DOCSLIB.ORG

Medical Vector Handbook 2015 Webv

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Medical Vector Handbook 2015 Webv MEDICAL VECTORS National Border Health and Ship Sanitation Course 27– 30 July 2015 Prepared by NZ BioSecure - Southern Monitoring Services Disclaimer and Acknowledgement This document has been put together as revision notes for the Ministry of Health’s Border Health courses and workshops only and not designed for widespread distribution. Several of the images in this document were sourced from the ICPMR website (http://www.arbovirus.health.nsw.gov.au/areas/arbovirus/mosq it/mosquitoes.htm). Thank you to Richard Russell and Stephen Doggett who kindly gave permission for these images to be used in these notes. vi 1. Introduction to Vectors ....................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Basic vector information ............................................................................................................................. 1 1.2 Public health disease threat ........................................................................................................................ 2 1.3 Vector and disease control .......................................................................................................................... 3 1.3.1 Background .......................................................................................................................................... 3 1.3.2 Personal Protection .............................................................................................................................. 3 1.3.3 Surveillance .......................................................................................................................................... 4 1.3.4 Control ................................................................................................................................................. 4 2. Mosquitoes .............................................................................................................................................. 5 2.1 Life cycle ...................................................................................................................................................... 5 2.1.1 The Egg ................................................................................................................................................ 6 2.1.2 The Larva .............................................................................................................................................. 7 2.1.3 The Pupa ............................................................................................................................................ 10 2.1.4 The Adult ............................................................................................................................................ 12 2.2 Habitats ..................................................................................................................................................... 14 2.2.1 Larvae ................................................................................................................................................ 14 2.2.2 Adults ................................................................................................................................................. 15 2.3 Hosts ......................................................................................................................................................... 15 2.4 Behaviour .................................................................................................................................................. 15 2.5 Diseases ..................................................................................................................................................... 16 2.5.1 Malaria .............................................................................................................................................. 17 2.5.2 Dengue ............................................................................................................................................... 20 2.5.3 Yellow fever ........................................................................................................................................ 22 2.5.4 Japanese encephalitis ........................................................................................................................ 27 2.5.5 Ross River & Barmah Forest ............................................................................................................... 28 2.5.6 West Nile Virus ................................................................................................................................... 29 2.5.7 Other Diseases ................................................................................................................................... 31 2.6. Exotic Mosquitoes ....................................................................................................................... 32 2.6.1 Why are we concerned about exotic mosquitoes? ............................................................................ 32 2.6.2 Pathways ............................................................................................................................................ 34 2.6.3 Unwanted organisms – Mosquito profiles ....................................................................... 35 2.6.3.1 Aedes (Stegomyia) aegypti (Linnaeus) ......................................................................................... 35 2.6.3.2 Aedes (Stegomyia) albopictus (Skuse) ......................................................................................... 38 2.6.3.3 Aedes (Finlaya) japonicus (Theobald) .......................................................................................... 43 2.7 Mosquitoes and Mosquito-Borne Disease Control ................................................................................... 45 2.7.1 Mosquito Personal Protection ............................................................................................................ 45 2.7.2 Mosquito Surveillance ........................................................................................................................ 45 2.7.3 Mosquito Control ............................................................................................................................... 45 3. Sand Flies .............................................................................................................................................. 