not discernibly decrease over time. Furthermore, statistical analysis revealed no significant difference in Bartonella infection rates in ticks over time (Kruskal-Wallis = 11.787, df = 11, P = 0.38).
Comparison of Bartonella Infection Rates in Ticks Collected from Animals vs. the Environment
We conducted a stratified meta-analysis to compare the Bartonella infection rate of ticks with different living habits. The heterogeneity analyses for animal-related rates and environmental rates yielded results of I2 = 98% (P < 0.01) and I2 = 81% (P < 0.01), respectively (Fig. 5). Consequently, we applied a random effects model for the meta-analysis. The findings revealed a prevalence of 4.90% (95% CI: 1.39 -10.14%) in ticks collected from animals, whereas ticks collected from the environment exhibited a prevalence of 1.42% (95% CI: 0.62 − 2.50%). The difference between groups was statistically significant (Chi-square = 3.94, P = 0.047).
Comparison of Bartonella Infection Rates in Different Regions
We divided the studies into two groups according to region (south and north of China) and performed a stratified meta-analysis. The prevalence of Bartonella was 6.45% (95% CI: 1.74– 13.62%) in ticks collected from the south of China and 1.28% (95% CI: 0.60– 2.15%) in ticks collected from the north of China (Fig. 6). The difference between groups was statistically significant (Chi-square = 4.72, P = 0.030).
Publication Bias
We used the Peters test to assess bias. The test indicated that the included studies had a low likelihood of publication bias regarding the determination of Bartonella infection rates (t = − 0.73, df = 14, P = 0.479) (Fig. 7). When studies were sequentially removed, the merged results of the remaining studies did not show significant changes, indicating a high robustness of the results (Fig. 8).
Discussion
This meta-analysis assessed Bartonella infection rates in China, revealing a prevalence of 3.15% (95% CI: 1.22 − 5.82%). TBD have garnered increased attention in the public health and veterinary medicine fields in recent years [45]. As arthropods, ticks can transmit a wider variety of pathogens than other vectors [46]. The presence of multiple co-infecting pathogens in ticks may contribute to the complexity of the disease [47]. Co-infection has been identified as a factor influencing the disease course [48]. Data on the vector competence of many tick species are limited, and the understanding of environmental factors affecting Bartonella transmission is insufficient. Thus, further studies are needed to evaluate relevant tick species and the factors that influence pathogen transmission.
We conducted a comparison of Bartonella infection rates in different regions, which revealed a prevalence of 6.45% in southern China and 1.28% in northern China. The main difference between the north and south of China lies in their climates; and climate change has the potential to impact both pathogens and vectors, influencing the survival and transmission of pathogens [49, 50]. Notably, the tick life cycle is reliant on climate conditions, and tick-borne pathogens exhibit sensitivity to climate variations; factors such as temperature and humidity stress may impact pathogen transmission [51, 52]. Warming trends may enhance tick survival, shorten tick life cycles, increase larval hatch rates, and prolong the duration of the tick season. Climate change also has indirect effects on host communities, which could further contribute to the spread of tick-borne pathogens by altering tick populations [53,54,55]. Moreover, the distribution of tick species differs between the north and south of China, and these differences influence the ticks’ pathogen-carrying capabilities. Most Dermacentor spp. and Hyalomma spp. are primarily distributed in the northern region, whereas they are uncommon in the southern region [56]. These variations significantly impact the regional Bartonella infection rates in ticks. Additional research is necessary to demonstrate the vector capacity of tick species [57]. Understanding vector competence and capacity is vital in predicting Bartonella’s expansion to new areas.
Our meta-analysis revealed a higher prevalence of Bartonella in ticks collected from animals (4.90%; 95% CI: 1.39 -10.14%) than in ticks collected from the environment (1.42%, 95% CI: 0.62-2.50%). Because studies collect ticks from different hosts, the detected microbial DNA may not originate solely from ticks. Rather, it may be derived from blood powder, potentially originating from the host. Simultaneous feeding ticks can amplify the transmission of pathogens between ticks, a phenomenon more likely to occur in ticks collected from animals than in those collected from the environment [58, 59]. After a tick is infected with one bacterium, it has an increased likelihood of being infected with another bacterium [60]. Ticks that are gathered from the surroundings have a reduced rate of carrying pathogens because they are unable to sustain the normal transmission of pathogens without hosts [61]. Additionally, the bacterial richness of all ticks significantly decreases after they become engorged [62].
