In EDS ansehen HTML Volltext PDF-Volltext

Rodents/Shrews and their Ectoparasites are not Associated with the Enzootic Maintenance and Transmission of Coxiella burnetii to Livestock and Humans in Puducherry, India

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Titel: Rodents/Shrews and their Ectoparasites are not Associated with the Enzootic Maintenance and Transmission of Coxiella burnetii to Livestock and Humans in Puducherry, India
Autoren: Prathibha A Indhu, V Bhanu Rekha, R Hariharan, V J Ajay Kumar, S Lakshmy, Anand Kasirajan, Thirumurthy Madhavan, D Panneer
Quelle: Zoonoses, Vol 4, Iss 1, p 998 (2024)
Verlagsinformationen: Compuscript Ltd, 2024.
Publikationsjahr: 2024
Bestand: LCC:Infectious and parasitic diseases
LCC:Veterinary medicine
Schlagwörter: Infectious and parasitic diseases, RC109-216, Veterinary medicine, SF600-1100
Beschreibung: “Q fever,” which is caused by Coxiella burnetii , is endemic in India. In addition to livestock, rodents have also been reported to be associated with enzootic maintenance, favoring pathogen transmission. Currently, however, no data are available on the role of rodents in “Q fever” transmission in India. A cross-sectional study was undertaken in 39 Puducherry villages to screen Coxiella burnetii in synanthropic rodents (rats and shrews) and their ectoparasites (ticks, mites, and fleas) by real-time and conventional PCR protocols targeting the pathogen specific IS 1111 and com 1 genes. One hundred forty animals were trapped (107 shrews and 33 rats). The ticks, mites, and fleas infesting the rodents were identified as Rhipicephalus sanguineus , Leptotrombidium deliense and Schoengastiella spp., and Xenopsylla cheopis , respectively. PCR screening of the DNA extracted from the rodent/shrew blood samples and their ectoparasites tested negative for C. burnetii. Synanthropic rodents, such as rodents/shrews and their ectoparasites do not have a pivotal part in the enzootic maintenance and spread of Q fever to humans and livestock in Puducherry.
Publikationsart: article
Dateibeschreibung: electronic resource
Sprache: English
ISSN: 2737-7474
2737-7466
Relation: https://www.scienceopen.com/hosted-document?doi=10.15212/ZOONOSES-2023-0042; https://doaj.org/toc/2737-7466; https://doaj.org/toc/2737-7474
DOI: 10.15212/ZOONOSES-2023-0042
Zugangs-URL: https://doaj.org/article/c8fb1eae1d634c36aae5f18a24c651b4
Dokumentencode: edsdoj.8fb1eae1d634c36aae5f18a24c651b4
Datenbank: Directory of Open Access Journals
Volltext ist per Gastzugang nicht verfügbar.
FullText Links:
  – Type: pdflink
    Url: https://content.ebscohost.com/cds/retrieve?content=AQICAHjPtM4BHU3ZchRwgzYmadcigk49r9CVlbU7V5F6lgH7WwFlsO8xfxnpbecY2guDuF1YAAAA4jCB3wYJKoZIhvcNAQcGoIHRMIHOAgEAMIHIBgkqhkiG9w0BBwEwHgYJYIZIAWUDBAEuMBEEDNBLMnrueJlO322v8wIBEICBmssioYQjUZ87U_YNQr_otBtAJ6FscwiQVqz9wAB3BOJz3QAtEQVavjrffRKofq38lQu5rogZaOfiATXruYLLJIqR1JUAlGjE1rHJihtxBXVpzyJNM6MuSRRAoKIzxZvgKAd89e2OmktP0G4SLBpaZk3-bUCyzTzIsNhbwwyKv87Lzwdhhz_ZUOpAd7bu9sfbHkhbIaEGkEinTmE=
Text:
  Availability: 1
  Value: <anid>AN0183058966;[n8zn]01jan.24;2025Feb18.04:54;v2.2.500</anid> <title id="AN0183058966-1">Rodents/Shrews and their Ectoparasites are not Associated with the Enzootic Maintenance and Transmission of Coxiella burnetii to Livestock and Humans in Puducherry, India </title> <p>Objectives: "Q fever," which is caused by Coxiella burnetii, is endemic in India. In addition to livestock, rodents have also been reported to be associated with enzootic maintenance, favoring pathogen transmission. Currently, however, no data are available on the role of rodents in "Q fever" transmission in India. Methods: A cross-sectional study was undertaken in 39 Puducherry villages to screen Coxiella burnetii in synanthropic rodents (rats and shrews) and their ectoparasites (ticks, mites, and fleas) by real-time and conventional PCR protocols targeting the pathogen specific IS 1111 and com 1 genes. Results: One hundred forty animals were trapped (107 shrews and 33 rats). The ticks, mites, and fleas infesting the rodents were identified as Rhipicephalus sanguineus, Leptotrombidium deliense and Schoengastiella spp., and Xenopsylla cheopis, respectively. PCR screening of the DNA extracted from the rodent/shrew blood samples and their ectoparasites tested negative for C. burnetii. Conclusions: Synanthropic rodents, such as rodents/shrews and their ectoparasites do not have a pivotal part in the enzootic maintenance and spread of Q fever to humans and livestock in Puducherry.