48 3.1 Life cycle .................................................................................................................................................... 48 3.1.1 Egg ..................................................................................................................................................... 48 3.1.2 Larva .................................................................................................................................................. 49 3.1.3 Pupa ................................................................................................................................................... 49 3.1.4 Adult ................................................................................................................................................... 49 3.2 Habitats ..................................................................................................................................................... 50 3.3 Hosts ......................................................................................................................................................... 50 3.4 Behaviour .................................................................................................................................................. 50 3.5 Diseases ..................................................................................................................................................... 51 3.5.1 Leishmaniasis ..................................................................................................................................... 51 3.5.2 Sandfly (Phlebotomus) Fever ............................................................................................................. 54 3.5.3 Other Diseases ................................................................................................................................... 54 3.6 Sand Flies and Sand Fly-Borne Disease Control ........................................................................................ 55 3.6.1 Sand Fly Personal Protection .............................................................................................................. 55 3.6.2 Sand Fly Surveillance .......................................................................................................................... 55 3.6.3 Sand Fly Control ................................................................................................................................. 55 4. Fleas ........................................................................................................................................................ 56 4.1 Life cycle .................................................................................................................................................... 57 4.1.1 Eggs ...................................................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Cattle Tick Rhipicephalus Microplus-Host Interface: a Review of Resistant and Susceptible Host Responses
    REVIEW published: 11 December 2017 doi: 10.3389/fcimb.2017.00506 Cattle Tick Rhipicephalus microplus-Host Interface: A Review of Resistant and Susceptible Host Responses Ala E. Tabor 1, 2*, Abid Ali 3, 4†, Gauhar Rehman 3†, Gustavo Rocha Garcia 5, Amanda Fonseca Zangirolamo 5, Thiago Malardo 5 and Nicholas N. Jonsson 6* 1 Centre for Animal Science, Queensland Alliance for Agriculture and Food Innovation, The University of Queensland, St. Lucia, QLD, Australia, 2 Centre for Comparative Genomics, Murdoch University, Perth, WA, Australia, 3 Department of Zoology, Abdul Wali Khan University Mardan, Mardan, Pakistan, 4 Escola de Enfermagem de Ribeirão Preto, University of São Paulo, Ribeirão Preto, Brazil, 5 Ribeirão Preto School of Medicine, University of São Paulo, Ribeirão Preto, Brazil, 6 Institute of Biodiversity, Animal Health and Comparative Medicine, The University of Glasgow, Glasgow, United Kingdom Ticks are able to transmit tick-borne infectious agents to vertebrate hosts which cause major constraints to public and livestock health. The costs associated with mortality, Edited by: relapse, treatments, and decreased production yields are economically significant. Ard Menzo Nijhof, Ticks adapted to a hematophagous existence after the vertebrate hemostatic system Freie Universität Berlin, Germany evolved into a multi-layered defense system against foreign invasion (pathogens and Reviewed by: Sim K. Singhrao, ectoparasites), blood loss, and immune responses. Subsequently, ticks evolved by University of Central Lancashire, developing an ability to suppress the vertebrate host immune system with a devastating United Kingdom Gervasio Henrique Bechara, impact particularly for exotic and crossbred cattle. Host genetics defines the immune Pontifícia Universidade Católica do responsiveness against ticks and tick-borne pathogens.
    [Show full text]
  • TTP STVM Poster Abstracts Final
    Joint 8th International Ticks and Tick-borne Pathogens (TTP-8) and 12th Biennial Society for Tropical Veterinary Medicine (STVM) Conference 24-29 August 2014 Cape Town South Africa Poster Abstracts TH POSTER SESSION I: MONDAY 25 AUGUST (17H00-19H00) x Abstract Presenting Author and Title Category no. Maxwell Opara: Recovering Ability of the African Grasscutter ( Thryonomys swinderianus ) to 0025 Trypanosoma infections Francisco Ruiz -Fons: The effects of host and environmental factors on tick parasitism in red 0029 deer are modulated by sex Pilar Alberdi: Anaplasma phagocytophilum strains inhibit apoptosis of Ixodes spp. tick cells to 0040 enhance early survival and multiplication Maria Pilar Alberdi: Experimental infections of HL -60 cells with different strains of Anaplasma 0051 phagocytophilum isolated from humans, dogs and sheep Veronika Urbanova: Components of tick complement system and their role in the immune 0053 response to microbial challenge 006 0 Marinda Oosthuizen: Wild ruminant species as reservoir hosts of tick -borne haemoparasites Sandy Sibusiso Baloyi: Transcriptomic analysis of African swine fever virus gene expression 0064 during infection Vincenzo Lorusso: Tick -borne pathogens of camels in Sokoto, Nigeria: Updating some host - 0088 pathogen associations Nathalie Vachiery: Global gene expression profiling of virulent and attenuated strains: 0091 towards the comprehension of Ehrlichia ruminantium pathogenesis Rosangela Zacarias Machado: Molecular and serological detection of Theileria equi and 0095 Babesia caballi in equids in São-Luiz, Maranhão, Brazil 0101 Jasna Kraljik: Ticks and fleas on small mammals in natural foci of Eastern Slovakia Carin Boshoff: Experimental infection of domestic pigs with African swine fever virus to 0104 investigate transmission cycles Lenka Berthova: Rickettsia spp.
