WITHDRAWN: First molecular evidence of Hepatozoon canis infection in Rhipicephalus sanguineus (sensu lato) ticks in Iran

DOI: https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-81343/v1

Abstract

Background

Hepatozoon canis is a protozoan that is transmitted by the ixodid ticks. Ingesting the tick or a section of the tick organ which is infected by the mature oocysts containing infectious sporozoite is the main source of infection in dogs. Canine hepatozoonosis infects dogs in Iran, but the vector for Hepatozoon protozoa from Iran has never been demonstrated. The present study aims to detect H. canis in dogs and vector ticks in Iran.

Methods

During the period of 2018–2019, Blood samples and ixodid ticks were collected and examined using microscopical, molecular, and serological methods. A total of 246 blood samples were collected from the cephalic vein of pet, stray, and shelter dogs (103 stray, 99 shelter, and 44 pets) of both genders and varying ages in Northwest of Iran.

Results

Microscopically, infected neutrophils with Hepatozoon spp. were detected in 5 of 246 (2.03%) thin stained blood smears with low parasitemia. Indirect immunofluorescent antibody test (IFAT) was used to test the serum samples and antibodies against H. canis were detected in 31 (12.6%) of the serum samples. Molecularly, 23 out of 246 (9.34%) blood samples were found to be infected with H. canis. A comparison of the results of 3 diagnostic methods demonstrated a good agreement between IFAT and PCR and a poor agreement between microscopical examination with IFAT and PCR. There was no significant difference in different age groups and sex of sampled dogs. However, stray dogs had significant infection rate of than pets and shelter ones. In body inspection, 141 adult ticks (31 partially engorged females, 26 fully engorged female and 84 fed males) were collected from examined dogs and all ticks were belonging to species of Rhipicephalus sanguineus (sensu lato). Positive reaction to H. canis was observed in the genomic DNA of the 7 ticks (4.96%). A BLAST analysis of obtaining sequences isolated from both dogs and ticks indicated a 99–100% similarity with H. canis 18S rRNA gene sequences in GenBank. This is the first study in Iran to detect H. canis in R. sanguineus tick.

Background

Canine hepatozoonosis is a tick-borne disease of domestic and wild canids that is caused by Hepatozoon canis and Hepatozoon americanum [1]. The first report of hepatozoonsis in canids caused by H. canis was in India in 1905 and then it was found in other countries [2]. But H. americanum was first noticed predominantly in the southern United States as distinct specie [1]. H. canis causes subclinical infection whereas the Canine hepatozoonosis caused by H. americanum can be fatal in some cases [35]. Canine hepatozoonosis has been seen in different countries of Asia, Europe, Latin America, and Africa [6].

Dogs are mainly infected by ingesting infected ticks. In the vector, infective oocysts of parasite which has numerous sporocysts with sporozoites was produced in the hemocoel [7]. Among various vectors, Rhipicephalus sanguineus is regarded as the main biological vector for H. canis, but other species can also be considered as vectors. Several definitive hosts have been approved for H. canis among which one can name Rhipicephalus microplus, Haemaphysalis flava, Amblyomma ovale, and Haemaphysalis longicornis ticks (de Castro Demoner et al., 2013; De Miranda et al., 2014; Murata et al., 1995; Rubini et al., 2009).

The diagnosis of H. canis is conducted by microscopic analysis of blood smears stained with Giemsa and it leads to the recognition of H. canis gamonts in the neutrophil’s cytoplasm and in some rare cases, it is used to identify in monocytes [12]. Various epidemiological examinations of hepatozoonosis in canids have used different serological tests like IFAT, western blot and ELISA [1]. Recent studies have shown that PCR and sequence analysis are providing accurate information regarding the prevalence of protozoan by detecting the DNA of H. canis in both the peripheral blood of infected dogs and in infected ticks [1, 13].

The recent parasitological, and molecular surveys have revealed H. canis infection in stray dogs from the northeastern and central of Iran [14, 15], but the tick vectors were not determined. In the current study, we used 3 different diagnostic methods, microscopic, serologic, and molecular techniques to investigate the occurrence of H. canis in dogs, and from the Ixodid ticks removed from the dogs of Urmia, Northwest of Iran.

Methods

Study Area

The study was conducted from 2018 to 2019 in Urmia, West Azerbaijan province located in northwestern Iran (37º 32´ N and 45º 04´ E). The study area was approximately 8000 km2 (Fig. 1). The study area has witnessed varying temperatures in different seasons in the range of -3.8 to +23.4° C. The area is located on the borders of Turkey and Iraq [16].

