Skip to main content
Download PDF

Intra- and interspecific variation of Amblyomma ticks from southern Africa

Parasites & Vectors volume 17, Article number: 364 (2024) Cite this article

Abstract

Background

Amblyomma spp. ticks, known for their long mouthparts, bright ornate appearance and aggressive hunting behaviour, are vectors of a number of important pathogens. In southern Africa, 17 Amblyomma spp. are currently documented. Of these species, Amblyomma hebraeum and Amblyomma variegatum have been well studied due to their wide geographical range and their status as competent vectors of pathogens that are of veterinary and medical importance. Studies on other Amblyomma spp. in southern Africa have been neglected, fostering ongoing debates on the validity of certain species such as Amblyomma pomposum. This study investigated the inter- and intra-species variation of Amblyomma ticks collected in southern Africa, focusing on resolving the dispute about A. pomposum and A. variegatum being distinct species.

Methods

Four Amblyomma tick species were collected from Angola, Mozambique, South Africa, Zambia and Zimbabwe, and were identified morphologically as Amblyomma eburneum (208), A. hebraeum (4758), A. pomposum (191) and A. variegatum (2577) using identification keys. Gene amplification targeting the 12S and 16S rRNA, cytochrome oxidase I, cytochrome B and internal transcribed spacer-2 genes was conducted for 204 ticks, for which varying success was achieved during amplification for each of the markers. Maximum likelihood analyses were performed in IQ-TREE.

Results

The phylogenetic topologies and ABGD analyses of each individual gene clustered A. pomposum within the A. variegatum clade, while clearly separating A. eburneum and A. hebraeum from all other species. None of the genetic markers indicated intraspecific structuring on the basis of geographical origin, despite great distances between sampling sites.

Conclusion

Our study concludes that there is insufficient molecular evidence to differentiate A. pomposum and A. variegatum from each other. We highlight the need for whole mitochondrial genome sequencing of these two species to resolve the ongoing controversies. Furthermore, we propose mating and hybrid viability studies between the two species to confirm their reproductive isolation.

Graphical Abstract

Background

The order Ixodida is divided into three families: Argasidae (also referred to as soft ticks), Ixodidae (also referred to as hard ticks) and Nuttalliellidae [1]. The most recent records collating valid tick names estimate 750 ixodid and 218 argasid species, as well as Nuttalliella namaqua, the only tick in the Nuttalliellidae family, and Deinocrotonidae (monotypic, but extinct) [2,3,4]. Of the 970 recognised species, 206 ixodids, 40 argasids and N. namaqua occur in the Afrotropical region of the world [2]. Amblyomma, one of the largest genera within the Ixodidae, is found on every continent except Antarctica, and is of major veterinary and public health concern in the Afrotropical region.

Amblyomma spp. are known to be aggressive hunters with a vibrant and ornate appearance. The majority of the Amblyomma spp. that have been studied are known to be potential vectors of zoonotic pathogens such as Rickettsia spp.; however, they do not commonly feed on humans. They are vectors of several pathogens of veterinary importance including, but not limited to, Ehrlichia ruminantium, Theileria mutans and Theileria velifera [5, 6]. In the south-eastern parts of Africa, 21 Amblyomma species have been documented [6,7,8]. Amblyomma variegatum and Amblyomma hebraeum are the most predominant and widespread of the species, while distribution records of Amblyomma pomposum and Amblyomma eburneum are scant (Fig. 1).

Fig. 1
figure 1

Map of Africa showing the historic distributions of A. eburneum (pink), A. hebraeum (blue), A. pomposum (purple) and A. variegatum (green) on the continent. Blank African map image was obtained from https://worldmapblank.com/blank-map-of-africa/ and modified with distribution information from Walker et al. [38] and Voltzit and Keirans [8]

Full size image

Tick taxonomy in southern Africa dates back to 1778 and is focused on the morphological characteristics of adults, geographical distribution and host preference [9,10,11,12,13,14]. The first phylogenetic representation of ticks was depicted by Hoogstraal and Aeschlimann [15], but this representation has been revised over the years with increasing information obtained from molecular studies [16, 17]. Several studies have been conducted on the molecular systematics of Amblyomma spp.; however, most have included few or no Amblyomma spp. from southern African regions [18,19,20,21]. This limited representation of Amblyomma spp. from southern Africa has allowed for several incongruencies to have gone unanswered for decades.

The validity of certain Amblyomma spp. classifications has been placed under scrutiny. One noted controversy in southern Africa encompasses the A. variegatum group as described in Dias [22] and highlighted by Theiler and Salisbury [23] and Walker and Olwage [24]. Amblyomma variegatum, as described by Fabricius [25], is the oldest known species in the A. variegatum group, with a documented geographical spread as illustrated in Fig. 1. Dönitz [26] described A. pomposum, and although it is similar to A. variegatum, sufficient distinguishing phenotypic features are present to separate the two species morphologically. The main distinguishing features included coarse punctation on the conscutum and the fused central and cervical patches.