    [Show full text]
  • Testing Local-Scale Panmixia Provides Insights Into the Cryptic Ecology, Evolution, and Epidemiology of Metazoan Animal Parasites
    981 REVIEW ARTICLE Testing local-scale panmixia provides insights into the cryptic ecology, evolution, and epidemiology of metazoan animal parasites MARY J. GORTON†,EMILYL.KASL†, JILLIAN T. DETWILER† and CHARLES D. CRISCIONE* Department of Biology, Texas A&M University, 3258 TAMU, College Station, TX 77843, USA (Received 14 December 2011; revised 15 February 2012; accepted 16 February 2012; first published online 4 April 2012) SUMMARY When every individual has an equal chance of mating with other individuals, the population is classified as panmictic. Amongst metazoan parasites of animals, local-scale panmixia can be disrupted due to not only non-random mating, but also non-random transmission among individual hosts of a single host population or non-random transmission among sympatric host species. Population genetics theory and analyses can be used to test the null hypothesis of panmixia and thus, allow one to draw inferences about parasite population dynamics that are difficult to observe directly. We provide an outline that addresses 3 tiered questions when testing parasite panmixia on local scales: is there greater than 1 parasite population/ species, is there genetic subdivision amongst infrapopulations within a host population, and is there asexual reproduction or a non-random mating system? In this review, we highlight the evolutionary significance of non-panmixia on local scales and the genetic patterns that have been used to identify the different factors that may cause or explain deviations from panmixia on a local scale. We also discuss how tests of local-scale panmixia can provide a means to infer parasite population dynamics and epidemiology of medically relevant parasites.
    [Show full text]
  • RNA Viruses of Amblyomma Variegatum and Rhipicephalus Microplus and Cattle Susceptibility in the French Antilles
    Preprints (www.preprints.org) | NOT PEER-REVIEWED | Posted: 12 December 2019 doi:10.20944/preprints201912.0172.v1 Peer-reviewed version available at Viruses 2020, 12, 144; doi:10.3390/v12020144 Article RNA viruses of Amblyomma variegatum and Rhipicephalus microplus and cattle susceptibility in the French Antilles Mathilde Gondard 1,2,#, Sarah Temmam 3,#, Elodie Devillers 1, Valérie Pinarello 2,4, Thomas Bigot 3,5, Delphine Chrétien 3, Rosalie Aprelon 2,4, Muriel Vayssier-Taussat 1, Emmanuel Albina 2,4, Marc Eloit 3,6* and Sara Moutailler 1* 1 UMR BIPAR, Animal Health Laboratory, ANSES, INRA, Ecole Nationale Vétérinaire d’Alfort, Université Paris-Est, Maisons-Alfort, France; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected] 2 CIRAD, UMR ASTRE, F-97170 Petit-Bourg, Guadeloupe, France; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected] 3 Institut Pasteur, Biology of Infection Unit, Inserm U1117, Pathogen Discovery Laboratory, Paris, France; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] 4 ASTRE, Univ Montpellier, CIRAD, INRA, Montpellier, France; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected] 5 Institut Pasteur – Bioinformatics and Biostatistics Hub – Computational Biology Department, Institut Pasteur, USR 3756 CNRS, Paris, France. 6 National Veterinary School of Alfort, Paris-Est University, Maisons-Alfort, 94704 Cedex, France. [email protected] # These authors contributed equally. * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +33 1 49 77 46 50; [email protected]; Tel.: +33 1 44 38 92 16 Abstract: Ticks transmit a wide variety of pathogens including bacteria, parasites and viruses.