Sampling

240 dogs (103 stray, 99 shelter, and 44 pets) were randomly selected. The data regarding the sex, age, tick burden and dog’s lifestyle were recorded. Blood samples were collected from the cephalic vein of dogs and placed into EDTA and serum tubes. Furthermore, blood smears were prepared from each blood sample. The whole skin of the dogs was carefully examined for ticks and the collected ticks were kept in 70% ethanol. The obtained samples were maintained under cool conditions prior to being sent to the laboratory of parasitology, Urmia university. Sera were separated by centrifuging the serum tubes. The tubes of sera and blood EDTA were stored at -20° C prior to molecular and serological examinations.

Microscopical Examination

Stained thin blood smears with 10% Giemsa solution were analyzed to find Hepatozoon spp. gamonts. Parasitemia was calculated by counting the number of infected neutrophils in at least 50 examined microscopic fields of vision [14].

Identification of Ticks

141 ticks (84 fed males, 26 fully engorged females, and 31 partially engorged females) were obtained from 99 dogs sampled. Then, the ticks were kept in vials with mesh cover which had plaster bottoms. Morphological features of the ticks were used for the identification of their specimen which was formerly explained by Walker et al. and Estrada-Pena et al. [17,18]. Feeding status and the sex (fed males, semi-engorged females, fully engorged females, unfed males) were the criteria used for classification of the ticks. Table 3 presents detailed information about the ticks used in the current study.

Serology for H. canis

The indirect fluorescent antibody test (IFAT) was used to determine the serology of H. canis [19]. Blood samples were obtained from dogs and allowed to clot. subsequently, they were centrifuged for the separation of the serum. The obtained serum samples were stored at -20 °C until use. Hepatozoon spp. gametocyte antigen for IFAT was prepared by collecting 40 ml of heparinized peripheral blood from an infected dog with 18.5% parasitemia. The method described by Baneth et al. was used to separate white blood cells on Ficoll–Hypaque density gradients [20]. The final pellet was resuspended in PBS containing 1.5% bovine serum albumin (BSA), and thin blood smears were prepared on glass slides by the method of Baneth et al. (1998). Sera were diluted at 1:32 as the cut off titer for IgG seropositivity determined earlier [21,22]. Rabbit-antidog IgG fluorescein conjugate (Sigma‐Aldrich, St Louis, MO, USA) was used at 1:100 dilution [19].

DNA extraction, PCR and Sequencing

DNA from the dog’s blood and ticks were extracted using a commercial kit [Molecular Biological System Transfer (MBST), Tehran, Iran], following the manufacturer’s instructions and kept at −20 C until use. A pair of primers, HepF (5´-ATACATGAGCAAAATCTCAAC-3´) and HepR (5´-CTTATTCCATGCTGCAG- 3´), were used to amplify a 660 bp fragment of the 18S rRNA gene of Hepatozoon species in dog blood samples and tick’s specimen. The primer’s specificity and sensitivity and the PCR condition have been described previously by Inokuma et al. (2002). PCR was carried out in 20 μl total reaction volume containing 1 μl (10 pmol) of each primer and 1 μl of extracted DNA, and 16 μl of distilled water were added to a Reddy® to use PCR master mix (Sinaclon Co., Tehran, Iran, Cat. No.: MM2061) with a final concentration of 250 μM of each dNTP in 10 mMTris-HCl, pH 9.0, 30 mM KCl, 1.5 mM MgCl2, and 1 U Taq DNA polymerase. Cycling condition for Hepatozoon was 95°C for 5 min, followed by 34 cycles at 95°C for 30 sec, 72°C for 5 min and 72°C for 5 min with a final extension step of 72°C for 10 min. The PCR products were separated by electrophoresis on 1% agarose gel in TAE (Tris-acetate-EDTA) buffer and visualized using ethidium bromide and UV illumination [14]. The positive control for H. canis was provided from faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Tehran, Iran. Distilled water used as negative control in PCR amplification.

To confirm the results and identify species, positive PCR products detected in dogs and ticks were purified and subjected to sequencing with both forward and reverse primers by Sinaclon Co., Tehran, Iran. The sequencing results were analysed using MEGA 6 software and compared with each other and the reference sequence in the GenBank database by Basic Local Alignment Search Tool (BLAST) analysis (www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov). The phylogenetic tree was constructed using MEGA 6 software based on the maximum likelihood method based on the Tamura-Nei model [23], with bootstrap 1,000 (1,000 replicates). The nucleotide sequences of Babesia canis were used as an outgroup (Fig. 2).