</p> <p>Keywords: Rodents; ectoparasites; C. burnetii; PCR; Q fever; Suncus murinus; IS 1111 gene</p> <hd id="AN0183058966-2">INTRODUCTION</hd> <p> <emph>Coxiella burnetii</emph> infection causes "Query (Q) fever" in humans and animals. Q fever is ranked as one of the top 13 priority zoonoses globally and has been designated as one of the most contagious diseases [[<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref1">1</reflink>]]. <emph>C. burnetii</emph> infects a wide variety of mammals (particularly rodents), reptiles, and birds [[<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref2">2</reflink>]]. Cattle, sheep, and goats are the primary reservoir hosts and are responsible for the majority of human infections. The primary mode of transmission in humans involves inhalation of aerosolized bacteria spread from infected reservoirs, while the primary mode of transmission in animals involves inhalation of infectious organisms and ingestion of contaminated feed and bedding [[<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref3">3</reflink>]]. In addition to aerosol transmission, ticks have been shown to exhibit vector competence in transferring pathogen to its hosts. Additionally, transstadial and transovarian transmission of <emph>C. burnetii</emph> in ticks has been reported. Moreover, ticks aid in the transmission of the pathogen to wild and domestic animals [[<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref4">4</reflink>]]. Natural infections have been reported in > 40 species of Ixodidae and Argasidae ticks [[<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref5">5</reflink>]]. The brown dog tick, <emph>Rhipicephalus sanguineus</emph>, has tested positive for <emph>C. burnetii</emph> [[<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref6">6</reflink>]]. Transmission of the Q fever agent by tick bites in humans has not been established; however, there are reports of humans acquiring Q fever infection by crushing the tick between the fingers [[<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref7">7</reflink>]] and <emph>via</emph> dried faeces containing spore-like forms of <emph>C. burnetii</emph> [[<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref8">3</reflink>]].</p> <p>Rodents have been reported as reservoirs for Q fever; however, rodent contribution to pathogen maintenance, transmission, and geographic spread remains to be elucidated. Small rodents serve as an important intermediate linking the sylvatic and domestic cycles, thereby contributing to <emph>C. burnetii</emph> transmission from rodents-to-livestock and incidentally to humans [[<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref9">8</reflink>]]. In this study we have clarified the role of synanthropic rodents/shrews and their ectoparasites in the epidemiology of Q fever under natural settings in Puducherry, India. Such data are essential to assess the mode of maintenance and spread of <emph>C. burnetii</emph> and risk of human infection in the future.</p> <hd id="AN0183058966-3">MATERIALS AND METHODS</hd> <p>This study was conducted in 39 villages within the Union Territory of Puducherry (Fig 1). The Institutional Animal Ethics Committee (IAEC-2018/ ICMR-VCRC/P-2) approved the study. Rodents and shrews were trapped in randomly selected villages using Sherman traps.</p> <p>MAP: FIGURE 1 | Map representing the villages in which the rodents were trapped in Puducherry.</p> <p>The traps were set by 5:00 pm and retrieved by 6:30 am the next morning. As the trapped rodents and shrews were potential sources of other zoonotic infections, the trapped animals were immobilized by exposure to chloroform to avoid accidental handling injuries. The anesthetized animals were euthanized by injecting an overdose of pentobarbital sodium (250 mg/kg) via the intraperitoneal route. The euthanized rodents were identified after recording their morphologic features [[<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref10">9</reflink>]]. Blood samples (0.5-1.0 ml) were collected from rodents and shrews via direct cardiac puncture using sterile syringes. The ears, snout, axillary regions, and limbs of individual rodents/shrews were examined under a stereo microscope. Ectoparasites were retrieved using thin tweezers and preserved in labelled vials containing 70% ethanol. The ectoparasites were identified based on the morphologic characteristics using standardard taxonomic keys [[<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref11">10</reflink>]–[<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref12">15</reflink>]]. The following formula was used to calculate the ectoparasite index: ectoparasite index = total number of ectoparasites collected/total number of animals examined.