    [Show full text]
  • 12Th Annual Spring Student Research Symposium
    Spring 2014 Student Research Symposium 12th Annual Spring Student Research Symposium March 22nd, 2014 St. Croix Campus College of Science & Mathematics University of the Virgin Islands 1 Twelfth Annual SpringSpring 2014 Student Research Symposium Research Symposium ~ Saturday, March 22, 2014 University of the Virgin Islands St. Croix Campus, U.S. Virgin Islands ~ Event Organized by: Emerging Caribbean Scientists (ECS) Program College of Science and Mathematics University of the Virgin Islands #2 John Brewer’s Bay St. Thomas, USVI 00802 Phone: 340-693-1249 Fax: 340-693-1245 Email: [email protected] Website: http://ecs.uvi.edu Emerging Caribbean Scientists (ECS) Programs increase research training and promote excellence for STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics), psychology, and nursing students at the University of the Virgin Islands. 2 Spring 2014 Research SymposiumSpring Table 2014 Student of ResearchContents Symposium Andy Breton .......................................................................................................... 6 Design and Implementation of Autonomous Weather Monitoring Agents Using The Java Agent Development Environment Annesha King ....................................................................................................... 7 PINK1: A Mitochondrial Ribosome Associated Kinase Anthonio Forbes ................................................................................................... 8 Determining Among-Site Prevalence of Haemogregarine Parasites In Caribbean Damselfish Species Antonios
    [Show full text]
  • (Boophilus) Microplus and Rhipicephalus (Boophilus) Decoloratus on a Farm in the Eastern Cape Province, South Africa
    The distribution of Rhipicephalus (Boophilus) microplus and Rhipicephalus (Boophilus) decoloratus on a farm in the Eastern Cape Province, South Africa By MICHELLE POTTINGER Submitted in fulfillment of the requirements in respect of the Master’s Degree, ZOOLOGY in the DEPARTMENT OF ZOOLOGY AND ENTOMOLOGY in the FACUILTY OF NATURAL AND AGRICULTURAL SCIECNES at the UNIVERSITY OF THE FREE STATE January 2019 Supervisor: Ms. EMSP van Dalen DECLARATION I, Michelle Pottinger, declare that the Master’s degree research dissertation that I herewith submit for the Master’s degree qualification, MSc Zoology, at the University of the Free State is my independent work, and that I have not previously submitted it for a qualification at another institution of higher education. Signed: Date: 23-01-2019 TABLE OF CONTENTS Table Index pg. I Figure Index pg. II Abbreviations pg. V Ethical Statement pg. VI Acknowledgement’s pg. VII Abstract pg. VIII Chapter 1: General Introduction & Literature Review 1.1. Tick Classification pg. 2 1.2. General Background pg. 3 1.2.1. Life Cycles pg. 3 1.2.2. Host Detection pg. 5 1.2.3. Feeding pg. 5 1.2.4. Habitat and Distribution pg. 6 1.2.5. Tick and Tick-borne Diseases pg. 7 1.3. Focus Species pg. 8 1.3.1. Rhipicephalus (Boophilus) decoloratus (Koch, 1844). pg. 8 1.3.2. Rhipicephalus (Boophilus) microplus (Canestrini, 1888). pg. 9 1.4. Introduction and Invasion of Rhipicephalus (Boophilus) microplus pg. 10 1.4.1. Factors Which Influence Distribution and Abundance pg. 10 1.4.1.1. Climate Change pg. 10 1.4.1.2.
