Dermacentor reticulatus: a vector on the rise

Dermacentor reticulatus is a hard tick species with extraordinary biological features. It has a high reproduction rate, a rapid developmental cycle, and is also able to overcome years of unfavourable conditions. Dermacentor reticulatus can survive under water for several months and is cold-hardy even compared to other tick species. It has a wide host range: over 60 different wild and domesticated hosts are known for the three active developmental stages. Its high adaptiveness gives an edge to this tick species as shown by new data on the emergence and establishment of D. reticulatus populations throughout Europe. The tick has been the research focus of a growing number of scientists, physicians and veterinarians. Within the Web of Science database, more than a fifth of the over 700 items published on this species between 1897 and 2015 appeared in the last three years (2013–2015). Here we attempt to synthesize current knowledge on the systematics, ecology, geographical distribution and recent spread of the species and to highlight the great spectrum of possible veterinary and public health threats it poses. Canine babesiosis caused by Babesia canis is a severe leading canine vector-borne disease in many endemic areas. Although less frequently than Ixodes ricinus, D. reticulatus adults bite humans and transmit several Rickettsia spp., Omsk haemorrhagic fever virus or Tick-borne encephalitis virus. We have not solely collected and reviewed the latest and fundamental scientific papers available in primary databases but also widened our scope to books, theses, conference papers and specialists colleagues’ experience where needed. Besides the dominant literature available in English, we also tried to access scientific literature in German, Russian and eastern European languages as well. We hope to inspire future research projects that are necessary to understand the basic life-cycle and ecology of this vector in order to understand and prevent disease threats. We conclude that although great strides have been made in our knowledge of the eco-epidemiology of this species, several gaps still need to be filled with basic research, targeting possible reservoir and vector roles and the key factors resulting in the observed geographical spread of D. reticulatus. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13071-016-1599-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users

Efficacy of the detection of Legionella in hot and cold water samples by culture and PCR. II. Examination of native samples from various sources

A total of 123 water samples were examined in parallel by culture and semi-nested PCR for the presence of Legionella. They comprised: 35 samples of hot water distributed by the urban municipal water supply system (MWSS) taken in institutions, 45 samples of hot water distributed by urban MWSS taken in dwellings, 27 samples of cold water distributed by rural MWSS taken in dwellings, and 16 samples of cold well water taken in rural areas. The greatest frequency of the isolation of Legionella by culture (88.6%) was recorded in the samples of hot water from the urban institutions, having been greater compared to all other sources (p<0.001). The frequency of Legionella isolation from hot water in urban dwellings (28.9%) was significantly greater compared to the combined value (2.3%) for cold water from rural MWSS and wells (p<0.001). Strains belonging to Legionella pneumophila serogroups 2-14 predominated in the examined samples, while strains of L. pneumophila serogroup 1 and strains of Legionella spp. (other than L. pneumophila) were 3-fold less numerous. The rates of positive findings in the semi-nested PCR (stage 2) were greater than culture isolations in all kinds of samples, except for urban institutions. The correlation between the culture and PCR results was positive for samples of hot water from urban MWSS (p<0.01), but not for samples of cold water from rural MWSS and wells (p>0.5). A significant correlation was found between rates of PCRpositive results and numbers of Legionella pneumophila serogroups 2-14 strains, but not for other Legionella serogroups or species. In conclusion, our results support the opinion that though PCR cannot be a substitute for the isolation of Legionella by culture, it could be regarded as an useful complementary method

Efficacy of the detection of Legionella in hot and cold water samples by culture and PCR. I. Standardization of methods

The aim of the present study was: – to compare methods for concentration and isolation of Legionella DNA from water; – to examine the efficacy of various modifications of PCR test (PCR, semi-nested PCR, and real-time PCR) for the detection of known numbers of Legionella pneumophila in water samples artificially contaminated with the strain of this bacterium and in randomly selected samples of environmental water, in parallel with examination by culture. It was found that filtration is much more effective than centrifugation for the concentration of DNA in water samples, and that the Qiamp DNA Mini-Kit is the most efficient for isolation of Legionella DNA from water. The semi-nested PCR and real-time PCR proved to be the most sensitive methods for detection of Legionella DNA in water samples. Both PCR modifications showed a high correlation with recovery of Legionella by culture (p<0.01), while no correlation occurred between the results of one-stage PCR and culture (p>0.1)

Hantavirus RNA was not detected in Dermacentor reticulatus ticks

A total of 190 Dermacentor reticulatus ticks (80 males, 110 females) collected on the territory of Ostrów Lubelski, Suchawa, Zalutyń and Kazimierz Dolny (Lublin Province, eastern Poland) were examined by reverse transcription PCR and nested PCR methods for the presence of hantavirus RNA. None of the examined Dermacentor reticulatus specimens showed the presence of the hantavirus-specific RNA in spite of using two pairs of primers and the clearly positive results obtained with the positive control. Thus, the hypothesis about the possible participation of ticks in the transmission of hantaviruses was not confirmed