Submit a preprint


The distribution, phenology, host range and pathogen prevalence of *Ixodes ricinus* in France: a systematic map and narrative reviewuse asterix (*) to get italics
Grégoire Perez, Laure Bournez, Nathalie Boulanger, Johanna Fite, Barbara Livoreil, Karen D. McCoy, Elsa Quillery, Magalie René-Martellet, and Sarah I. BonnetPlease use the format "First name initials family name" as in "Marie S. Curie, Niels H. D. Bohr, Albert Einstein, John R. R. Tolkien, Donna T. Strickland"
<p style="text-align: justify;">The tick <em>Ixodes ricinus</em> is the most important vector species of infectious diseases in European France. Understanding its distribution, phenology, and host species use, along with the distribution and prevalence of associated pathogens at national scales is essential for developing prevention strategies. The aim of this paper is to provide a systematic map and narrative review of the existing knowledge on the eco-epidemiology of <em>I. ricinus</em> in France. Using literature published up to 2020, the present paper provides a distribution map for the species and a summary of environmental factors explaining observed geographical differences in phenology and temporal differences in abundance. The diversity of vertebrate host species used by this tick, along with their degree of infestation when available, are presented and discussed with respect to their potential contribution to the population dynamics of <em>I. ricinus</em> and the circulation of tick-borne zoonotic pathogens. Prevalence data of detected pathogens are summarised in different maps. Results from 187 identified references show that the species is present in most departments, but scarce under Mediterranean climate and in coastal habitats. Its phenology is generally bimodal with variations depending on climate. Abundance seems positively influenced by forest cover and host abundance. Rodents and ruminants are the most studied species groups, but the diversity of sampling protocols (e.g., location, season, exhaustivity of inspection) precluded direct comparisons between species groups. Data on pathogens are patchy, with most studies conducted near research units. Among pathogens, <em>Borrelia burgdorferi </em>sensu lato is the most searched for in ticks and seems more prevalent in north-eastern and central France. The review carried out here has made it possible to highlight the gaps in our knowledge of tick-host-pathogen interactions, their ecology and their distribution, and the need to address these gaps in order to optimize tick and tick-borne diseases prevention and control strategies.</p> should fill this box only if you chose 'All or part of the results presented in this preprint are based on data'. URL must start with http:// or https://
You should fill this box only if you chose 'Scripts were used to obtain or analyze the results'. URL must start with http:// or https://
You should fill this box only if you chose 'Codes have been used in this study'. URL must start with http:// or https://
Ixodes ricinus; Anaplasma; Babesia; Bartonella; Borrelia; Coxiella; Francisella; Theileria; Rickettsia; tick-borne encephalitis virus; hard tick; tick-borne diseases.
NonePlease indicate the methods that may require specialised expertise during the peer review process (use a comma to separate various required expertises).
Animal diseases, Behaviour of hosts, infectious agents, or vectors, Disease Ecology/Evolution, Ecohealth, Ecology of hosts, infectious agents, or vectors, Epidemiology, Geography of infectious diseases, Interactions between hosts and infectious agents/vectors, Kariology, Cell cycle and Life cycles of hosts, infectious agents, or vectors, Parasites, Population dynamics of hosts, infectious agents, or vectors, Vectors, Zoonoses
Richard Ostfeld (, Annapaola Rizzoli (, Umemiya-Shirafuji (, Filipe Dantas-Torres (, Janet Foley (, Eduard Korenberg (, Naftaly Githaka (, Armanda Bastos (, Andrei Mihalca (, Ana Cláudia Norte ( No need for them to be recommenders of PCIInfections. Please do not suggest reviewers for whom there might be a conflict of interest. Reviewers are not allowed to review preprints written by close colleagues (with whom they have published in the last four years, with whom they have received joint funding in the last four years, or with whom they are currently writing a manuscript, or submitting a grant proposal), or by family members, friends, or anyone for whom bias might affect the nature of the review - see the code of conduct
e.g. John Doe []
2022-12-06 14:52:44
Ana Sofia Santos