Statistical Analysis

The results were analyzed by SPSS software (ver. 21.0). The Chi-square test was used to analyze the relationship between several risk factors including sex, age, and tick burden with the rate of infection in dogs and the values less than 0.05 was considered significant (P<0.05). Cohen’s Kappa test was used to evaluate the agreement of three diagnostic methods and the values obtained for Kappa were categorized as low (0.2 < ĸ < 0.4), moderate (0.4 < ĸ < 0.6), good (0.6 < ĸ < 0.8), or excellent (ĸ > 0.8) [24]. The method proposed by Kahl et al. was used to analyze the prevalence of infestation, the mean density, and the intensity of infestation of adult ticks on dogs [25].

Results

The results of the study showed that the gamonts of Hepatozoon spp. were found by microscopic methods in 5 out of 246 (2.03%) blood smears of dogs and the percentage of neutrophils infected with gamonts was between 0.001 and 0.003(Fig. 2). IFAT revealed the seropositive reaction in 31 dogs (12.6%). The results of PCR also showed the infection of 9.34% (23/246) dogs with H. canis (Fig. 3).

A comparison of results obtained by PCR and IFAT indicated that 21 (67.74%) IFAT-positive sample were also positive by PCR (Table 1). While 10 (32.25%) samples were positive only by IFAT and 2 (9.30%) samples were positive only by PCR. The rate of Hepatozoon positive dogs determined by microscopy, PCR and IFAT differed significantly between the three tests (P < 0.05). A poor agreement (ĸ values,0.252 and 0.335) with a highly significant difference was observed between microscopic examination with IFAT and PCR methods (P = 0.000), whereas a good agreement (ĸ values, 0.751) with a highly significant difference was observed between IFAT and PCR (P = 0.000) (Table 1).

Table 1

Comparison of microscopy, PCR, and IFAT results for the detection of H. canis infection in dogs from Urmia, Iran

Microscopical examination and serology

PCR

Total No

Positive No

Negative No

M(+), S(+)

5

0

31

M(-), S(+)

16

10

26

M(+), S(-)

0

0

0

M(-), S(-)

2

213

215

Total

23

223

246

M, microscopical examination; S, serology.

Table 2 shows the prevalence of H. canis in dogs in relation to their sex, tick burden, age, and the lifestyle. No significant association with sex and age was found for Hepatozoon (P > 0.05). Positive serology and PCR had correlation with the presence of ticks on dogs (P < 0.05). The statistical analysis indicated that the prevalence of H. canis in stray, shelter and pet dogs was 15.53%, 5.05% and 4.54%, respectively. As shown in Table 2, the prevalence of H. canis is the highest in stray dogs and the statistical analysis revealed significant difference between them (P < 0.05).

Table 2

Frequency of Hepatozoon infection in dogs from Urmia, Iran, in relation to possible risk factors

Risk factors

IFAT

No(%)

PCR

No(%)

Total

No

Age

6 m to 1 yr

8 (9.87)

5(6.17)

81

≥ 1 yr

23(13.93)

18(10.90)

165

P value

X2 = 0.814, P = 0.367

X2 = 1.438, P = 0.230

 

Gender

Male

21(14.58)

14(9.72) b

144

Female

10(12.82)

9(11.53)

78

P value

X2 = 1.238, P = 0.266

X2 = 0.057, P = 0.811

 

Tick infestation status

Positive

19(19.19)

18(18.18)

99

Negative

12(8.16)

5(3.40)

147

P value

X2 = 6.533, P = 0.011

X2 = 15.249, P = 0.000

 

Dog Lifestyle

Pet

1(2.27)

2(4.54)

44

Shelter

8(8.08)

5(5.05)

99

Stray

22(21.35)

16(15.53)

103

P value

X2 = 13.272, P = 0.001

X2 = 8.005, P = 0.018

 

Total

31

23

246

During the visual examination, a total of 141 adult ticks were taken from 99 dogs and all of them were morphologically identified as R. sanguineus (sensu lato). 57(40.4%) of collected ticks were females, 84 (59.5%) were males. The prevalence of adult tick infestation, the mean density of adult ticks per examined dogs, and the intensity of adult tick infestation on infested dogs were determined as 40.24%, 0.57, and 1.42, respectively. Table 3 shows the frequency and infection rates of H. canis for each tick. Of the 141 tick tested, only 7 ticks (4.96%) were infected with H. canis (Fig .3).