The Bartonella infection rate is also influenced by the tick species; various studies have suggested that tick species impact bacterial diversity [63, 64]. A previous study indicated that the infection rate of Dermacentor everestianus (D. everestianus) was higher than that of other tick species. D. everestianus is predominantly distributed in Tibet, China, and is well-adapted to highland areas [65]. Haemaphysalis qinghaiensis (H. qinghaiensis) is particularly prevalent in Qinghai, Gansu, Sichuan, and Tibet Provinces [66]. By contrast, Haemaphysalis longicornis (H. longicornis) transmits the largest number of pathogens of all tick species, including Dabie bandavirus, tick-borne encephalitis virus, Borrelia burgdorferi, Anaplasma phagocytophilum, and Babesia, among others [67, 68]. The distribution of Dermacentor silvarum (D. silvarum) spans from 22°N to 57°N and has been widely reported in northern China [69]. The distribution of D. silvarum is concentrated in areas with boreal climates featuring precipitation and boreal winter dry climates [70].
Detecting subtypes of pathogens with pathogenic potential in humans facilitates a more precise assessment of human disease risk [71]. The impact of Bartonellosis on animals and public health varies based on the Bartonella species, infection stage, immune characteristics, and geographical area [72]. CSD was initially described in 1931 and is the most common syndrome associated with Bartonella infection [73]. CSD, caused by B. henselae, is typically characterized as febrile lymphadenopathy, which is also among the most common venereal causes of neuroretinitis [74]. Although some cases progress to meningitis, osteomyelitis, encephalitis, and endocarditis [75]. Diagnosing infections caused by Bartonella is difficult due to the complex clinical symptoms and features of the pathogen [76].
The present study has four major limitations. First, the included studies encompassed a limited number of provinces, potentially introducing substantial errors in assessing the national rate of Bartonella infection in ticks. Second, the sample size of the ticks varied considerably across studies. The calculation of the overall infection rate was not weighted; it simply aggregated the number of positive detections. Third, we excluded papers that lacked complete data on prevalence, which may have resulted in substantial data loss. Fourth, most studies in this paper employed PCR for pathogen detection, while Next Generation Sequencing (NGS) technology can identify a broader range of tick-associated bacteria. Prospective studies based on NGS findings can be instrumental in preventing TBD [77]. Finally, the presence of Bartonella in ticks does not always mean that Bartonella is spread by ticks. Further studies are needed to evaluate the vector role of ticks. These findings underscore the imperative for future research on tick-associated bacteria using NGS, with a specific focus on medically relevant species to prevent TBD.
Conclusion
Ticks act as carriers for Bartonella, with ticks found on animals carrying more pathogens than those found in the environment, imposing a substantial disease burden. Analyzing the vector capacity of ticks is crucial in aiding public health efforts to assess the role ticks play in Bartonella transmission. This knowledge is indispensable for the prevention of Bartonellosis, particularly since there are no specific treatments currently available.