    [Show full text]
  • Universidad Central Del Ecuador Facultad De Medicina Veterinaria Y Zootecnia Carrera De Medicina Veterinaria Y Zootecnia
    UNIVERSIDAD CENTRAL DEL ECUADOR FACULTAD DE MEDICINA VETERINARIA Y ZOOTECNIA CARRERA DE MEDICINA VETERINARIA Y ZOOTECNIA “ESTANDARIZACIÓN DE LA TÉCNICA DE ANÁLISIS DE FUSIÓN DE ALTA RESOLUCIÓN PARA LA DETECCIÓN DE Babesia EN GARRAPATAS UTILIZANDO POLIMORFISMOS DE NUCLEÓTIDOS”. Trabajo de Grado presentado como requisito parcial para optar el Título de Médico Veterinario Zootecnista KARLA ANDREA VASCO AGUAS TUTOR: Dr. Luis Vasco Campaña Quito, enero, 2013 ii RECONOCIMIENTOS Agradezco al Instituto de Microbiología de la Universidad San Francisco de Quito, por el apoyo logístico, formación y confianza brindados durante esta investigación; especialmente a Gabriel Trueba y a Sonia Zapata por su guía y motivación, y a Jorge Chiriboga y Carolina Proaño por sus valiosos consejos. Un reconocimiento para quienes facilitaron el trabajo de campo en diferentes zonas de nuestro país: Dr. Gildo Velasco, Ing. Xavier Freire, Dr. Ramiro González, Edison Defaz, Oscar Lamiña, Félix Lara, Xavier Naranjo y Miguel Jervis. Gratifico la ayuda de los doctores Richar Rodríguez y Luis Vasco por el interés, apoyo e importantes aportes académicos y logísticos brindados en este estudio. Agradezco también a mis padres y hermanas que con cariño y ejemplo contribuyen a mi crecimiento profesional y personal, impregnándome de la fuerza necesaria para alcanzar mis metas. Finalmente, agradezco a Andrés Valencia, por acompañarme en esta importante etapa, brindándome su apoyo, cariño y fortaleza en todo momento. iii iv v vi ÍNDICE GENERAL LISTADO DE TABLAS ............................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Rhipicephalus Microplus) Deutsch Strain
    PROKARYOTES crossm Genome Sequence of Coxiella-Like Endosymbiont Strain CLE- RmD, a Bacterial Agent in the Cattle Tick (Rhipicephalus microplus) Deutsch Strain Arunachalam Ramaiah,a Gregory A. Dascha aRickettsial Zoonoses Branch, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia, USA ABSTRACT We report a partial genome sequence for the Coxiella-like endosymbi- ont strain CLE-RmD, assembled from metagenomics data obtained from the south- ern cattle tick (Rhipicephalus microplus) Deutsch strain. any of the model species for investigating host-bacterial interactions include Mhematophagous, plant sap-sucking arthropods, and food-storage pests (1–4). These diets lack essential amino acids, vitamins, and cofactors, which also cannot be synthesized by the host arthropods. The endosymbiotic bacteria of these arthropods are hypothesized to provide those nutrients (5). Bacterial endosymbionts in hard and soft ticks related to Coxiella burnetii, the etiologic agent of Q fever, are known as Coxiella-like endosymbionts (CLEs) (6–8). The nutritional dependence of Amblyomma americanum on its CLE has been experimentally demonstrated (9) and further sup- ported bioinformatically for CLEs from several other hard tick species whose symbiont genomes have been sequenced, namely, Rhipicephalus turanicus (CRt) (10), Rhipiceph- alus sanguineus (CLE-RsOK) (11), and A. americanum (CLEAA/CLE-AaGA) (11, 12). For most other tick CLE symbionts, only a few sequences have been obtained (7). Illumina HiSeq-1000 (accession numbers SRX1668952, SRX1668960, and SRX1668961) and 454GS FLX (accession numbers SRX019998 and SRX019999) reads were generated from low-Cot and Cot 696 genomic DNA extracted from a pooled collection of eggs from the f7 and f10 to f12 generations of the R.
