Explore the vast range of titles available.

Tickborne diseases (TBDs) such as Lyme disease result in ≈500,000 diagnoses annually in the United States. Various methods can reduce the abundance of ticks at small spatial scales, but whether these methods lower incidence of TBDs is poorly understood. We conducted a randomized, replicated, fully crossed, placebo-controlled, masked experiment to test whether 2 environmentally safe interventions, the Tick Control System (TCS) and Met52 fungal spray, used separately or together, affected risk for and incidence of TBDs in humans and pets in 24 residential neighborhoods. All participating properties in a neighborhood received the same treatment. TCS was associated with fewer questing ticks and fewer ticks feeding on rodents. The interventions did not result in a significant difference in incidence of human TBDs but did significantly reduce incidence in pets. Our study is consistent with previous evidence suggesting that reducing tick abundance in residential areas might not reduce incidence of TBDs in humans.

Lyme and other tick-borne diseases are increasing in the United States. Development of tick control tools have focused primarily on the blacklegged tick, Ixodes scapularis Say. Application of acaricides or entomopathogenic fungal agents to kill host-seeking ticks or ticks on rodents can suppress I. scapularis abundance in residential landscapes, but evidence is lacking for impact on human tick bites or tick-borne disease. Similar studies remain limited for the lone star tick, Amblyomma americanum (L.). Other knowledge gaps include how well homeowners and pest control companies perform in the broadcast application of tick-killing products, relative to high efficacy reported in research studies, and the tick-killing potential of natural product formulations exempt from Environmental Protection Agency registration. Area-wide control based on preventing ticks from feeding on their main reproductive host, the white-tailed deer, can suppress populations of both I. scapularis and A. americanum. Some studies also suggest an impact on Lyme disease cases, but this needs to be further validated in larger-scale intervention studies. The effectiveness, scale, cost, and implementation of various tick management strategies are important considerations in efforts to reduce human tick encounters and tick-borne disease. Additional barriers include weak incentives for industry and academia to develop, test, and register new tick and pathogen control technologies, including vaccines targeting humans, tick reproductive hosts, or wildlife pathogen reservoirs. Solutions will need to be ‘two-pronged': improving the tick and pathogen control toolbox and strengthening the public health workforce engaging in tick control at local and state levels.

Ticks and tick-borne diseases affect animal and human health worldwide and are the cause of significant economic losses. Approximately 10% of the currently known 867 tick species act as vectors of a broad range of pathogens of domestic animals and humans and are also responsible for damage directly due to their feeding behaviour. The most important tick species and the effects they cause are listed. The impact on the global economy is considered to be high and although some estimates are given, there is a lack of reliable data. The impact of ticks and tick-borne diseases on animal production and public health and their control are discussed.

Tickborne diseases are an increasing public health threat in the United States. Prevention and diagnosis of tickborne diseases are improved by access to current and accurate information on where medically important ticks and their associated human and veterinary pathogens are present, their local abundance or prevalence, and when ticks are actively seeking hosts. The true extent of tick and tickborne pathogen expansion is poorly defined, in part because of a lack of nationally standardized tick surveillance. We surveyed 140 vectorborne disease professionals working in state, county, and local public health and vector control agencies to assess their 1) tick surveillance program objectives, 2) pathogen testing methods, 3) tick control practices, 4) data communication strategies, and 5) barriers to program development and operation. Fewer than half of respondents reported that their jurisdiction was engaged in routine, active tick surveillance, but nearly two-thirds reported engaging in passive tick surveillance. Detection of tick presence was the most commonly stated current surveillance objective (76.2%). Most of the programs currently supporting tick pathogen testing were in the Northeast (70.8%), Upper and Central Midwest (64.3%), and the West (71.4%) regions.The most common pathogens screened for were Rickettsia spp. (Rickettsiales: Rickettsiaceae) and bacterial and viral agents transmitted by Ixodes (Acari: Ixodidae) ticks. Only 12% of respondents indicated their jurisdiction directly conducts or otherwise financially supports tick control. Responses indicated that their ability to expand the capacity of tick surveillance and control programs was impeded by inconsistent funding, limited infrastructure, guidance on best practices, and institutional capacity to perform these functions.

