RESEARCH PAPER
Serological survey of Borrelia burgdorferi sensu lato, Anaplasma phagocytophilum, and Ehrlichia canis infections in rural and urban dogs in Central Italy
1
Department of Veterinary Science, University of Pisa, Italy
Ann Agric Environ Med. 2014;21(4):671-675
KEYWORDS
Borrelia burgdorferi sensu latoAnaplasma phagocytophilumEhrlichia canisdogindirect immunofluorescent assayzoonosis
ABSTRACT
Introduction:
Borrelia burgdorferi sensu lato (s.l.) and Anaplasma phagocytophilum are well known zoonotic pathogens, whereas Ehrlichia canis is usually considered to be of veterinary concern, although on the basis of recent reports it also seems to be able to infect humans.
Objective:
The aim of the study was to determine the seroprevalence of B. burgdorferi s.l., A. phagocytophilum and E. canis in an Italian canine population, and to verify if there are differences between dogs living in urban areas and those from a rural environment.
Material and Methods:
Blood sera of 1,965 dogs, 1,235 from cities and 730 from rural areas, were tested by indirect immunofluorescent assay (IFAT).
Results:
The overall seroprevalence was highest for E. canis (7.07%), followed by A. phagocytophilum (4.68%), and B. burgdorferi s.l. (1.47%). Rural dogs showed the highest seroprevalence to B. burgdorferi s.l. and A. phagocytophilum. No significant differences were observed between rural and urban E. canis-positive dogs. A low percentage (1.32%) of dogs with dual seropositivity was detected, and no triple positive reactions were observed. No significant differences were detected in the seroprevalence of the three agents in relationship to the age and gender of the dogs. Seroprevalence in the five years considered were not statistically different, except for the lowest rate for E. canis observed in 2012.
Conclusions:
The results confirm the presence of B. burgdorferi s.l., A. phagocytophilum and E. canis in Italian dogs in both urban and rural areas. Monitoring pet dogs, which share the same environment with their owners, is useful for identifying the presence of tick-borne disease agents of both veterinary and public health significance.
Borrelia burgdorferi sensu lato (s.l.) and Anaplasma phagocytophilum are well known zoonotic pathogens, whereas Ehrlichia canis is usually considered to be of veterinary concern, although on the basis of recent reports it also seems to be able to infect humans.
Objective:
The aim of the study was to determine the seroprevalence of B. burgdorferi s.l., A. phagocytophilum and E. canis in an Italian canine population, and to verify if there are differences between dogs living in urban areas and those from a rural environment.
Material and Methods:
Blood sera of 1,965 dogs, 1,235 from cities and 730 from rural areas, were tested by indirect immunofluorescent assay (IFAT).
Results:
The overall seroprevalence was highest for E. canis (7.07%), followed by A. phagocytophilum (4.68%), and B. burgdorferi s.l. (1.47%). Rural dogs showed the highest seroprevalence to B. burgdorferi s.l. and A. phagocytophilum. No significant differences were observed between rural and urban E. canis-positive dogs. A low percentage (1.32%) of dogs with dual seropositivity was detected, and no triple positive reactions were observed. No significant differences were detected in the seroprevalence of the three agents in relationship to the age and gender of the dogs. Seroprevalence in the five years considered were not statistically different, except for the lowest rate for E. canis observed in 2012.
Conclusions:
The results confirm the presence of B. burgdorferi s.l., A. phagocytophilum and E. canis in Italian dogs in both urban and rural areas. Monitoring pet dogs, which share the same environment with their owners, is useful for identifying the presence of tick-borne disease agents of both veterinary and public health significance.
REFERENCES (28)
1.
Wormser GP, Dattwyler RJ, Shapiro ED, Halperin JJ, Steere AC, Klempner MS, et al. The clinical assessment, treatment, and prevention of Lyme disease, human granulocytic anaplasmosis, and babesiosis: clinical practice guidelines by the Infectious Diseases Society of America. Clin Infect Dis. 2006; 43: 1089–1134.
2.
Dambach DM, Smith CA, Lewis RM, Van Winkle TJ. Morfologic, immunohistochemical, and ultrastructural characterization of a distinctive renal lesion in dogs putatively associated with Borrelia burgdorferi infection: 49 cases (1987–1992). Vet Pathol. 1997; 34: 85–96.