The partial sequences of the 18S rRNA gene for H. canis which was isolated in this study were submitted to GenBank database and they are recorded with MT810118 (dog), and MT810115 (tick) accession numbers. A BLAST search performed with the 18S rRNA gene sequences of Hepatozoon species isolated from dogs and ticks showed 99–100% similarity with the corresponding H. canis isolates deposited in the GenBank database. Phylogenetic analyses revealed that the obtained H. canis sequences clustered in the group with H. canis sequences and sequences were clearly distinct from Hepatozoon americanum, and Hepatozoon felis (Fig. 4).

Discussion

H. canis has long been recognized to cause disease in dogs in all over the world [26, 27]. H. Canis infection was first reported by Khoshnegah et al. (2009) in an eleven-year-old male dog in Iran. They observed H. canis gametocytes inside neutrophils of peripheral blood smears and bone marrow smear in Giemsa stain [28]. Previous studies used molecular and microscopic techniques to investigate the presence of H. Canis in Iran [14, 15]. It should be noted that, the vector ticks of Hepatozoon species are completely understood in Iran. This study used serological and molecular survey based on PCR amplification and DNA sequencing to recognize the species of Hepatozoon in dogs and ticks feeding on the dogs. This is the first report of H. canis in dogs and the ticks collected from dogs in northwest of Iran.

In this study, peripheral blood smears were used for identifying Hepatozoon spp. gamonts. H. canis was microscopically detected in only a small number of blood smears (2.03%) of dogs, which could be due to the low sensitivity of microscopic method. Based on the microscopic examination of blood smears, Hepatozoon spp. infection in sampled dogs in the present study (2.03%) is higher than the previous study conducted in Iran (1.6%) [29] which it may be related to the paraseitemia rate in sampled dogs [14]. There were some similar studies conducted in different countries which used microscopic examination of dog’s blood smears and they showed Hepatozoon spp. infection in 2.7% of stray dogs in Thailand [30], 2.3% of stray dogs in India [31], 4.3% of dogs in Colombia [32], 1–10.6% of stray dogs in Turkey [19, 33], 11.6% of pet and stray dogs in Pakistan [34], 23.7% of hunting dogs in Japan [35], 11.3% of rural dogs in Brazil [13], and 43.9% of young dogs that lived in a shelter located in Italy [36].

The seroprevalance of H. canis infection in this study was 12.6%. The study conducted by Karagenc et al. (2006) delineated that IFAT was able to detect more positive animals to Hepatozoon compared to microscopic methods and PCR. The existing evidence show lower sensitivity of direct observation compared to IFAT, because the investigation of H. canis prevalence by blood smear parasitology was only 1%, while IFAT yielded the result of 33.1% [37]. The absence of gamonts in the animals identified as positive with IFAT may be due to low or intermittent parasitemia or arrest of parasite development at the meront stage in visceral organs [3, 37, 38]. It should be noted that antibodies against Hepatozoon spp. might be present for several months after parasitemia can no longer be detected [21, 39].

In the present study, H. canis was found in 9.34% of the dogs investigated with molecular analysis. The study conducted by Barati and Razmi (2018) in northeast of Iran using molecular analysis found H. canis in 8% of the dogs investigated. Climatic difference can justify the difference in prevalence in the two regions. Different occurrence rates of Hepatozoon infection in dogs have also been reported in other countries. Using PCR, the prevalence of H. canis infection in dogs has been reported at 9.3% in Haiti [40], 0.7% in the United States [41], 31.8% in Colombia [32], 53.3–79.2% in Brazil [8, 13, 42], 3.6– 25.8% in Turkey [19, 33, 43], 5.5% in Palestine [44], 49.7% in India [31], 42.9% in Japan [35], 36.0% in Thailand [30], 20.3% in Nigeria [45], 57.8% in Italy [36], 11.8% in Croatia [46], 50.0% in Czech Republic [47], and 36.0% in Hungary [48]. The differences in reported prevalence might be related to several factors such as the population of tick vector, the methods used for animal management, and the climate [14].