References
Nelson CA, Saha S, Mead PS (2016) Cat-scratch disease in the United States, 2005–2013[J]. Emerg Infect Dis 22(10):1741–1746. https://doi.org/10.3201/eid2210.160115
Muhldorfer K (2013) Bats and bacterial pathogens: a review[J]. Zoonoses Public Health 60(1):93–103. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1863-2378.2012.01536.x
Boulouis HJ, Chang CC, Henn JB et al (2005) Factors associated with the rapid emergence of zoonotic Bartonella infections[J]. Vet Res 36(3):383–410. https://doi.org/10.1051/vetres:2005009
Chomel BB, Boulouis HJ, Maruyama S et al (2006) Bartonella spp. in pets and effect on human health[J]. Emerg Infect Dis 12(3):389–394. https://doi.org/10.3201/eid1203.050931
Klotz SA, Ianas V, Elliott SP (2011) Cat-scratch disease[J]. Am Fam Physician 83(2):152–155
Ji⁃min S, Liang L, Qi⁃yong L et al (2010) Molecular epidemiological investigation of Bartonella infection in ticks in Zhejiang Province[J]. Chin J Vector Biol Control 21(03):232–234
Spach DH, Koehler JE (1998) Bartonella-associated infections[J]. Infect Dis Clin North Am 12(1):137–155. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0891-5520(05)70414-1
Krugel M, Krol N, Kempf VAJ et al (2022) Emerging rodent-associated Bartonella: a threat for human health?[J]. Parasit Vectors 15(1):113. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13071-022-05162-5
Zangwill KM, Hamilton DH, Perkins BA et al (1993) Cat scratch disease in connecticut. Epidemiology, risk factors, and evaluation of a new diagnostic test[J]. N Engl J Med 329(1):8–13. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJM199307013290102
Lucey D, Dolan MJ, Moss CW et al (1992) Relapsing illness due to Rochalimaea henselae in immunocompetent hosts: implication for therapy and new epidemiological associations[J]. Clin Infect Dis 14(3):683–688. https://doi.org/10.1093/clinids/14.3.683
Bowman AS, Nuttall PA (2008) Ticks: biology, disease and control. Cambridge University Press
Parola P (2004) Tick-borne rickettsial diseases: emerging risks in Europe[J]. Comp Immunol Microbiol Infect Dis 27(5):297–304. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cimid.2004.03.006
Graves SR, Stenos J (2017) Tick-borne infectious diseases in Australia[J]. Med J Aust 206(7):320–324. https://doi.org/10.5694/mja17.00090
Dehhaghi M, Kazemi Shariat Panahi H, Holmes EC et al (2019) Human tick-borne diseases in Australia[J]. Front Cell Infect Microbiol 9:3. https://doi.org/10.3389/fcimb.2019.00003
Parola P, Paddock CD, Socolovschi C et al (2013) Update on tick-borne rickettsioses around the world: a geographic approach[J]. Clin Microbiol Rev 26(4):657–702. https://doi.org/10.1128/CMR.00032-13
Chang CC, Chomel BB, Kasten RW et al (2001) Molecular evidence of Bartonella spp. in questing adult Ixodes pacificus ticks in California[J]. J Clin Microbiol 39(4):1221–1226. https://doi.org/10.1128/JCM.39.4.1221-1226.2001
de la Fuente J, Estrada-Pena A, Venzal JM et al (2008) Overview: ticks as vectors of pathogens that cause disease in humans and animals[J]. Front Biosci 13:6938–6946. https://doi.org/10.2741/3200
Hempleman SC, Warburton SJ (2013) Comparative embryology of the carotid body[J]. Respir Physiol Neurobiol 185(1):3–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resp.2012.08.004
Kong Y, Zhang G, Jiang L et al (2022) Metatranscriptomics reveals the diversity of the tick virome in Northwest China[J]. Microbiol Spectr 10(5):e0111522. https://doi.org/10.1128/spectrum.01115-22
Sonenshine DE (2018) Range expansion of tick disease vectors in North America: implications for spread of tick-borne disease[J]. Int J Environ Res Public Health 15(3). https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph15030478
Madison-Antenucci S, Kramer LD, Gebhardt LL et al (2020) Emerging tick-borne diseases[J]. Clin Microbiol Rev 33(2). https://doi.org/10.1128/CMR.00083-18
Fang LQ, Liu K, Li XL et al (2015) Emerging tick-borne infections in mainland China: an increasing public health threat[J]. Lancet Infect Dis 15(12):1467–1479. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1473-3099(15)00177-2
Zhao GP, Wang YX, Fan ZW et al (2021) Mapping ticks and tick-borne pathogens in China[J]. Nat Commun 12(1):1075. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-021-21375-1