</p> <p>A commercially available DNA extraction kit (GenElute Blood Genomic DNA kit; Sigma-Aldrich, St. Louis, MO, USA) was used to extract DNA from the ectoparasites and rodent blood samples following the manufacturerˈs protocols. Preliminary screening for <emph>C. burnetii</emph> in rodent/shrew and ectoparasite DNA was carried out using real-time PCR by targeting the 70-bp fragment of the <emph>IS 1111</emph> gene [[<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref13">16</reflink>]]. The samples that tested negative by real-time PCR were re-screened for <emph>C. burnetii</emph> according to the published protocol of Dhaka et al. [[<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref14">17</reflink>]] and De Bruin et al. [[<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref15">18</reflink>]] and Zhang et al. [[<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref16">19</reflink>]] to amplify the <emph>IS1111</emph> and <emph>com 1</emph> genes, respectively. A <emph>C. burnetii</emph>-positive DNA sample (kindly provided by Dr. Stephen Selvaraj, Professor of Microbiology at MGAMRI, Puducherry) was used as a PCR-positive control and standardization of all PCR assays.</p> <hd id="AN0183058966-4">RESULTS</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0183058966-5">Details of the trapped rodents/shrews and ectoparasites</hd> <p>In this study a total of 724 traps were placed and 140 animals were trapped (a trap-positive rate of 19.34%). Of the 140 animals trapped, 33 were identified as <emph>Rattus rattus</emph> and 107 were identified as <emph>Suncus murinus</emph>. Tick infestation was noticed in 15 animals, of which 11 were <emph>S. murinus</emph> and 4 were <emph>R. rattus</emph>. Mite infestation was detected in 89 trapped animals, of which 79 were <emph>S. murinus</emph> and 10 were <emph>R. rattus.</emph> Flea infestation was detected in one <emph>R. rattus</emph>. In total, 57 ticks, 3290 mites, and 6 fleas were collected. The tick-, mite-, and flea-positive rates are shown in Table 1. The retrieved ticks were identified as <emph>Rhipicephalus sanguineus</emph>, the mites were identified as <emph>Leptotrombidium deliense</emph> and <emph>Schoengastiella</emph> spp., and the fleas were identified as <emph>Xenopsylla cheopis</emph>.</p> <p>TABLE 1 | Ectoparasite positivity rate and index in the trapped animals.</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead><tr><th align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1" valign="top">Species of rodents/shrews trapped (No. of animals trapped)</th><th align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1" valign="top">Number of animals positive for ticks</th><th align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1" valign="top">Tick positivity rate</th><th align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1" valign="top">Number of ticks collected</th><th align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1" valign="top">Tick index</th><th align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1" valign="top">Number of animals positive for mites</th><th align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1" valign="top">Mite positivity rate</th><th align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1" valign="top">Number of mites collected</th><th align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1" valign="top">Mite index</th><th align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1" valign="top">Number of animals positive for fleas</th><th align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1" valign="top">Flea positivity rate</th><th align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1" valign="top">Number of fleas collected</th><th align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1" valign="top">Flea index</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1" valign="top"><italic>Rattus rattus</italic><break /><italic>(n=33)</italic></td><td align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1" valign="top">4</td><td align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1" valign="top">12.12%</td><td align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1" valign="top">7</td><td align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1" valign="top">0.21</td><td align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1" valign="top">10</td><td align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1" valign="top">30.3%</td><td align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1" valign="top">7</td><td