    [Show full text]
  • Immune Recognition of Salivary Proteins from the Cattle Tick
    Garcia et al. Parasites & Vectors (2017) 10:144 DOI 10.1186/s13071-017-2077-9 RESEARCH Open Access Immune recognition of salivary proteins from the cattle tick Rhipicephalus microplus differs according to the genotype of the bovine host Gustavo Rocha Garcia1, Sandra Regina Maruyama1, Kristina T. Nelson2, José Marcos Chaves Ribeiro3, Luiz Gustavo Gardinassi1, Antonio Augusto Mendes Maia4, Beatriz Rossetti Ferreira1,5, Frans N. J. Kooyman6 and Isabel K. F. de Miranda Santos1* Abstract Background: Males of the cattle tick Rhipicephalus microplus produce salivary immunoglobulin-binding proteins and allotypic variations in IgG are associated with tick loads in bovines. These findings indicate that antibody responses may be essential to control tick infestations. Infestation loads with cattle ticks are heritable: some breeds carry high loads of reproductively successful ticks, in others, few ticks feed and they reproduce inefficiently. Different patterns of humoral immunity against tick salivary proteins may explain these phenotypes. Methods: We describe the profiles of humoral responses against tick salivary proteins elicited during repeated artificial infestations of bovines of a tick-resistant (Nelore) and a tick-susceptible (Holstein) breed. We measured serum levels of total IgG1, IgG2 and IgE immunoglobulins and of IgG1 and IgG2 antibodies specific for tick salivary proteins. With liquid chromatography followed by mass spectrometry we identified tick salivary proteins that were differentially recognized by serum antibodies from tick-resistant and tick-susceptible bovines in immunoblots of tick salivary proteins separated by two-dimensional electrophoresis. Results: Baseline levels of total IgG1 and IgG2 were significantly higher in tick-susceptible Holsteins compared with resistant Nelores. Significant increases in levels of total IgG1, but not of IgG2 accompanied successive infestations in both breeds.
    [Show full text]
  • Commission on Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture
    October 2014 CGRFA/WG-AnGR-8/14/Inf.2 – Part 1 & 2 E COMMISSION ON GENETIC RESOURCES FOR FOOD AND AGRICULTURE Item 3 of the Provisional Agenda INTERGOVERNMENTAL TECHNICAL WORKING GROUP ON ANIMAL GENETIC RESOURCES FOR FOOD AND AGRICULTURE Eighth Session Rome, 26-28 November 2014 DRAFT SECOND REPORT ON THE STATE OF THE WORLD'S ANIMAL GENETIC RESOURCES FOR FOOD AND AGRICULTURE Part 1 & 2 Status of preparation All parts of The second report on the world's animal genetic resources for food and agriculture (Second Report) have been drafted. However, Part 4 – State of the art in the management of animal genetic resources – is at an early stage of drafting and will thus not be made available to the Working Group. While a number of sections of the Second Report have been reviewed by FAO and external experts, these sections still need to be revised based on the comments received. Review of the remaining sections remains to be arranged. The whole report needs to be further edited to ensure internal consistency and improve readability. The acknowledgements, preface, executive summary and list of abbreviations and acronyms still need to be prepared. It is foreseen that a full draft of the Second Report will be ready in March 2015. This document is printed in limited numbers to minimize the environmental impact of FAO's processes and contribute to climate neutrality. Delegates and observers are kindly requested to bring their copies to meetings and to avoid asking for additional copies. Documents for this meeting are available on the Internet at http://www.fao.org/Ag/AGAInfo/programmes/en/genetics/angrvent.html
    [Show full text]
  • Modelling the Distribution of Rhipicephalus Microplus and R