This study is the first in Iran to record H. canis in R. sanguineus (s.l) ticks from dogs. It should be noted that the previous studies have mentioned R. sanguineus s.l. as the most prevalent specie of tick to infest the dogs in Iran [29], but the vector competence of R. sanguineus s. l. for Hepatozoon protozoa from Iran has never been demonstrated. In the present study, R. sanguineus (s.l.) ticks was the only species found in sampled dogs of the study area which could be related to its huge capability to adapt [4952]. The molecular screening of tick specimens collected in the study area reveals the importance of vector R. sanguineus (7/141 ticks positive to H. canis). The percentage of positive ticks in a previously conducted study by Aktas et al. [53] was higher (20.58%) compared to that of ours (4.96%; 7/141). In this study, fed males, partially and fully engorged adult females were the only life stages positive to H. canis. The results of this study are in line with that of Aktas et al. (2013), but it differs with the results reported by study conducted in Italy which showed the highest positivity to H. canis in unfed adults [51].

The frequency of Hepatazoon infection in dogs did not significantly vary regardless of age and gender in this study. The results of the study are in agreement with other studies done in the east of Iran [14], Turkey [33], in Japan [35, 54], in Thailand [30], in Pakistan [34], and in India [55], but the results were not in line with two other studies. The study conducted by Aktas et al. (2015) in Turkey claimed that the frequency of Hepatozoon infection was significantly related to age of the sampled dogs. Another study in Brazil by de Miranda et al. (2014) showed the influence of gender and age on frequency of Hepatozoon infection.

The results of this study showed a correlation between presence of H. canis DNA with the presence of R. sanguineus in dogs (P < 0.05). The results obtained during this study are in agreement with the previous studies and all report that Hepatozoon infection has positive correlation with tick’s presence [53, 56, 57]. It was also shown that H. canis infection in stray dogs (15.53%) assessed by PCR was significantly higher compared to pet and shelter dogs which were 4.54% and 5.05%, respectively. This study proved the relationship between the prevalence of H. canis and the dogs’ lifestyle. This finding is in line with that of Soltani and Dalimi (2018).

A phylogenetic tree based on 18S rRNA gene in the present study showed that the H. canis sequences obtained in this study from both the ticks and dogs (with accession numbers MT810118 and MT810115) clustered with H. canis sequences of dogs from eastern Iran and other countries and it was different from the H. americanum and H. felis clades. This was the first study of the type conducted in ticks of Iran.

Conclusions

In conclusion, this study shows the predominance of R. sanguineus (s.l.) in infesting the domestic dogs living in the studied area and it also shows the existence of H. canis in these tick populations. As far as we know, our study is the first molecular examination of tick vectors of H. canis which has been conducted in Iran. It should be noted that performing transmission evaluations is necessary to confirm the vector capacity of a given tick species. It is also necessary to conduct further studies to identify the epidemiology, and vector ticks of this infection in other parts of Iran.

Abbreviations

IFAT: Indirect fluorescent antibody test; PCR:polymerase chain reaction; BLAST:basic local alignment search tool; ELISA:enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay; EDTA:Ethylenediamine tetraacetic acid; BSA:bovine serum albumin; IgG:Immunoglobulin G; MBST:Molecular Biological System Transfer; TAE:Tris-acetate-EDTA

Declarations

Declaration of Competing Interest

Authors disclose no potential conflict of interests.

Abbreviations

IFAT: Indirect fluorescent antibody test; PCR: polymerase chain reaction; BLAST: basic local alignment search tool; ELISA: enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay; EDTA: Ethylenediamine tetraacetic acid; BSA: bovine serum albumin; IgG: Immunoglobulin G; MBST: Molecular Biological System Transfer; TAE: Tris-acetate-EDTA

Acknowledgements

We would like to sincerely thank the members of the Faculty of Veterinary Medicine and Urmia University Research Council for the approval and support of this research.

Authors’ contributions

FM and AR contributed in conception, design, data collection, statistical analysis and drafting of the manuscript. FM, AR, MZ and MY, contributed in conception, design, supervision of the study and drafting of the manuscript. All authors approved the final version for submission.

Funding

This research has been financially supported by Research Council of Urmia University.

Availability of data and materials

The datasets analyzed during the present study are available from the corresponding authors upon reasonable request.

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Collection of blood samples from dogs was performed by skilled and trained veterinarians following proper physical restraint of dogs to reduce the potential painful stimuli and ensure both animal safety and personnel. Ethical approval for this study was obtained from Ethics Committee of the Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Urmia University (approval number: IR-UU-AEC-3/618/AD-6/9/2020).