Tsai YL, Chuang ST, Chang CC et al (2010) Bartonella species in small mammals and their ectoparasites in Taiwan[J]. Am J Trop Med Hyg 83(4):917–923. https://doi.org/10.4269/ajtmh.2010.10-0083
Tsai YL, Chomel BB, Chang CC et al (2011) Bartonella and Babesia infections in cattle and their ticks in Taiwan[J]. Comp Immunol Microbiol Infect Dis 34(2):179–187. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cimid.2010.11.003
Tsai YL, Lin CC, Chomel BB et al (2011) Bartonella infection in shelter cats and dogs and their ectoparasites[J]. Vector Borne Zoonotic Dis 11(8):1023–1030. https://doi.org/10.1089/vbz.2010.0085
Wang W, Li l (2013) Investigation on ticks and the pathogens they could carry in Tianjin[J]. Chin J Hyg Insect & Equip 19(03):220–222. https://doi.org/10.19821/j.1671-2781.2013.03.016
Zhe X, Xuhon X, Yilong Z et al (2014) Comprehensive surveillance of tick-borne diseases in Jiande, Zhejiang Province China[J]. Chin J Vector Biol & Control.;25(4)
Cheng C, Wen-dong J, dan J, et al (2015) Investigation of emerging tick-borne diseases at Heilongjiang ports[J]. Chinese Frontier Health Quarantine.;38(03):176–181. https://doi.org/10.16408/j.1004-9770.2015.03.007
Ying-qun F, Ting-ting L, Yong H et al (2015) Investigation of ticks and carried pathogens on Heixiazi island[J]. Chin Frontier Health Quarantine 38(02):119–123. https://doi.org/10.16408/j.1004-9770.2015.02.011
Yu⁃qing L, Feng L, Jin⁃bo H et al (2015) Surveillance of tick⁃borne infections during 2012–2013 in Lishui, Zhejiang[J]. Chin J Vector Biol Control 26(5):512–515. https://doi.org/10.11853/j.issn.1003.4692.2015.05.022
Liu X, Zheng C, Li X et al (2015) Research on the pathogenic infection of Haemaphysalis longicornis ticks parasitizing goats in Yiyuan County, Shandong Province[J]. Acta Academiae Medicinae Xuzhou 35(12):837–840
Han H, Yang Y, Zhao X et al (2016) Monitoring for tick and tick-borne pathogens at Inner Mongolia Ports[J]. Acta Parasito1 Med Entomo1 Sin.;23(4)
Jun Y, Yanmei W, Wendong J et al (2016) Investigation on emerging tick-borne pathogens and co-infection in ticks in lava area of Xunke County, Heilongjiang Province[J]. Chin J Vector Biol Control 27(04):341–344
Liu XY, Gong XY, Zheng C et al (2017) Molecular epidemiological survey of bacterial and parasitic pathogens in hard ticks from eastern China[J]. Acta Trop 167:26–30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actatropica.2016.12.010
Ju W, Wang Y, Xu N et al (2018) Investigation on Bartonella infection in rodents and ticks at Heihe Airport in Heilongjiang Province[J]. Port Health Control 23(02):60–63. https://doi.org/10.16408/j.1004-9770.2015.03.007
Yu Y, Yan⁃fei G, Yang C et al (2018) Investigation on tick⁃borne pathogens in Inner Mongolia Manchuria port area during 2012–2014[J]. Chin J Vector Biol Control 29(02):147–150
Ye N, Pei X, Sun S (2018) Investigation of the ticks in border trade regions of Heihe[J]. Chin J Zoonoses 34(08):761–767. https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1002-2694.2018.00.128
Hou J, Ling F, Liu Y et al (2019) A molecular survey of Anaplasma, Ehrlichia, Bartonella, and Theileria in ticks collected from southeastern China[J]. Exp Appl Acarol 79(1):125–135. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10493-019-00411-2
Tiancai T, chengcheng L, Dongbo Y et al (2019) Molecular detection of Bartonella infection in ixodid ticks collected from yaks in Shiqu County of Sichuan Province[J]. Acta Agricultuurae Zhejiangensis 31(07):1066–1072. https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1004-1524.2019.07.05
Xiutian H, Yang X, Dongbo Y et al (2020) PCR detection and phylogenetic analysis of Bartonella spp. and Anaplasma spp. in Ixodid ticks collected from Yak and Plateau Pika in Songpan County of Sichuan Province[J]. Acta Vet Et Zootechnica Sinica 51(06):1438–1446. https://doi.org/10.11843/j.issn.0366-6964.2020.06.027
Xia C, Lei N, Hui-jie L et al (2022) Surveillance of ticks and tick-borne pathogens at Fuyuan port in Heilongjiang Province from 2019 to 2021[J]. Chin Frontier Health Quarantine 45(5):357–360. https://doi.org/10.16408/j.1004-9770.2022.05.005