align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1" valign="top">0.21</td><td align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1" valign="top">1</td><td align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1" valign="top">3.0%</td><td align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1" valign="top">6</td><td align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1" valign="top">0.18</td></tr><tr><td align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1" valign="top"><italic>Suncus murinus</italic><break /><italic>(n=107)</italic></td><td align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1" valign="top">11</td><td align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1" valign="top">10.28%</td><td align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1" valign="top">50</td><td align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1" valign="top">0.47</td><td align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1" valign="top">79</td><td align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1" valign="top">73.83%</td><td align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1" valign="top">3283</td><td align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1" valign="top">30.68</td><td align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1" valign="top">0</td><td align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1" valign="top">0.0%</td><td align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1" valign="top">0</td><td align="left" colspan="1" rowspan="1" valign="top">0.0</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <hd id="AN0183058966-6">Molecular detection of C. burnetii in rodent/shrew and ectoparasite DNA samples</hd> <p>The DNA samples from 140 rodents and shrews, 45 ticks (9 pools), 1375 mites (55 pools), and 6 fleas (1 pool) tested <emph>C. burnetii</emph> negative using real-time and conventional PCR methods (Fig 2A–D).</p> <p>Graph: FIGURE 2 | (A) Real-time PCR screening of C. burnetii in rodents/shrews and their ectoparasites targeting the IS 1111 gene. (B) Results of screening C. burnetii in rodents and their ectoparasites by PCR targeting the IS1111 gene. (C) Results of screening C. burnetii in rodents and their ectoparasites by trans- PCR targeting the IS1111 gene. (D) Results of screening C. burnetii in a rodent by PCR targeting the com1 gene.</p> <hd id="AN0183058966-7">DISCUSSION</hd> <p>The lack of <emph>C. burnetii</emph> in the present study is in agreement with the results obtained by Sahu et al. [[<reflink idref="bib20" id="ref17">20</reflink>]], who reported that of 38 rodents collected from paddy fields adjoining the goat farms in Chattishgarh and Odisha, none were positive for <emph>C. burnetii</emph> [[<reflink idref="bib20" id="ref18">20</reflink>]]. Pluta et al. [[<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref19">21</reflink>]] did not detect <emph>C. burnetii</emph> among 119 rodents trapped from 3 Q fever endemic areas in southern Germany. Similarly, Minichova et al. [[<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref20">22</reflink>]] reported zero prevalence of <emph>C. burnetii</emph> in rodents in Slovakia. However, Reusken et al. [[<reflink idref="bib23" id="ref21">23</reflink>]] reported the presence of <emph>C. burnetii</emph> in black and brown rats trapped from animal farms located close to bulk milk-positive goat farms associated with a Q fever outbreak in The Netherlands. Gonzalez et al. [[<reflink idref="bib24" id="ref22">24</reflink>]] reported the presence of <emph>C. burnetii</emph> in micromammals, such as <emph>Apodemus</emph> spp., <emph>Crocidura</emph> spp. and <emph>Rattus rattus</emph> in Spain. Alotaibi et al. [[<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref23">25</reflink>]] demonstrated <emph>C. burnetii</emph> DNA in 17.5% of rodents trapped in Saudi Arabia. The absence of <emph>C. burnetii</emph> in rodents and shrews in the current study could be due to a lack of pathogen exposure from infected livestock or neutralization and clearance of the pathogen by the antibodies developed in exposed rodents/shrews.</p> <p>In addition to the molecular evidence, exposure to <emph>C. burnetii</emph> in rodents was also confirmed based on serologic results. Meredith et al. [[<reflink idref="bib26" id="ref24">26</reflink>]] reported an overall seroprevalence of 17.3% among rodents in the UK (range, 15.6%–19.1%) based on species. Hence, a sero-surveillance in rodents/shrews in the current study would have helped confirm exposure to <emph>C. burnetii;</emph> however, this remains a major limitation.