↓ Skip to main content

Tick-Host Range Adaptation: Changes in Protein Profiles in Unfed Adult Ixodes scapularis and Amblyomma americanum Saliva Stimulated to Feed on Different Hosts

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Cellular and Infection Microbiology, December 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (87th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (90th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
71 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
66 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Tick-Host Range Adaptation: Changes in Protein Profiles in Unfed Adult Ixodes scapularis and Amblyomma americanum Saliva Stimulated to Feed on Different Hosts
Published in
Frontiers in Cellular and Infection Microbiology, December 2017
DOI 10.3389/fcimb.2017.00517
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lucas Tirloni, Tae K. Kim, Antônio F. M. Pinto, John R. Yates, Itabajara da Silva Vaz, Albert Mulenga

Abstract

Understanding the molecular basis of how ticks adapt to feed on different animal hosts is central to understanding tick and tick-borne disease (TBD) epidemiology. There is evidence that ticks differentially express specific sets of genes when stimulated to start feeding. This study was initiated to investigate if ticks such as Ixodes scapularis and Amblyomma americanum that are adapted to feed on multiple hosts utilized the same sets of proteins to prepare for feeding. We exposed I. scapularis and A. americanum to feeding stimuli of different hosts (rabbit, human, and dog) by keeping unfed adult ticks enclosed in a perforated microfuge in close contact with host skin, but not allowing ticks to attach on host. Our data suggest that ticks of the same species differentially express tick saliva proteins (TSPs) when stimulated to start feeding on different hosts. SDS-PAGE and silver staining analysis revealed unique electrophoretic profiles in saliva of I. scapularis and A. americanum that were stimulated to feed on different hosts: rabbit, human, and dog. LC-MS/MS sequencing and pairwise analysis demonstrated that I. scapularis and A. americanum ticks expressed unique protein profiles in their saliva when stimulated to start feeding on different hosts: rabbit, dog, or human. Specifically, our data revealed TSPs that were unique to each treatment and those that were shared between treatments. Overall, we identified a total of 276 and 340 non-redundant I. scapularis and A. americanum TSPs, which we have classified into 28 functional classes including: secreted conserved proteins (unknown functions), proteinase inhibitors, lipocalins, extracellular matrix/cell adhesion, heme/iron metabolism, signal transduction and immunity-related proteins being the most predominant in saliva of unfed ticks. With exception of research on vaccines against Rhipicephalus microplus, which its natural host, cattle, research on vaccine against other ticks relies feeding ticks on laboratory animals. Data here suggest that relying on lab animal tick feeding data to select target antigens could result in prioritizing irrelevant anti-tick vaccine targets that are expressed when ticks feed on laboratory animals. This study provides the platform that could be utilized to identify relevant target anti-tick vaccine antigens, and will facilitate early stage tick feeding research.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 66 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 66 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 11 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 12%
Student > Master 8 12%
Student > Bachelor 7 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 11%
Other 12 18%
Unknown 13 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 15 23%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 11 17%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 7 11%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 8%
Immunology and Microbiology 3 5%
Other 5 8%
Unknown 20 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 24 July 2023.
All research outputs
#2,539,011
of 24,135,931 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Cellular and Infection Microbiology
#443
of 7,280 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#57,499
of 448,238 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Cellular and Infection Microbiology
#12
of 113 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,135,931 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,280 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 448,238 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 113 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.