Detection of Crimean-Congo hemorrhagic fever virus in blood-fed Hyalomma ticks collected from Mauritanian livestock

Table 3 Distribution of positive ticks amongst the sampled animals

Location	Host	n	+	(+)	Tick samples with the lowest CCHFV Ct value				CCHFV
Location	Host	n	+	(+)	Lowest Ct value	Tick species (lowest Ct value)	Second-lowest Ct value	Tick species (second-lowest Ct value)	Genotype
Idini	Cattle no. 1	22	22	0	18.26	H. rufipes	28.62	H. dromedarii	Africa I
Idini	Cattle no. 2	30	1	8	19.44	H. dromedarii	35.22	H. dromedarii	Africa I
Idini	Cattle no. 3	22	5	9	19.68	H. rufipes	34.44	H. dromedarii	Africa I
Rosso	Cattle no. 4	21	7	3	28.8	H. rufipes	31.52	H. rufipes	Africa III
Idini	Cattle no. 5	8	1	0	26.66	H. rufipes	–	–	Africa III
Nouakchott	Camel no. 1	24	3	0	28.67	H. dromedarii (×3)	(29.89; 29.56)	–	Africa I
Total		127	39	20

All sampled animals on which CCHFV-positive ticks were found (6/91), including weakly positive ticks, and the tick species of the most CCHFV-positive sample. The CCHFV genotype was determined by comparing the real-time reverse-transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (127 bp) data using the BLAST tool (National Center for Biotechnology Information). For abbreviations, see Table 1
n Number of ticks, + positive ticks, (+) weakly positive ticks, ×3 (3 specimens of H. dromedarii)

ISSN: 1756-3305