</p> <p>None of the ticks (n=45), mites (n=1375), and fleas (n=5) infesting rodents and shrews tested positive for <emph>C. burnetii</emph>. Our findings are consistent with earlier reports of <emph>C. burnetii</emph> absence among 8593 tick samples in Slovakia [[<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref25">22</reflink>]]. Similarly, Kamani et al. [[<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref26">27</reflink>]] did not detect <emph>C. burnetii</emph> in rodent ticks (<emph>Rhipicephalus sanguineus</emph>), mites (<emph>Haemolaelaps</emph> spp. and <emph>Hemimerus talpoides</emph>), and fleas (<emph>Xenopsylla cheopis</emph> and <emph>Ctenophthalmus</emph> spp.) in Nigeria. Our findings suggest that the natural foci of <emph>C. burnetii</emph> are limited, which accounted for our negative results in the ectoparasites.</p> <p>The <emph>IS1111</emph> gene is a transposase-like insertion sequence with a wide range of copy numbers (7–100 copies per genome), offering higher sensitivity of <emph>C. burnetii</emph> detection by PCR. It has been reported that ticks also harbor <emph>Coxiella</emph>-like endosymbionts (CLEs), which may also test positive for the <emph>IS1111</emph> gene by PCR, leading to false-positive reports of <emph>C. burnetii</emph> [[<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref27">28</reflink>]]. Therefore, we also performed screening with PCR targeting the <emph>com1</emph> gene, which encodes outer membrane protein 1 with a single copy in the <emph>C. burnetii</emph> genome [[<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref28">4</reflink>]]. To rule out non-specific amplifications, a standard positive control was also used. We believe that the absence of <emph>C. burnetii</emph> in rodents and their ectorparasites might be due to the absence of the pathogen or very low-copy numbers of pathogen DNA.</p> <p>Given that serologic and molecular evidence in Puducherry indicated exposure to <emph>C. burnetii</emph> in sheep, goats [[<reflink idref="bib29" id="ref29">29</reflink>]], and a buffalo [[<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref30">30</reflink>]], future longitudinal studies with serologic and molecular markers are warranted in rodents. Such investigations will help to delineate the factors facilitating the sustenance and spread of <emph>C</emph>. <emph>burnetii</emph> in Puducherry.</p> <p>Overall, our findings indicate that the enzootic maintenance of <emph>C. burnetii</emph> and its transmission <emph>via</emph> ticks in rodents/shrews has a minor role in the tansmission of Q fever to animals and humans in Puducherry compared to the major route of transmission by aerosol from the infected livestock. Further longitudinal studies are warranted to delineate the influence of seasonal variations and the role of rodents and their ectoparasites in Q fever disease dynamics.</p> <hd id="AN0183058966-8">CONFLICTS OF INTEREST</hd> <p>All the authors declare that there are no conflicts of interests.</p> <ref id="AN0183058966-9"> <title> REFERENCES </title> <blist> <bibl id="bib1" idref="ref1" type="bt">1</bibl> <bibtext> Grace D, Mutua F, Ochungo P, Kruska R, Jones K, Brierley L. Mapping of Poverty and Likely Zoonoses Hotspots. Zoonoses Project 4. Report to the UK Department for International Development Nairobi, Kenya: International Livestock Research Institute; 2012.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib2" idref="ref2" type="bt">2</bibl> <bibtext> Woldehiwet Z. Q fever (coxiellosis): epidemiology and pathogenesis. Res Vet Sci. 2004;77:93-100.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib3" idref="ref3" type="bt">3</bibl> <bibtext> Maurin M, Raoult D. Q fever. Clin Microbiol Rev. 1999;12:518-553.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib4" idref="ref4" type="bt">4</bibl> <bibtext> Körner S, Makert GR, Ulbert S, Pfeffer M, Mertens-Scholz K. The prevalence of Coxiella burnetii in hard ticks in Europe and their role in Q fever transmission revisited-a systematic review. Front Vet Sci. 2021;8655715.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib5" idref="ref5" type="bt">5</bibl> <bibtext> Hadush A, Kandi V, Pal M. Epidemiology and public health implications of Q fever. Perspect Med Res. 2016;4:42-46.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib6" idref="ref6" type="bt">6</bibl> <bibtext> Stephen S, Chandrashekara I, Rao KN. Natural occurrence of Coxiella burnetii in the brown dog tick Rhipicephalus sanguineus. Indian J Med Res. 1980;71:865-869.