3.
Cerri D, Farina R, Andreani E, Nuvoloni R, Pedrini A, Cardini G. Experimental infection of dogs with Borrelia burgdorferi. Res Vet Sci. 1994; 57: 256–258.
4.
Summers BA, Straubinger AF, Jacobson RH, Chang YF, Appel MJG, Straubinger RK. Histopathological studies of experimental Lyme disease in the dog. J Comp Pathol. 2005; 133: 1–13.
5.
Gerber B, Eichenberger S, Haug K, Wittenbrink MM. The dilemma with Lyme borreliosis in the dog with particular consideration of “Lyme nephritis”. Schweiz Arch Tierheilkd. 2009; 151: 479–483.
6.
Bowman D, Little SE, Lorentzen L, Shields J, Sullivan MP, Carlin EP. Prevalence and geographic distribution of Dirofilaria immitis, Borrelia burgdorferi, Ehrlichia canis, and Anaplasma phagocytophilum in dogs in the United States: results of a national clinic-based serologic survey. Vet Parasitol. 2009; 160: 138–148.
7.
Dumler JS, Barbet AF, Bekker CPJ, Dasch GA, Palmer GH, Ray SC, et al. Reorganization of genera in the families Rickettsiaceae and Anaplasmataceae in the order Rickettsiales: unification of some species of Ehrlichia with Anaplasma, Cowdria with Ehrlichia and Ehrlichia with Neorickettsia, descriptions of six new species combinations and designation of Ehrlichia equi and HE agent as subjective synonyms of Ehrlichia phagocytophila. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol. 2001; 51: 2145–2165.
8.
Walker DH, Dumler JS. Emergence of the ehrlichioses as human health problems. Emerg Infect Dis. 1996; 2: 18–29.
9.
Cockwill KR, Taylor SM, Snead ECR, Dickinson R, Cosford K, Malek S, et al. Granulocytic anaplasmosis in three dogs from Saskatoon, Saskatchewan. Can Vet J. 2009; 50: 835–840.
10.
Carrade D, Foley J, Sullivan M, Foley CW, Sykes JE. Spatial distribution of seroprevalence for Anaplasma phagocytophilum, Borrelia burgdorferi, Ehrlichia canis, and Dirofilaria immitis in dogs in Washington, Oregon, and California. Vet Clin Pathol. 2011; 40: 293–302.
11.
Perez M, Bodor M, Zhand C, Xiong Q, Rikihisa Y. Human infection with Ehrlichia canis accompanied by clinical signs in Venezuela. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2006; 1078: 110–117.
12.
Perez M, Rikihisa Y, Wen B. Ehrlichia canis-like agent isolated from a man in Venezuela: antigenic and genetic characterization. J Clin Microbiol. 1996; 34: 2133–2139.
13.
Paddock CD, Childs JE. Ehrlichia chaffeensis: a prototypical emerging pathogen. Clin Microbiol Rev. 2003; 16: 37–64.
14.
Ebani VV, Cerri D, Fratini F, Ampola M, Andreani E. Seroprevalence of Anaplasma phagocytophilum in domestic and wild animals from central Italy. New Microbiol. 2008; 31: 371–375.
15.
Ebani VV, Bertelloni F, Turchi B, Cerri D. Serological and molecular survey of Anaplasma phagocytophilum in Italian hunting dogs. Ann Agric Environ Med. 2013; 20(2) (in press).
16.
Calderaro A, Montecchini S, Gorrini C, Piccolo G, Chezzi G, Dettori G. Presence of anti-Borrelia burgdorferi antibodies and Borrelia burgdorferi sensu lato DNA in samples of subjects in an area of the Northern Italy in the period 2002–2008. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 2011; 70: 455–460.
17.
Tomao P, Ciceroni L, D’Ovidio MC, De Rosa M, Vonesch N, Iavicoli S, et al. Prevalence and incidence of antibodies to Borrelia burgdorferi and to tick-borne encephalitis virus in agricultural and forestry workers from Tuscany, Italy. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis. 2005; 24: 457–463.
18.