Robinson [27] described two male specimens collected in southern Rhodesia (now Zimbabwe) as A. variegatum var. nocens. Its distribution was designated to span from Makoni, Umtali (now Mutare) and Melsetter in Zimbabwe to Manica province in Mozambique and is found in bushveld ecoregions, at elevations of 2000–3000 feet [23, 27]. He noted that the main morphological difference between A. variegatum and A. variegatum var. nocens was that A. variegatum var. nocens had coarser punctations and was more vibrant in colouration. Robinson concluded in 1926 that the species he named A. variegatum var. nocens was synonymous with A. pomposum [26], which was given preference [22]. Theiler and Salisbury [23] examined and compared the two males, which Robinson [27] identified as A. variegatum var. nocens with A. pomposum samples and found that the morphologies did not resemble each other closely enough. Later, Dias described a new species, A. variegatum var. govurensis in Mozambique and compared its morphology with that of A. variegatum and A. pomposum. He described A. variegatum var. govurensis as distinguishable from the type specimens of A. variegatum and A. pomposum by large and coarse punctations, while the patterns were more vibrant and intense. Dias [22] attempted to revise the A. variegatum group, to include his newly described species A. variegatum var. govurensis; however, upon examination of the samples from Robinson [27], Dias concluded that his A. variegatum var. govurensis was identical to A. variegatum var. nocens and thus synonymous with A. pomposum.

During Dias’s revision of the A. variegatum group, he went on to note that the records of A. pomposum in eastern Africa as described by Dönitz [26] morphologically resembled the specimens that they found in Mozambique; however, the A. pomposum from western and central Africa did not match the description of the species by Dönitz [26]. Dias [22] proposed a new species name, Amblyomma superbum, which he illustrated in Dias [28], for the Amblyomma spp. in central and western Africa. This new nomenclature was rejected [23], and “A. pomposum” is still used to describe the species occurring in the central and western parts of Africa [23]. In light of these morphological debates, Theiler and Salisbury [23] examined all the reference material they had access to and advocated for the re-establishment of A. variegatum var. nocens as Amblyomma nocens Robertson 1911, with a geographic distribution range confined to latitudes 18–22°S. This change in nomenclature was also rejected [29].

To date, there is still disagreement regarding the diversity of Amblyomma spp. in Mozambique. It is unclear whether these morphological variations in the Amblyomma spp. found in Mozambique are due to the ticks being different species, or subspecies, or merely due to intraspecific heterogeneity. Although this disagreement on the geographical distribution of A. variegatum and A. pomposum in Mozambique has been ongoing for decades [8, 22,23,24], no molecular evidence has been provided to help resolve this question.

Molecular studies on Amblyomma spp. in Africa have been limited to date, focusing on mitochondrial genetic markers, such as the cytochrome oxidase subunit 1 (coi) gene, 12S rRNA and 16S rRNA genes, and nuclear markers, such as 18S rRNA and 28S rRNA [18, 30, 31]. Phylogenetic analyses with the use of these markers showed varying differentiating capabilities. To increase phylogenetic resolution, whole mitochondrial analyses have been conducted and proven to be highly effective in distinguishing between closely related species [16, 21, 32, 33]. To date, whole mitochondrial genome (mitogenome) sequencing is still considered expensive, limiting the number of mitogenomes available on sequence repositories and limiting its use in developing countries. Concatenation of several molecular markers into a “super-matrix” is a commonly used tool to differentiate between species, although debates on its accuracy has been long-standing [34,35,36].

Thus, this study investigated the intra- and inter-species variation of A. eburneum, A. hebraeum, A. pomposum and A. variegatum ticks collected in southern Africa using molecular techniques (concatenation of four mitochondrial markers), with the aim to resolve the taxonomic controversy between A. pomposum and A. variegatum in southern Africa.

Methods

Sample collection

Amblyomma spp. ticks were collected in Angola, Zambia and Zimbabwe (Fig. 2) by means of hand collections from cattle and goats. In Mozambique, Amblyomma spp. ticks were also collected from livestock, and legally hunted wildlife (Fig. 2; Additional file 1: Text S1). Animals were visually inspected for tick infestations before collections were made. Due to the bright ornate patterning in Amblyomma spp., these ticks can be spotted from a distance. This prevented the unnecessary restriction and sampling of animals that would not provide a sufficient number of ticks. Once an infested animal was spotted and restrained, complete tick collections were done by hand from the animal to ensure optimal species representation. Tick samples were taken from the whole body of the animal, paying particular attention to the predilection sites such as the dewlap, perineum, axilla, udder, or interdigital spaces. Collections were performed during the optimal season for adult ticks in each country: in Angola during March 2022, in Mozambique from February 2021 to April 2021 and again in November 2021, in Zambia during April 2022 and July 2022 and in Zimbabwe from March 2022 to June 2022. Amblyomma spp. ticks from South Africa were obtained from Dlamkile et al. [37] (Additional file 1: Text S1). Collected ticks were stored in 70% ethanol and transported to the Department of Veterinary Tropical Diseases, University of Pretoria, Onderstepoort. The ticks were morphologically identified to the species level, using identification keys obtained from Walker et al. [38] and Voltzit and Keirans [8]. Morphological characteristics were documented using the Fujifilm XT-4 camera, and images were stacked using Capture One Pro 9 and Zerene Stacker software version 1.04 [39, 40].