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib7" idref="ref7" type="bt">7</bibl> <bibtext> Mediannikov O, Fenollar F, Socolovschi C, Diatta G, Bassene H, Molez JF. C. burnetii in humans and ticks in rural sengal. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2010;4e654.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib8" idref="ref9" type="bt">8</bibl> <bibtext> Meerburg BG, Reusken CBEM. The role of wild rodents in spread and transmission of Coxiella burnetii needs further elucidation. Wildl Res. 2011;38:617-625.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib9" idref="ref10" type="bt">9</bibl> <bibtext> Agarwal VC. Taxonomic Studies on Indian Muridae and Hystricidae (Mammalia Rodentia). Records of the Zoological Survey of India: Occasional Paper Vol. 180l; 2000:69-70.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ferris GF. The Sucking Lice. Memoirs of the Pacific Coast Entomological Society Vol. 1 San Francisco: Pacific Coast Entomological Society; 1951:1-320.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Geevarghese G, Fernande S, Kulkarni SM. A check list of Indian ticks (Acari: ixodoidea). Indian J Anim Sci. 1997;67:566-574.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Geevarghese G, Mishra AC. Haemaphysalis Ticks of India. USA: Elsevier; 2011.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Iyengar R. The siphonaptera of the Indian subregion. Orient Insects. 1973;7:1-91.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Sharif M. A Revision of the Indian Ixodidae with Special Reference to the Collection in the Indian Museum. Calcutta: Survey of India; 1928.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Keirans JE. Systematics of the ixodida (argasidae, ixodidae, nuttalliellidae): an overview and some problems. Tick Vector Biology. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer; 1992.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Schneeberger PM, Hermans MHA, van Hannen EJ, Schellekens JJA, Leenders ACAP, Wever PC. Real-time PCR with serum samples is indispensable for early diagnosis of acute Q fever. Clin Vaccine Immunol. 2010;17:286-290.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Dhaka P, Malik SVS, Yadav JP, Kumar M, Baranwal A, Barbuddhe SB. Seroprevalence and molecular detection of coxiellosis among cattle and their human contacts in an organized dairy farm. J Infect Public Health. 2019;12:190-194.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> de Bruin A, de Groot A, de Heer L, Bok J, Wielinga PR, Hamans M. Detection of Coxiella burnetii in complex matrices by using multiplex quantitative PCR during a major Q fever outbreak in the Netherlands. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2011;77:6516-6523.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Zhang GQ, To H, Yamaguchi T, Fukushi H, Hirai K. Differentiation of Coxiella burnetii by sequence analysis of the gene (com1) encoding a 27-kDa outer membrane protein. Microbiol Immunol. 1997;41:871-877.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Sahu R, Kale SB, Vergis J, Dhaka P, Kumar M, Choudhary M. Apparent prevalence and risk factors associated with occurrence of Coxiella burnetii infection in goats and humans in Chhattisgarh and Odisha, India. Comp Immunol Microbiol Infect Dis. 2018;60:46-51.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Pluta S, Hartelt K, Oehme R, Mackenstedt U, Kimming P. Prevalence of Coxiella burnetii and Rickettsia species in ticks and rodents in southern Germany. Ticks Tick Borne Dis. 2010;1:145-147.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Minichová L, Hamšíková Z, Mahríková L, Slovák M, Kocianová E, Kazimírová M. Molecular evidence of Rickettsia spp. in ixodid ticks and rodents in suburban, natural and rural habitats in Slovakia. Parasit Vectors. 2017;10:158.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Reusken C, van der Plaats R, Opsteegh M, de Bruin A, Swart A. Coxiella burnetii (Q fever) in Rattus norvegicus and Rattus rattus at livestock farms and urban locations in the Netherlands; could Rattus spp. represent reservoirs for (re)introduction? Prev Vet Med. 2011;101:124-130.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> González-Barrio D, Jado I, Viñuela J, García JT, Olea PP, Arce F. Investigating the role of micromammals in the ecology of Coxiella burnetii in Spain. Animals (Basel). 2021;11:654.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Alotaibi BH, Amor N, Merella P, Mohammed OB, Alagaili AN. Genetic diversity of wild rodents and detection of Coxiella burnetii, the causative agent of Q fever, in Saudi Arabia. Vet Res Commun. 2022;46:769-780.