Rath PM, Ibershoff B, Mohnhaupt A, Albig J, Eljaschewitsch B, Jurgens D, et al. Seroprevalence of Lyme borreliosis in forestry workers from Brandenburg, Germany. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis. 1996; 15: 372–377.
19.
Cardoso L, Mendão C, Madeira de Carvalho L. Prevalence of Dirofilaria immitis, Ehrlichia canis, Borrelia burgdorferi sensu lato, Anaplasma spp. Leishmania infantum in apparently healthy and CVBD-suspect dogs in Portugal: a national serological study. Parasit Vectors. 2012; 5: 62.
20.
Solano-Gallego L, Llull J, Osso M, hegarty B, Breitschwerdt E. A serological study of exposure to arthropod-borne pathogens in dogs from northeastern Spain. Vet Res. 2006; 37: 231–244.
21.
Amusategui I, Tesouro MA, Kakoma I, Sainz A. Serological reactivity to Ehrlichia canis, Anaplasma phagocytophilum, Neorickettsia risticii, Borrelia burgdorferi and Rickettsia conorii in dogs from northwestern Spain. Vector Borne Zoonotic Dis. 2008; 8: 797–803.
22.
Pantchev N, Schaper R, Limousin S, Norden N, Weise M, Lorentzen L. Occurrence of Dirofilaria immitis and tick-borne infections caused by Anaplasma phagocytophilum, Borrelia burgdorferi sensu lato and Ehrlichia canis in domestic dogs in France: results of a countrywide serologic survey. Parasitol Res. 2009; 105: 101–114.
23.
Skotarczak B, Wodecka B, Rymaszewska A, Sawczuk M, Maciejewska A, Adamska M, et al. prevalence of DNA and antibodies to Borrelia burgdorferi sensu lato in dogs suspected of borreliosis. Ann Agric Environ Med. 2005; 12: 199–205.
24.
Zygner W, Gorski P, Wedrychowicz H. Detection of the DNA of Borrelia afzelii, Anaplasma phagocytophilum and Babesia canis in blood samples from dogs in Warsaw. Vet Rec. 2009; 164: 465–467.
25.
Pantchev N, Norden N, Lorentzen L, Rossi M, Rossi U, Brand B, Dyachenko V. Current surveys on the prevalence and distribution of Dirofilaria spp. in dogs in Germany. Parasitol Res. 2009; 105: 63–74.
26.
Kiss T, Cadar D, Krupaci AF, Bordeanu A, Brudasca GF, Mihalca AD, et al. Serological reactivity to Borrelia burgdorferi sensu lato in dogs and horses in distinct areas in Romania. Vector Borne Zoonotic Dis. 2011; 11: 1259–1262.
27.
Kybicova K, Schanilec P, Hulinska D, Uherkova L, Kurzova Z, Spejchalova S. Detection of Anaplasma phagocytophilum and Borrelia burgdorferi sensu lato in dogs in Czech Republic. Vector Borne Dis. 2009; 9: 655–661.
28.
Savić S, Vidić B, Lazić S, Lako B, Potkonjak A, Lepsanović Z. Borrelia burgdorferi in ticks and dogs in the provinve of Vojvodina, Serbia. Parasite. 2010; 17: 357–361.
Share
RELATED ARTICLE
| eISSN: | 1898-2263 |
| ISSN: | 1232-1966 |
Improvement of visual identification of the journal - task financed under the agreement No. 618/P-DUN/2019 by the Minister of Science and Higher Education allocated to the activities of disseminating science.
Generation of the DOI (Digital Object Identifier) - task financed under the agreement No. 618/P-DUN/2019 by the Minister of Science and Higher
© 2006-2024 Journal hosting platform by Bentus
We process personal data collected when visiting the website. The function of obtaining information about users and their behavior is carried out by voluntarily entered information in forms and saving cookies in end devices. Data, including cookies, are used to provide services, improve the user experience and to analyze the traffic in accordance with the Privacy policy. Data are also collected and processed by Google Analytics tool (more).
You can change cookies settings in your browser. Restricted use of cookies in the browser configuration may affect some functionalities of the website.
You can change cookies settings in your browser. Restricted use of cookies in the browser configuration may affect some functionalities of the website.
