Institute of Parasitology, Department of Pathobiology, University of Veterinary Medicine Vienna, Veterinaerplatz 1, Vienna A-1210, Austria.
Parasit Vectors. 2013 Mar 19;6:76. doi: 10.1186/1756-3305-6-76.
Effective control of tick infestation and pathogen transmission requires profound knowledge of tick biology in view of their vector function. The particular time of the year when the different tick species start to quest and the favoured sites on the canine host are of major interest. The efficacy of acaricides/repellents to control ticks in the field requires observation.
To address these issues, 90 dogs, grouped in "untreated", "acaricide/repellent" (permethrin) and "acaricide only" (fipronil) animals and subjected to tick infestation under natural conditions in Burgenland (Eastern Austria), were examined. The number and species of ticks occurring during and outside the protection time was evaluated during a period of 11 months and the biting location on the dogs' skin was recorded.
Of the 700 ticks collected, the most common species in that particular walking area was Ixodes ricinus, followed by Dermacentor reticulatus and Haemaphysalis concinna. Regarding the on-host activity, D. reticulatus displayed more infestations in early spring and late autumn, whereas I. ricinus occurred almost one month later in spring and one month earlier in autumn. H. concinna followed a monophasic pattern of activity with a peak in summer. The preferred feeding sites of the ticks on the dogs were on the head, neck, shoulder and chest. This distribution over the dog's body was not influenced by the use of the drugs, although on the whole fewer ticks (22.5% of all ticks) were found during the protection time. Interestingly, differences occurred with the use of drugs compared to non-protected dogs with regard to the infestation over the year. Acaricide-treated dogs displayed a higher prevalence in April, May and September, whereas dogs of the acaricide/repellent group showed a higher infestation in March, July, October and November.
The different tick species display different on-dog activity peaks over the year, during which particular canine diseases can be expected and predicted, considering the specific incubation times for each pathogen.The tick species occurring in this study do not seem to choose particular sites on the dogs. Their arrival place seems to represent the attachment and consequently the feeding sites. The use of acaricides leads to a significantly (p<0.01) lower number of infesting ticks but no change of the distribution pattern on the dogs was observed.
鉴于蜱虫的媒介功能,有效控制蜱虫滋生和病原体传播需要深入了解蜱虫的生物学特性。不同蜱种开始觅食的特定时间以及犬宿主的首选部位是主要关注点。在野外控制蜱虫的杀蜱剂/驱避剂的效果需要进行观察。
为了解决这些问题,将 90 只犬分为“未处理”、“杀蜱剂/驱避剂(氯菊酯)”和“杀蜱剂(氟虫腈)”三组,在奥地利东部布尔根兰州的自然条件下进行蜱虫感染实验。在 11 个月的时间内,评估了在保护期内和保护期外发生的蜱虫数量和种类,并记录了蜱虫在犬皮肤上的叮咬位置。
在所采集的 700 只蜱虫中,该特定步行区域最常见的物种是蓖子硬蜱,其次是血红扇头蜱和长角血蜱。关于宿主活动,血红扇头蜱在早春和晚秋时感染较多,而蓖子硬蜱则在春季晚一个月、秋季早一个月出现。长角血蜱则呈现单峰活动模式,夏季达到高峰。蜱虫在犬身上的首选进食部位在头部、颈部、肩部和胸部。这种在犬体上的分布不受药物使用的影响,尽管在保护期内发现的蜱虫(所有蜱虫的 22.5%)数量较少。有趣的是,与未受保护的犬相比,药物使用会导致全年的感染情况有所不同。杀蜱剂处理的犬在 4 月、5 月和 9 月的感染率较高,而杀蜱剂/驱避剂组的犬在 3 月、7 月、10 月和 11 月的感染率较高。
不同的蜱种在一年中表现出不同的犬体活动高峰,在此期间,可以根据每种病原体的特定潜伏期,预计和预测特定的犬类疾病。本研究中出现的蜱种似乎不会选择犬只的特定部位。它们到达的地方似乎代表了附着部位,进而也是进食部位。杀蜱剂的使用会显著(p<0.01)降低感染蜱虫的数量,但在犬只上没有观察到分布模式的变化。