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Meredith AL, Cleaveland SC, Denwood MJ, Brown JK, Shaw DJ. Coxiella burnetii (Q-fever) seroprevalence in prey and predators in the United Kingdom: evaluation of infection in wild rodents, foxes and domestic cats using a modified ELISA. Transbound Emerg Dis. 2015;62:639-649.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kamani J, Baneth G, Gutierrez R, Nachum- Biala Y, Mumcuoglu KY, Harrus S. Coxiella burnetii and Rickettsia conorii: two zoonotic pathogens in peridomestic rodents and their ectoparasites in Nigeria. Ticks Tick Borne Dis. 2018;9:86-92.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Duron O. The IS1111 insertion sequence used for detection of Coxiella burnetii is widespread in Coxiella-like endosymbionts of ticks. FEMS Microbiol Lett. 2015;362(17):fnv132.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Stephen S, Sangeetha B, Antony PX. Seroprevalence of coxiellosis (Q fever) in sheep & goat in Puducherry & neighbouring Tamil Nadu. Indian J Med Res. 2014;140:785-787.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Pradeep J, Stephen S, Pooja P, Akshayavardhini A, Sangeetha B, Antony PX. Coxiellosis in domestic livestock of Puducherry and Tamil Nadu: detection of Coxiella burnetii DNA by polymerase chain reaction in slaughtered ruminants. Vet World. 2017;10:667-671.</bibtext> </blist> </ref> <aug> <p>By Prathibha A Indhu; V Bhanu Rekha; R Hariharan; V J Ajay Kumar; S Lakshmy; Anand Kasirajan; Thirumurthy Madhavan and D Panneer</p> <p>Reported by Author; Author; Author; Author; Author; Author; Author; Author</p> </aug> <nolink nlid="nl1" bibid="bib10" firstref="ref11"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl2" bibid="bib15" firstref="ref12"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl3" bibid="bib16" firstref="ref13"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl4" bibid="bib17" firstref="ref14"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl5" bibid="bib18" firstref="ref15"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl6" bibid="bib19" firstref="ref16"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl7" bibid="bib20" firstref="ref17"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl8" bibid="bib21" firstref="ref19"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl9" bibid="bib22" firstref="ref20"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl10" bibid="bib23" firstref="ref21"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl11" bibid="bib24" firstref="ref22"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl12" bibid="bib25" firstref="ref23"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl13" bibid="bib26" firstref="ref24"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl14" bibid="bib27" firstref="ref26"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl15" bibid="bib28" firstref="ref27"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl16" bibid="bib29" firstref="ref29"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl17" bibid="bib30" firstref="ref30"></nolink>
CustomLinks:
  – Url: https://doaj.org/article/c8fb1eae1d634c36aae5f18a24c651b4
    Name: EDS - DOAJ (s4221598)
    Category: fullText
    Text: View record in DOAJ
Header DbId: edsdoj
DbLabel: Directory of Open Access Journals
An: edsdoj.8fb1eae1d634c36aae5f18a24c651b4
RelevancyScore: 944
AccessLevel: 3
PubType: Academic Journal
PubTypeId: academicJournal
PreciseRelevancyScore: 943.605590820313
IllustrationInfo
Items – Name: Title
  Label: Title
  Group: Ti
  Data: Rodents/Shrews and their Ectoparasites are not Associated with the Enzootic Maintenance and Transmission of Coxiella burnetii to Livestock and Humans in Puducherry, India
– Name: Author
  Label: Authors
  Group: Au
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Prathibha+A+Indhu%22">Prathibha A Indhu</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22V+Bhanu+Rekha%22">V Bhanu Rekha</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22R+Hariharan%22">R Hariharan</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22V+J+Ajay+Kumar%22">V J Ajay Kumar</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22S+Lakshmy%22">S Lakshmy</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Anand+Kasirajan%22">Anand Kasirajan</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Thirumurthy+Madhavan%22">Thirumurthy Madhavan</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22D+Panneer%22">D Panneer</searchLink>
– Name: TitleSource
  Label: Source
  Group: Src
  Data: Zoonoses, Vol 4, Iss 1, p 998 (2024)
– Name: Publisher
  Label: Publisher Information
  Group: PubInfo
  Data: Compuscript Ltd, 2024.