Vector-borne diseases (VBDs) such as malaria, dengue, and leishmaniasis exert a huge burden of morbidity and mortality worldwide, particularly affecting the poorest of the poor. The principal method by which these diseases are controlled is through vector control, which has a long and distinguished history. Vector control, to a greater extent than drugs or vaccines, has been responsible for shrinking the map of many VBDs. Here, we describe the history of vector control programmes worldwide from the late 1800s to date. Pre 1940, vector control relied on a thorough understanding of vector ecology and epidemiology, and implementation of environmental management tailored to the ecology and behaviour of local vector species. This complex understanding was replaced by a simplified dependency on a handful of insecticide-based tools, particularly for malaria control, without an adequate understanding of entomology and epidemiology and without proper monitoring and evaluation. With the rising threat from insecticide-resistant vectors, global environmental change, and the need to incorporate more vector control interventions to eliminate these diseases, we advocate for continued investment in evidence-based vector control. There is a need to return to vector control approaches based on a thorough knowledge of the determinants of pathogen transmission, which utilise a range of insecticide and non-insecticide-based approaches in a locally tailored manner for more effective and sustainable vector control.

In an update of earlier surveys conducted in Connecticut and New Jersey in the mid-1990s, an online survey of private commercial pest control firms engaged in residential tick control showed that the application of synthetic acaricides continues to be the primary method of control used. The carbamate and organophospate acaricides, previously the most commonly used against ticks, have given way to synthetic pyrethroids and, to a lesser extent, the use of natural product/organic acaricides. Typical costs for a single acaricide application today ($100–$200 for a 1 acre [0.4 ha] property) remain similar to those reported from the earlier surveys, although the frequency of applications and, therefore, also the overall annual cost has increased. The application habitats within residential properties, life stages targeted, and application equipment used have not changed appreciably since the mid-1990s. While most survey respondents expressed knowledge of natural product acaricides and Damminix Tick Tubes, many reported that they either did not employ or knew very little about other alternative tick control methods (including entomopathogenic fungus and topical application of acaricides to tick hosts via 4-Poster deer treatment stations or Select TCS rodent bait boxes). This suggests either a failure to adequately inform the pest management industry and their potential client base of the availability of alternate methods, and/or industry concerns about cost and effectiveness of the alternatives.

We conducted surveys of New Jersey mosquito control and public health agencies to determine their willingness and ability to expand or create and maintain publicly funded tick and tick-borne disease (T/TBD) management programs. Nearly all (86%) of 21 county mosquito control agencies (MCAs) completed the survey, while only 25% of the 102 health departments (HDs) responded, probably reflecting traditional agency responsibilities. Although few of either group had formal programs, many were engaged inT/TBD-related activities. Many MCAs rated their ability to assumeT/TBD responsibilities as high or moderate, while most HDs rated their capabilities as low.With the exceptions of lack of sustainable funding and possible legal constraints, the groups differed regarding perceived barriers to program creation and maintenance. Both groups envisioned comprehensive programs emphasizing public education, but program priorities differed between the groups. MCAs were willing to include most program activities, while HDs felt that some activities should be the responsibility of other agencies. MCAs were generally more familiar than HDs with tick control methods and while both groups would include control in a comprehensive program, both would limit control to public lands. Estimated program costs varied widely, probably reflecting responding agency size and complexity of envisioned programs. These results in a state with a system of existing agencies staffed by highly competent professionals suggest that more than simply additional funding (e.g., established guidelines for tick control and surveillance) is needed to create a network of practice necessary to address the growing incidence of TBD.

Background Tick control is a worldwide challenge due to its resistance to acaricides. Essential oils (EOs) and isolated compounds (EOCs) are potential alternatives for tick control technologies. Methods A review with EOs and EOCs, under field and semi-field conditions, was performed based on Scopus, Web of Science and PubMed databases. Thirty-one studies published between 1991 and 2022 were selected. The search was performed using the following keywords: \"essential oil\" combined with \"tick,\" \" Ixodes ,\" \" Argas ,\" \" Rhipicephalus ,\" \" Amblyomma ,\" \" Hyalomma ,\" \" Dermacentor ,\" \" Haemaphysalis \" and \" Ornithodoros .\" The words \"essential oil\" and \"tick\" were searched in the singular and plural. Results The number of studies increased over the years. Brazil stands out with the largest number (51.6%) of publications. The most studied tick species were Rhipicephalus microplus (48.4%), Ixodes scapularis (19.4%), Amblyomma americanum and R. sanguineus sensu lato (9.7% each). Cattle (70%) and dogs (13%) were the main target animal species. Regarding the application of EOs/EOCs formulations, 74% of the studies were conducted with topical application (spray, pour-on, foam, drop) and 26% with environmental treatment (spray). Efficacy results are difficult to evaluate because of the lack of information on the methodology and standardization. The nanotechnology and combination with synthetic acaricides were reported as an alternative to enhance the efficacy of EOs/EOCs. No adverse reactions were observed in 86.6% of the studies evaluating EOs/EOCs clinical safety. Studies regarding toxicity in non-target species and residues are scarce. Conclusions This article provides a comprehensive review on the use of EOs and EOCs to reduce tick infestations, in both the hosts and the environment. As future directions, we recommend the chemical characterization of EOs, methodology standardization, combination of EOs/EOCs with potential synergists, nanotechnology for new formulations and safety studies for target and non-target organisms, also considering the environmental friendliness. Graphical abstract

