Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2020 Feb 28;13(1):110.
doi: 10.1186/s13071-020-3973-y.

Ticks and associated pathogens in camels (Camelus dromedarius) from Riyadh Province, Saudi Arabia

Abdullah D Alanazi  1 , Viet Linh Nguyen  2 , Mohamed S Alyousif  3 , Ranju R S Manoj  2 , Abdulaziz S Alouffi  4 , Ridolfi Donato  5 , Alireza Sazmand  6 , Jairo A Mendoza-Roldan  2 , Filipe Dantas-Torres  2   7 , Domenico Otranto  8   9
Affiliations

Ticks and associated pathogens in camels (Camelus dromedarius) from Riyadh Province, Saudi Arabia

Abdullah D Alanazi et al. Parasit Vectors. .

Abstract

Background: Camel production in Saudi Arabia is severely affected by various diseases and by inadequate veterinary services. Ticks and tick-borne pathogens (TBPs) affect the health and wellbeing of camels consequently diminishing their productivity and performances. In addition, camels may act as hosts for TBPs (e.g. Anaplasma phagocytophilum) causing diseases in humans. The current study aimed to determine the prevalence of ixodid ticks and molecularly investigate the associated pathogens in camels from Saudi Arabia.

Methods: Blood and tick samples were collected from camels (n = 170) in Riyad Province of Saudi Arabia. Ticks were morphologically identified, and blood of camels were molecularly screened for apicomplexan (i.e. Babesia spp., Theileria spp., Hepatozoon spp.) and rickettsial parasites (i.e. Ehrlichia spp. and Anaplasma spp.).

Results: Of the 170 camels examined, 116 (68.2%; 95% CI: 60.9-75.1%) were infested by ticks with a mean intensity of 2.53 (95% CI: 2.4-2.6). In total of 296 ticks collected, Hyalomma dromedarii was the most prevalent (76.4%), followed by Hyalomma impeltatum (23.3%) and Hyalomma excavatum (0.3%). Of the tested animals, 13 (7.6%; 95% CI: 4.3-12.8%) scored positive to at least one TBP, with Anaplasma platys (5.3%; 95% CI: 2.7-9.9%) being the most prevalent species, followed by Anaplasma phagocytophilum, Anaplasma sp., Ehrlichia canis and Hepatozoon canis (0.6% each; 95% CI: 0.04-3.4%). None of the camels were found to be co-infected with more than one pathogen. All samples tested negative for Babesia spp. and Theileria spp.

Conclusions: The present study reveals the occurrence of different tick species and TBPs in camels from Saudi Arabia. Importantly, these camels may carry A. phagocytophilum and A. platys, representing a potential risk to humans.

Keywords: Anaplasma phagocytophilum; Anaplasma platys; Camels; Ehrlichia canis; Hepatozoon canis; Saudi Arabia; Tick-borne pathogens; Ticks.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

All authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Phylogenetic relationships of Hepatozoon canis sequence detected in this study and other Hepatozoon spp. based on a partial sequence of the 18S rRNA gene. The analyses were performed using a maximum likelihood method with Hasegawa–Kishino–Yano model. Adelina bambarooniae (GenBank: AF494058) was used as the outgroup. Sequences are presented by GenBank accession number, host species and country of origin
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Phylogenetic relationships of Anaplasma spp. sequence types (Anaplasma platys, Anaplasma phagocytophilum and Anaplasma sp.) and an Ehrlichia canis sequence detected in this study and other Anaplasma spp. and Ehrlichia spp. based on a partial sequence of the 16S rRNA gene. The analyses were performed using a maximum likelihood method with Kimura 2-parameter model. Wolbachia pipientis (GenBank: AF179630) was used as the outgroup. Sequences are presented by GenBank accession number, host species and country of origin
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Guglielmone AA, Robbins RG, Apanaskevich DA, Petney TN, Estrada-Peña A, Horak IG. The hard ticks of the world. Dordrecht: Springer; 2015.
    1. Dantas-Torres F, Chomel BB, Otranto D. Ticks and tick–borne diseases: a one health perspective. Trends Parasitol. 2012;28:437–446. doi: 10.1016/j.pt.2012.07.003. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Jabbar A, Abbas T, Sandhu Z, Saddiqi HA, Qamar MF, Gasser RB. Tick-borne diseases of bovines in Pakistan: major scope for future research and improved control. Parasit Vectors. 2015;8:283. doi: 10.1186/s13071-015-0894-2. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Faye B. Role, distribution and perspective of camel breeding in the third millennium economies. Emir J Food Agr. 2015;27:318–327. doi: 10.9755/ejfa.v27i4.19906. - DOI
    1. FAOSTAT: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations Statistics Division; 2019. http://www.fao.org/faostat. Accessed 16 Dec 2019.

MeSH terms