Cao XQ, Gu XL, Zhang L et al (2023) Molecular detection of Rickettsia, Anaplasma, and Bartonella in ticks from free-ranging sheep in Gansu Province, China[J]. Ticks Tick Borne Dis 14(3):102137. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ttbdis.2023.102137
He Z, Fu T, Yan M et al (2023) Analysis of epidemiological characteristics of pathogens carried by ticks in Qinling Area[J]. Adv Clin Med 13(11). https://doi.org/10.12677/acm.2023.13112375
Boulanger N, Boyer P, Talagrand-Reboul E et al (2019) Ticks and tick-borne diseases[J]. Med Mal Infect 49(2):87–97. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.medmal.2019.01.007
Diaz-Sanchez AA, Obregon D, Santos HA et al (2023) Advances in the epidemiological surveillance of tick-borne pathogens[J]. Pathogens 12(5). https://doi.org/10.3390/pathogens12050633
Edvinsson M, Norlander C, Nilsson K et al (2021) Bartonella spp. seroprevalence in tick-exposed Swedish patients with persistent symptoms[J]. Parasit Vectors 14(1):530. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13071-021-05043-3
Cutler SJ, Vayssier-Taussat M, Estrada-Pena A et al (2021) Tick-borne diseases and co-infection: current considerations[J]. Ticks Tick Borne Dis 12(1):101607. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ttbdis.2020.101607
Bacon EA, Kopsco H, Gronemeyer P et al (2022) Effects of climate on the variation in abundance of three tick species in Illinois[J]. J Med Entomol 59(2):700–709. https://doi.org/10.1093/jme/tjab189
Estrada-Pena A (2023) The climate niche of the invasive tick species Hyalomma marginatum and Hyalomma rufipes (Ixodidae) with recommendations for modeling exercises[J]. Exp Appl Acarol 89(2):231–250. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10493-023-00778-3
Estrada-Pena A (2009) Tick-borne pathogens, transmission rates and climate change[J]. Front Biosci (Landmark Ed) 14(7):2674–2687. https://doi.org/10.2741/3405
Sands BO, Bryer KE, Wall R (2021) Climate and the seasonal abundance of the tick Dermacentor reticulatus[J]. Med Vet Entomol 35(3):434–441. https://doi.org/10.1111/mve.12518
Barker SC, Walker AR (2014) Ticks of Australia. The species that infest domestic animals and humans[J]. Zootaxa 38161–144. https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.3816.1.1
Bakirci S, Aysul N, Bilgic HB et al (2019) Tick bites on humans in southwestern region of Turkey: species diversity[J]. Turkiye Parazitol Derg 43(1):30–35. https://doi.org/10.4274/tpd.galenos.2019.6219
Ogden NH, Ben Beard C, Ginsberg HS et al (2021) Possible effects of climate change on Ixodid ticks and the pathogens they transmit: predictions and observations[J]. J Med Entomol 58(4):1536–1545. https://doi.org/10.1093/jme/tjaa220
Zhang YK, Zhang XY, Liu JZ (2019) Ticks (Acari: Ixodoidea) in China: geographical distribution, host diversity, and specificity[J]. Arch Insect Biochem Physiol 102(3):e21544. https://doi.org/10.1002/arch.21544
Nasirian H (2022) Ticks infected with crimean-Congo hemorrhagic fever virus (CCHFV): a decision approach systematic review and meta-analysis regarding their role as vectors[J]. Travel Med Infect Dis 47:102309. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tmaid.2022.102309
Randolph SE (2011) Transmission of tick-borne pathogens between co-feeding ticks: Milan Labuda’s enduring paradigm[J]. Ticks Tick Borne Dis 2(4):179–182. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ttbdis.2011.07.004
Moraes-Filho J, Costa FB, Gerardi M et al (2018) Rickettsia rickettsii Co-feeding transmission among Amblyomma aureolatum ticks[J]. Emerg Infect Dis 24(11):2041–2048. https://doi.org/10.3201/eid2411.180451
Sun J, Liu Q, Lu L et al (2008) Coinfection with four genera of bacteria (Borrelia, Bartonella, Anaplasma, and Ehrlichia) in Haemaphysalis longicornis and Ixodes sinensis ticks from China[J]. Vector Borne Zoonotic Dis 8(6):791–795. https://doi.org/10.1089/vbz.2008.0005
Zhao C, Zhang X, Si X et al (2022) Hedgehogs as amplifying hosts of severe fever with thrombocytopenia syndrome virus, China[J]. Emerg Infect Dis 28(12):2491–2499. https://doi.org/10.3201/eid2812.220668
Qiu H, Lv Q, Chang Q et al (2022) Microbiota community structure and interaction networks within Dermacentor silvarum, Ixodes persulcatus, and Haemaphysalis concinna[J]. Anim (Basel) 12(23). https://doi.org/10.3390/ani12233237