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

References

  1. Baneth G. Hepatozoon canis infection. In Infectious diseases of the dog and cat. 4th ed. Elsevier; 2012.
  2. Baneth G, Vincent-Johnson N. Hepatozoonosis. Arthropod-borne Infect Dis dog cat. CRC Press; 2016. p. 121–36.
  3. Baneth G, Weigler B. Retrospective case‐control study of hepatozoonosis in dogs in Israel. J Vet Intern Med. 1997;11:365–70.
  4. Baneth G, Mathew JS, Shkap V, Macintire DK, Barta JR, Ewing SA. Canine hepatozoonosis: two disease syndromes caused by separate Hepatozoon spp. TRENDS Parasitol. 2003;19:27–31.
  5. Gavazza A, Bizzeti M, Papini R. Observations on dogs found naturally infected with Hepatozoon canis in Italy. Rev Med Vet (Toulouse). 2003;154:565–71.
  6. Little SE, Allen KE, Johnson EM, Panciera RJ, Reichard M V, Ewing SA. New developments in canine hepatozoonosis in North America: a review. Parasit Vectors. 2009;2:1–4.
  7. Smith TG. The genus hepatozoon (apicomplexa: adeleina). J Parasitol. 1996;565–85.
  8. De Miranda RL, O’Dwyer LH, De Castro JR, Metzger B, Rubini AS, Mundim A V, et al. Prevalence and molecular characterization of Hepatozoon canis in dogs from urban and rural areas in Southeast Brazil. Res Vet Sci. 2014;97:325–8.
  9. de Castro Demoner L, Rubini AS, dos Santos Paduan K, Metzger B, de Paula Antunes JMA, Martins TF, et al. Investigation of tick vectors of Hepatozoon canis in Brazil. Tick Borne Dis. 2013;4:542–6.
  10. Murata T, Inoue M, Taura Y, Nakama S, Abe H, Fujisaki K. Detection of Hepatozoon canis oocyst from ticks collected from the infected dogs. J Vet Med Sci. 1995;57:111–2.
  11. Rubini AS, Paduan KS, Martins TF, Labruna MB, O’dwyer LH. Acquisition and transmission of Hepatozoon canis (Apicomplexa: Hepatozoidae) by the tick Amblyomma ovale (Acari: Ixodidae). Vet Parasitol. 2009;164:324–7.
  12. Modrý D, Beck R, Hrazdilová K, Baneth G. A review of methods for detection of Hepatozoon infection in carnivores and arthropod vectors. Vector-Borne Zoonotic Dis. Mary Ann Liebert, Inc. 140 Huguenot Street, 3rd Floor New Rochelle, NY 10801 USA; 2017;17:66–72.
  13. Rubini AS, dos Santos Paduan K, Lopes VVA, O’Dwyer LH. Molecular and parasitological survey of Hepatozoon canis (Apicomplexa: Hepatozoidae) in dogs from rural area of Sao Paulo state, Brazil. Parasitol Res. 2008;102:895.
  14. Barati A, Razmi GR. A Parasitologic and molecular survey of Hepatozoon canis infection in stray dogs in northeastern Iran. J Parasitol. 2018;104:413–7.
  15. Soltani R, Dalimi A. A Molecular Study on Hepatozoon canis Infection in Dogs in Tehran (Iran). Arch Razi Inst. 2018;73:257–63.
  16. Malekifard F, Tavassoli M, Yakhchali M, Darvishzadeh R. Detection of Theileria equi and Babesia caballi using microscopic and molecular methods in horses in suburb of Urmia, Iran. Vet Res forum. 2014. p. 129.
  17. Estrada-Peña A. Ticks of domestic animals in the Mediterranean region: a guide to identification of species. University of Zaragoza; 2004.
  18. Walker JB, Keirans JE, Horak IG. The genus Rhipicephalus (Acari, Ixodidae): a guide to the brown ticks of the world. Cambridge University Press; 2005.
  19. Karagenc TI, Pasa S, Kirli G, Hosgor M, Bilgic HB, Ozon YH, et al. A parasitological, molecular and serological survey of Hepatozoon canis infection in dogs around the Aegean coast of Turkey. Vet Parasitol. 2006;135:113–9.
  20. Baneth G, Barta JR, Shkap V, Martin DS, Macintire DK, Vincent-Johnson N. Genetic and antigenic evidence supports the separation of Hepatozoon canis and Hepatozoon americanum at the species level. J Clin Microbiol. 2000;38:1298–301.