Background Mixed Game and Livestock Interfaces (MGLIs) in and around conservation areas like Queen Elizabeth National Park (QENP) have typanosomosis, tsetse flies, Ticks and Tick-Borne Diseases (TTBDs) as major constraints to livestock productivity. There were no cheaper community-based methods for controlling both ticks and tsetse flies. It was against this background that this study was done. Methods A weekly restricted spraying of cattle using vectocid ® for 6 months was done in MGLIs in QENP for controlling both ticks and tsetse flies. Before technology introduction, a baseline survey was done to establish livestock productivity, tsetse infestation and cattle tick burdens, prevalence of tick-borne diseases (TBDs) and trypanososmosis, morbidity and mortality rates due to TBDs and trypanososmosis; and the economic cost due to TTBDs, tstetse flies and trypanosomosis. Later the above parameters were monitored to quantify the impact. Results After intervention, infestations by Rhipicephalus appendiculatus (14.8 ± 0.8 / cattle), Ambylloma variegatum (0.8 / cattle) and Rhipicephalus evertsi (0.2/ cattle) decreased by 43.2%, 50% and 100% respectively. However, Rhipicephalus microplus and Rhipicephalus decoloratus infestations grew by 1000% and 400% respectively. Tsetse fly catches per trap after 72 h decreased from 14.2 to 0. The trypanosomosis prevalence in cattle decreased from 7.3% to none. The farmer reported prevalence of tryapanosomosis reduced from 31.6% to 1.1%; East Coast Fever (ECF) reduced from 12.3% to 4.3%; heartwater and anaplasmosis reduced from 4.5% and 0.7% respectively, to 0. The mortality rate of cattle due to tryapnosomosis was reduced from 7.2% to 0; ECF reduced from 3.2% to 0.6%; anaplasmosis and heartwater reduced from 0.1% and 1.1% respectively to 0. Annual mortality loss per cattle herd due to trypanosomosis and TBDs reduced by 88.3% from USD 1,571.3 to USD 184.1 after intervention. Before intervention tryapnosomosis, ECF, anaplasmosis and heartwater constituted 70.6%, 17.7%, 11.1% and 0.6% of this loss respectively. However, after intervention there was mortality loss of only USD 35.9 which occurred due to ECF. The annual economic cost of ticks, tsetse flies, TBDs and trypnosomosis decreased from USD 1,916.8 to USD 302, with return of investment of 23. Conclusions The introduced technology was effective for control of tsetse flies, R. appendiculatus , R. evertsi and A. variegatum ; but not for R. decoloratus and R. microplus .

Background The brown dog tick, Rhipicephalus sanguineus sensu lato ( Rh. sanguineus s.l.), is an important vector of Rickettsia rickettsii , the causative agent of Rocky Mountain spotted fever (RMSF), in western North America, with the most prominent tick infestations occurring in the Southwestern USA and Northern Mexico. RMSF is a significant public health threat in these regions, including in the state of California. Methods In 2024, the Sacramento-Yolo Mosquito and Vector Control District detected a brown dog tick infestation in a neighborhood in South Sacramento (CA, USA) that encompassed three adjoining properties. This infestation was unusual due to its location farther north than those in most recent reports. In partnership with the Laboratory of Infectious Disease Ecology at the University of California, Davis, a surveillance and abatement program was implemented. This included tick monitoring, residual spraying of acaricide, deployment of tick collars on dogs and bilingual public outreach. Results The integrated intervention substantially reduced tick populations at the affected site. Both adult and immature stages of Rh. sanguineus s.l. declined following sequential treatments. Sustained suppression and elimination were achieved through continued control and outreach efforts. Conclusions This localized infestation of Rh. sanguineus s.l. in northern California highlights the potential for range expansion of RMSF vectors and underscores the need for continued surveillance, rapid response and community engagement to mitigate vector-borne disease risks. Graphical Abstract