Abstract:
INTRODUCTION :
Tick-borne pathogens (TBPs) constitute an emerging threat to public and animal health especially in the African continent, where land-use change, and wildlife loss are creating new opportunities for disease transmission. A review of TBPs with a focus on ticks determined the epidemiology of Rhipicephalus ticks in heartwater and the affinity of each Rickettsia species for different tick genera. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to collect, map and estimate the molecular prevalence of Anaplasmataceae, Rickettsiaceae and Coxiellaceae in African wildlife.
MATERIALS AND METHODS :
Relevant scientific articles were retrieved from five databases: PubMed, ScienceDirect, Scopus, Ovid and OAIster. Publications were selected according to pre-determined exclusion criteria and evaluated for risk of bias using the appraisal tool for cross-sectional studies (AXIS). We conducted an initial descriptive analysis followed by a meta-analysis to estimate the molecular prevalence of each pathogen. Subgroup analysis and meta-regression models were employed to unravel associations with disease determinants. Finally, the quality of evidence of every estimate was finally assessed.
RESULTS :
Out of 577 retrieved papers, a total of 41 papers were included in the qualitative analysis and 27 in the meta-analysis. We retrieved 21 Anaplasmataceae species, six Rickettsiaceae species and Coxiella burnetii. Meta-analysis was performed for a total of 11 target pathogens. Anaplasma marginale, Ehrlichia ruminantium and Anaplasma centrale were the most prevalent in African bovids (13.9 %, CI: 0–52.4 %; 20.9 %, CI: 4.1–46.2 %; 13.9 %, CI: 0–68.7 %, respectively). Estimated TBPs prevalences were further stratified per animal order, family, species and sampling country.
DISCUSSION :
We discussed the presence of a sylvatic cycle for A. marginale and E. ruminantium in wild African bovids, the need to investigate A. phagocytophilum in African rodents and non-human primates as well as E. canis in the tissues of wild carnivores, and a lack of data and characterization of Rickettsia species and C. burnetii.
CONCLUSION :
Given the lack of epidemiological data on wildlife diseases, the current work can serve as a starting point for future epidemiological and/or experimental studies.
Description:
SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL : TABLE S1: PRISMA statement checklist; TABLE S2: PRISMA checklist for abstracts; TABLE S3: additional checklist for systematic reviews and meta-analyses retrieved from Migliavaca et al., 2020; TABLE S4: critical appraisal of included studies; TABLE S5: detailed summary of Anaplasmataceae, Rickettsiaceae and Coxiellaceae detected in African wildlife stratified by country and detection method; TABLE S6: results of the analysis of publication bias; TABLE S7: List of papers excluded during full-text examination and relevant exclusion criteria