  21. Baneth G, Shkap V, Samish M, Pipano E, Savitsky I. Antibody response to Hepatozoon canis in experimentally infected dogs. Vet Parasitol. 1998;74:299–305.
  22. Shkap V, Baneth G, Pipano E. Circulating antibodies to Hepatozoon canis demonstrated by immunofluorescence. J Vet Diagnostic Investig. SAGE Publications Sage CA: Los Angeles, CA; 1994;6:121–3.
  23. Tamura K, Nei M. Estimation of the number of nucleotide substitutions in the control region of mitochondrial DNA in humans and chimpanzees. Mol Biol Evol. 1993;10:512–26.
  24. Petrie A, Watson P. Statistics for veterinary and animal science. Blackwell Publishing; 2006.
  25. Kahl O, Gern L, Eisen L, Lane RS. Ecological research on Borrelia burgdorferi sensu lato: terminology and some methodological pitfalls. Lyme borreliosis Biol Epidemiol Control. CABI Publishing New York, NY; 2002;29–46.
  26. Baneth G. Perspectives on canine and feline hepatozoonosis. Vet Parasitol. 2011;181:3–11.
  27. Chomel B. Tick-borne infections in dogs—an emerging infectious threat. Vet Parasitol. 2011;179:294–301.
  28. Khoshnegah J, Mohri M, Movassaghi AR, Mehrjerdi HK. The first report of Hepatozoon canis infection of a dog in Iran. Comp Clin Path. 2009;18:455–8.
  29. Amoli AAR, Khoshnegah J, Razmi G. A preliminary parasitological survey of Hepatozoon spp. infection in dogs in Mashhad, Iran. Iran J Parasitol. 2012;7:99.
  30. Jittapalapong S, Rungphisutthipongse O, Maruyama S, Schaefer JJ, Stich RW. Detection of Hepatozoon canis in stray dogs and cats in Bangkok, Thailand. Ann N Y Acad Sci. Blackwell Publishing Inc Malden, USA; 2006;1081:479–88.
  31. Abd Rani PAM, Irwin PJ, Coleman GT, Gatne M, Traub RJ. A survey of canine tick-borne diseases in India. Parasit Vectors. 2011;4:141.
  32. Vargas-Hernandez G, André MR, Munhoz TD, Faria JML, Machado RZ, Tinucci-Costa M. Molecular characterization of Hepatozoon canis in dogs from Colombia. Parasitol Res. 2012;110:489–92.
  33. Aktas M, Özübek S, Altay K, Balkaya İ, Utuk AE, Kırbas A, et al. A molecular and parasitological survey of Hepatozoon canis in domestic dogs in Turkey. Vet Parasitol. 2015;209:264–7.
  34. Qamar M, Malik MI, Latif M, Ain Q ul, Aktas M, Shaikh RS, et al. Molecular detection and prevalence of Hepatozoon canis in dogs from Punjab (Pakistan) and hematological profile of infected dogs. Vector-Borne Zoonotic Dis. Mary Ann Liebert, Inc. 140 Huguenot Street, 3rd Floor New Rochelle, NY 10801 USA; 2017;17:179–84.
  35. El-Dakhly KM, Goto M, Noishiki K, El-Nahass E-S, Hirata A, Sakai H, et al. Prevalence and diversity of Hepatozoon canis in naturally infected dogs in Japanese islands and peninsulas. Parasitol Res. 2013;112:3267–74.
  36. Otranto D, Dantas-Torres F, Weigl S, Latrofa MS, Stanneck D, Decaprariis D, et al. Diagnosis of Hepatozoon canis in young dogs by cytology and PCR. Parasit Vectors. 2011;4:1–6.
  37. Baneth G, Shkap V, Presentey B-Z, Pipano E. Hepatozoon canis: the prevalence of antibodies and gametocytes in dogs in Israel. Vet Res Commun. 1996;20:41–6.
  38. Murata T, Shimoda K, Inoue M, Shiramizu K, Kanoe M, Taura Y, et al. Seasonal periodical appearance of Hepatozoon canis gamont in the peripheral blood. J Vet Med Sci. 1993;55:877–9.
  39. Gonen L, Strauss-Ayali D, Shkap V, Vincent-Johnson N, Macintire DK, Baneth G. An enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay for antibodies to Hepatozoon canis. Vet Parasitol. 2004;122:131–9.