Van Treuren W, Ponnusamy L, Brinkerhoff RJ et al (2015) Variation in the microbiota of Ixodes ticks with regard to geography, species, and sex[J]. Appl Environ Microbiol 81(18):6200–6209. https://doi.org/10.1128/AEM.01562-15
Sperling JL, Silva-Brandao KL, Brandao MM et al (2017) Comparison of bacterial 16S rRNA variable regions for microbiome surveys of ticks[J]. Ticks Tick Borne Dis 8(4):453–461. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ttbdis.2017.02.002
Li T, Liu M, Zhang TT et al (2018) The life cycle and development characteristics of Dermacentor everestianus (Acari: Ixodidae) under field conditions in Qinghai-Tibet Plateau[J]. Exp Appl Acarol 76(4):513–522. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10493-018-0325-0
Weinert LA, Werren JH, Aebi A et al (2009) Evolution and diversity of Rickettsia bacteria[J]. BMC Biol 7:6. https://doi.org/10.1186/1741-7007-7-6
Rochlin I, Toledo A (2020) Emerging tick-borne pathogens of public health importance: a mini-review[J]. J Med Microbiol 69(6):781–791. https://doi.org/10.1099/jmm.0.001206
Seo JW, Kim D, Yun N et al (2021) Clinical update of severe fever with thrombocytopenia syndrome[J]. Viruses 13(7). https://doi.org/10.3390/v13071213
Guo WB, Shi WQ, Wang Q et al (2021) Distribution of Dermacentor silvarum and associated pathogens: meta-analysis of global published data and a field survey in China[J]. Int J Environ Res Public Health 18(9). https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18094430
Rubel F, Brugger K, Belova OA et al (2020) Vectors of disease at the northern distribution limit of the genus Dermacentor in Eurasia: D. reticulatus and D. silvarum[J]. Exp Appl Acarol 82(1):95–123. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10493-020-00533-y
Hojgaard A, Osikowicz LM, Rizzo MF et al (2022) Using next generation sequencing for molecular detection and differentiation of Anaplasma phagocytophilum variants from host seeking Ixodes scapularis ticks in the United States[J]. Ticks Tick Borne Dis 13(6):102041. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ttbdis.2022.102041
Deng H, Pang Q, Zhao B et al (2018) Molecular mechanisms of Bartonella and mammalian erythrocyte interactions: a review[J]. Front Cell Infect Microbiol 8:431. https://doi.org/10.3389/fcimb.2018.00431
Zangwill KM (2013) Cat scratch disease and other Bartonella infections[J]. Adv Exp Med Biol 764:159–166. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-4726-9_13
Yap SM, Saeed M, Logan P et al (2020) Bartonella neuro retinitis (cat-scratch disease)[J]. Pract Neurol 20(6):505–506. https://doi.org/10.1136/practneurol-2020-002586
Florin TA, Zaoutis TE, Zaoutis LB (2008) Beyond cat scratch disease: widening spectrum of Bartonella henselae infection[J]. Pediatrics 121(5):e1413–1425. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2007-1897
Iannino F, Salucci S, Di Provvido A et al (2018) Bartonella infections in humans dogs and cats[J]. Vet Ital 54(1):63–72. https://doi.org/10.12834/VetIt.398.1883.2
Che Lah EF, Ahamad M, Dmitry A et al (2023) Metagenomic profile of the bacterial communities associated with Ixodes granulatus (Acari: Ixodidae): a potential vector of tick-borne diseases[J]. J Med Entomol 60(4):753–768. https://doi.org/10.1093/jme/tjad044
Funding
This work was supported by National Natural Science Foundation of China [Grant No. 82273689]; Key Research and Development Program of Shaanxi [Grant No. 2024SF-YBXM-289].
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Competing Interest
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Additional information
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Electronic Supplementary Material
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if you modified the licensed material. You do not have permission under this licence to share adapted material derived from this article or parts of it. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Wang, Y., Li, R., Yin, T. et al. Prevalence of Tick Infection with Bartonella in China: A Review and Meta-analysis. Acta Parasit. (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11686-024-00893-0
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11686-024-00893-0