– Name: DatePubCY
  Label: Publication Year
  Group: Date
  Data: 2024
– Name: Subset
  Label: Collection
  Group: HoldingsInfo
  Data: LCC:Infectious and parasitic diseases<br />LCC:Veterinary medicine
– Name: Subject
  Label: Subject Terms
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Infectious+and+parasitic+diseases%22">Infectious and parasitic diseases</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22RC109-216%22">RC109-216</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Veterinary+medicine%22">Veterinary medicine</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22SF600-1100%22">SF600-1100</searchLink>
– Name: Abstract
  Label: Description
  Group: Ab
  Data: “Q fever,” which is caused by Coxiella burnetii , is endemic in India. In addition to livestock, rodents have also been reported to be associated with enzootic maintenance, favoring pathogen transmission. Currently, however, no data are available on the role of rodents in “Q fever” transmission in India. A cross-sectional study was undertaken in 39 Puducherry villages to screen Coxiella burnetii in synanthropic rodents (rats and shrews) and their ectoparasites (ticks, mites, and fleas) by real-time and conventional PCR protocols targeting the pathogen specific IS 1111 and com 1 genes. One hundred forty animals were trapped (107 shrews and 33 rats). The ticks, mites, and fleas infesting the rodents were identified as Rhipicephalus sanguineus , Leptotrombidium deliense and Schoengastiella spp., and Xenopsylla cheopis , respectively. PCR screening of the DNA extracted from the rodent/shrew blood samples and their ectoparasites tested negative for C. burnetii. Synanthropic rodents, such as rodents/shrews and their ectoparasites do not have a pivotal part in the enzootic maintenance and spread of Q fever to humans and livestock in Puducherry.
– Name: TypeDocument
  Label: Document Type
  Group: TypDoc
  Data: article
– Name: Format
  Label: File Description
  Group: SrcInfo
  Data: electronic resource
– Name: Language
  Label: Language
  Group: Lang
  Data: English
– Name: ISSN
  Label: ISSN
  Group: ISSN
  Data: 2737-7474<br />2737-7466
– Name: NoteTitleSource
  Label: Relation
  Group: SrcInfo
  Data: https://www.scienceopen.com/hosted-document?doi=10.15212/ZOONOSES-2023-0042; https://doaj.org/toc/2737-7466; https://doaj.org/toc/2737-7474
– Name: DOI
  Label: DOI
  Group: ID
  Data: 10.15212/ZOONOSES-2023-0042
– Name: URL
  Label: Access URL
  Group: URL
  Data: <link linkTarget="URL" linkTerm="https://doaj.org/article/c8fb1eae1d634c36aae5f18a24c651b4" linkWindow="_blank">https://doaj.org/article/c8fb1eae1d634c36aae5f18a24c651b4</link>
– Name: AN
  Label: Accession Number
  Group: ID
  Data: edsdoj.8fb1eae1d634c36aae5f18a24c651b4
PLink https://erproxy.cvtisr.sk/sfx/access?url=https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=edsdoj&AN=edsdoj.8fb1eae1d634c36aae5f18a24c651b4
RecordInfo BibRecord:
  BibEntity:
    Identifiers:
      – Type: doi
        Value: 10.15212/ZOONOSES-2023-0042
    Languages:
      – Text: English
    PhysicalDescription:
      Pagination:
        PageCount: 1
        StartPage: 998
    Subjects:
      – SubjectFull: Infectious and parasitic diseases
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: RC109-216
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Veterinary medicine
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: SF600-1100
        Type: general
    Titles:
      – TitleFull: Rodents/Shrews and their Ectoparasites are not Associated with the Enzootic Maintenance and Transmission of Coxiella burnetii to Livestock and Humans in Puducherry, India
        Type: main
  BibRelationships:
    HasContributorRelationships:
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Prathibha A Indhu
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: V Bhanu Rekha
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: R Hariharan
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: V J Ajay Kumar
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: S Lakshmy
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Anand Kasirajan
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Thirumurthy Madhavan
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: D Panneer
    IsPartOfRelationships:
      – BibEntity:
          Dates:
            – D: 01
              M: 01
              Type: published
              Y: 2024
          Identifiers:
            – Type: issn-print
              Value: 27377474
            – Type: issn-print
              Value: 27377466
          Numbering:
            – Type: volume
              Value: 4
            – Type: issue
              Value: 1
          Titles:
            – TitleFull: Zoonoses
              Type: main
ResultId 1