  40. Starkey LA, Newton K, Brunker J, Crowdis K, Edourad EJP, Meneus P, et al. Prevalence of vector-borne pathogens in dogs from Haiti. Vet Parasitol. 2016;224:7–12.
  41. Allen KE, Li Y, Kaltenboeck B, Johnson EM, Reichard M V, Panciera RJ, et al. Diversity of Hepatozoon species in naturally infected dogs in the southern United States. Vet Parasitol. 2008;154:220–5.
  42. Spolidorio MG, Labruna MB, Zago AM, Donatele DM, Caliari KM, Yoshinari NH. Hepatozoon canis infecting dogs in the State of Espírito Santo, southeastern Brazil. Vet Parasitol. 2009;163:357–61.
  43. Aydin MF, Sevinc F, Sevinc M. Molecular detection and characterization of Hepatozoon spp. in dogs from the central part of Turkey. Tick Borne Dis. 2015;6:388–92.
  44. Azmi K, Al-Jawabreh A, Nasereddin A, Abdelkader A, Zaid T, Ereqat S, et al. Detection and molecular identification of Hepatozoon canis and Babesia vogeli from domestic dogs in Palestine. Parasitology. Cambridge University Press; 2017;144:613.
  45. Sasaki M, Omobowale O, Ohta K, Tozuka M, Matsuu A, Hirata H, et al. A PCR-based epidemiological survey of Hepatozoon canis in dogs in Nigeria. J Vet Med Sci. 2008;70:743–5.
  46. Vojta L, Mrljak V, Ćurković S, Živičnjak T, Marinculić A, Beck R. Molecular epizootiology of canine hepatozoonosis in Croatia. Int J Parasitol. 2009;39:1129–36.
  47. Mitková B, Hrazdilová K, Steinbauer V, D’Amico G, Mihalca AD, Modrý D. Autochthonous Hepatozoon infection in hunting dogs and foxes from the Czech Republic. Parasitol Res. 2016;115:4167–71.
  48. Hornok S, Tánczos B, de Mera IGF, de la Fuente J, Hofmann-Lehmann R, Farkas R. High prevalence of Hepatozoon-infection among shepherd dogs in a region considered to be free of Rhipicephalus sanguineus. Vet Parasitol. 2013;196:189–93.
  49. Dantas-Torres F, Figueredo LA, Otranto D. Seasonal variation in the effect of climate on the biology of Rhipicephalus sanguineus in southern Europe. Parasitology. 2011;138:527–36.
  50. Lorusso V, Dantas‐Torres F, Lia RP, Tarallo VD, Mencke N, Capelli G, et al. Seasonal dynamics of the brown dog tick, Rhipicephalus sanguineus, on a confined dog population in Italy. Med Vet Entomol. 2010;24:309–15.
  51. Ramos RAN, Giannelli A, Lia RP, Brianti E, Tarallo VD, Breitshwerdt EB, et al. Incidence of Cercopithifilaria bainae in dogs and probability of co-infection with other tick-borne pathogens. PLoS One. 2014;9:e88198.
  52. Santos MAB, de Souza IB, de Macedo LO, do Nascimento Ramos CA, de Oliveira Rego AG, Alves LC, et al. Cercopithifilaria bainae in Rhipicephalus sanguineus sensu lato ticks from dogs in Brazil. Tick Borne Dis. Elsevier; 2017;8:623–5.
  53. Aktas M, Özübek S, Ipek DNS. Molecular investigations of Hepatozoon species in dogs and developmental stages of Rhipicephalus sanguineus. Parasitol Res. 2013;112:2381–5.
  54. Inokuma H, Okuda M, Ohno K, Shimoda K, Onishi T. Analysis of the 18S rRNA gene sequence of a Hepatozoon detected in two Japanese dogs. Vet Parasitol. 2002;106:265–71.
  55. Singh K, Singh H, Singh NK, Kashyap N, Sood NK, Rath SS. Molecular prevalence, risk factors assessment and haemato-biochemical alterations in hepatozoonosis in dogs from Punjab, India. Comp Immunol Microbiol Infect Dis. 2017;55:53–8.
  56. Forlano M, Scofield A, Elisei C, Fernandes KR, Ewing SA, Massard CL. Diagnosis of Hepatozoon spp. in Amblyomma ovale and its experimental transmission in domestic dogs in Brazil. Vet Parasitol. 2005;134:1–7.
  57. O’dwyer LH, Massard CL, de Souza JCP. Hepatozoon canis infection associated with dog ticks of rural areas of Rio de Janeiro State, Brazil. Vet Parasitol. 2001;94:143–50.