    Veterinary Parasitology: Regional Studies and Reports 14 (2018) 41–49 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Veterinary Parasitology: Regional Studies and Reports journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/vprsr Original Article Modelling the distribution of Rhipicephalus microplus and R. decoloratus in Zimbabwe T ⁎ Sungirai M.a,b, , Moyo D.Z.c, De Clercq P.d, Madder M.e, Vanwambeke S.O.f, De Clercq E.M.g a Department of Livestock and Wildlife Management, Midlands State University, Private Bag 9055, Gweru, Zimbabwe b Unit of Entomology, Department of Biomedical Sciences, Institute of Tropical Medicine, Nationalestraat 155, Antwerp 2000, Belgium c Department of Biological Sciences, Midlands State University, P. Bag 9055, Gweru, Zimbabwe d Department of Plants and Crops, Ghent University, Coupure Links 653, B-9000 Ghent, Belgium e Department of Veterinary Tropical Diseases, Faculty of Veterinary Science, University of Pretoria, Private Bag X04, Onderstepoort 0110, South Africa f Georges Lemaître Institute for Earth and Climate Research, Université catholique de Louvain, Place Louis Pasteur 3, B-1348 Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium g Research Fellow FNRS, Georges Lemaître Institute for Earth and Climate Research, Université catholique de Louvain, Place Louis Pasteur 3, B-1348 Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT Keywords: Species distribution modelling is a very useful tool in vector management. Ticks are vectors of various pathogens Rhipicephalus (Boophilus) which cause serious problems in livestock production in tropical countries. They have a high dispersal potential Modelling which is mainly facilitated by the movement of animals from one area to another. In light of the observed Habitat suitability geographic expansion of Rhipicephalus microplus in Zimbabwe, we used species distribution modelling techniques Zimbabwe to identify areas which may provide suitable habitats for the occurrence of this invasive tick species as well as the autochthonous Rhipicephalus decoloratus.
    [Show full text]
  • (Boophilus) Microplus Q ⇑ Matthew I
    International Journal for Parasitology 42 (2012) 161–169 Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect International Journal for Parasitology journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ijpara CattleTickBase: An integrated Internet-based bioinformatics resource for Rhipicephalus (Boophilus) microplus q ⇑ Matthew I. Bellgard a,b,1, Paula M. Moolhuijzen a,b,1, Felix D. Guerrero c, , David Schibeci a, Manuel Rodriguez-Valle b,d, Daniel G. Peterson e, Scot E. Dowd f, Roberto Barrero a, Adam Hunter a, Robert J. Miller g, Ala E. Lew-Tabor a,b,d a Centre for Comparative Genomics, Murdoch University, Perth, WA 6150, Australia b Cooperative Research Centre for Beef Genetic Technologies, Armidale, NSW 2350, Australia c USDA-ARS Knipling Bushland US Livestock Insect Research Laboratory, 2700 Fredericksburg Road., Kerrville, TX 78028, USA d Queensland Alliance for Agriculture, Food & Innovation, The University of Queensland, Department of Employment, Economic Development & Innovation, P.O. Box 6097, St. Lucia, 4067 QLD, Australia e Department of Plant & Soil Sciences, Life Sciences & Biotechnology Institute, Mississippi State University, 117 Dorman Hall, Box 9555, Mississippi State, MS 39762, USA f Molecular Research, 503 Clovis Road, Shallowater, TX 79363, USA g USDA-ARS Cattle Fever Tick Research Laboratory, 22675 North Moorefield Road, Building 6419, Edinburg, TX 78541, USA article info abstract Article history: The Rhipicephalus microplus genome is large and complex in structure, making it difficult to assemble a Received 9 September 2011 genome sequence and costly to resource the required bioinformatics. In light of this, a consortium of Received in revised form 16 November 2011 international collaborators was formed to pool resources to begin sequencing this genome.
    [Show full text]