Fig. 2
figure 2

Map of southern Africa, illustrating the collection points during the 2020–2022 sampling period of Amblyomma spp. The colour of the dot represents the species of Amblyomma tick collected at the sampling point

Full size image

DNA extraction and amplification

DNA from all ticks were individually extracted using the Chelex 100 resin method (total final volume of 100 µl) as described by Smit et al. [41] and stored at –20 °C for downstream use. Molecular characterisation was conducted targeting four mitochondrial (12S rRNA gene [42], 16S rRNA gene [43], cytochrome B (cytB) [44] and cytochrome oxidase subunit 1 (coi) [45]) genes and the nuclear internal transcribed spacer 2 (ITS2) region [20]. These markers were selected on the basis of reference sequence availability on GenBank and as the most popular loci used in the literature. Four male and four female ticks per species per region, if available, were selected for DNA extraction. In total 204 ticks were used: A. eburneum (n = 13), A. hebraeum (n = 92), A. pomposum (n = 26) and A. variegatum (n = 73). Amplification master-mixes are described below. Primer, master-mix and annealing temperatures can be located in Additional file 2: Dataset S1. The general polymerase chain reaction (PCR) cycling conditions for each marker comprised an initial denaturation at 98 °C for 10 s, followed by 10 cycles of denaturation at 98 °C for 1 s, annealing at x °C for 5 s and extension at 72 °C for 15 s. This was followed by 30 cycles of amplification with denaturation at 98 °C for 1 s, annealing at y °C for 5 s and extension at 72 °C for 15 s. Final extension was performed at 72 °C for 15 s.

The PCR products were separated on a 1.5% agarose gel and visualised using the Bio-Rad gel documentation system with assisting visualisation programming. All samples that had visible bands were sent to the Central Analytical Facility (CAF), Stellenbosch, South Africa, for Sanger sequencing in both directions.

Phylogenetic analysis

Each gene was analysed separately. Sequences were manually corrected on CLC main workbench version 23.0.2 (developed by CLC Bio, http://www.clcbio.com), and compared with those available in the GenBank database using the Basic Local Alignment Search Tool (BLAST; https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/genbank/) [46]. Reference sequences were obtained from GenBank and used for comparison purposes (Additional file 3: Dataset S2). All reference sequences that were available of A. eburneum and A. pomposum, as well as for cytB, were used due to their limited number. Amblyomma hebraeum and A. variegatum had a larger variety of available sequences; therefore, several sequences were selected that were of similar length to the sequences generated in the study. The outgroup was selected to be Amblyomma americanum, as it is sufficiently distant from the species obtained in this study to serve as a well-defined root. Contigs were assembled, sequence orientations were confirmed and alignments were generated alongside reference sequences using the online MAFFT version 7 (developed by http://mafft.cbrc.jp/alignment/server/index.html) with default parameters. The frameshift and stop codon detection was conducted for each matrix using MACSE version 2.07 using the invertebrate mitochondrial code [47]. The aligned matrices were manually viewed, edited and truncated using MEGA 11 [48]. The best fit model was determined for each individual gene using ModelFinder [49] on the IQ-TREE version 1 software [50]. Maximum likelihood (ML) analyses were conducted on IQ-TREE version 1 using 1000 bootstrap replicates. The resulting trees were visualised and edited in iTOL version 6.8 [51]. Sequences that were identical to each other were removed from the trees to increase readability. The evaluation criteria for the bootstrap values were as follows: values of 75% and lower were considered nonsignificant, between 75 and 94% were considered moderately significant and values of 95% and higher represented high statistical support [52].

A concatenated file was constructed including 12S, 16S, coi and cytB genes. Alignments for each of the individual genes were done on MAFFT. The aligned sequences were then concatenated into a super-matrix using MEGA 11. Model selection and ML analysis was done using IQ-TREE. Partitioning was applied to the super-matrix [53] with a 1000 bootstrap replicates using the ultrafast bootstrapping method [54]. The evaluation criteria for the ultrafast bootstrap values were as follows: values of 95% and higher represented high statistical support, while values lower than 95% were considered unsupported [55].

Barcode gap analysis

Groups based on Amblyomma spp. were created in Mega version 11, and the intra- and inter- species variation of these groups were compared. A pairwise distance matrix (p-distance) was obtained for 12S rRNA and 16S rRNA genes, coi, cytB and the concatenated alignment using default parameters with 1000 bootstrap replicates to calculate the standard error (SE). Barcode gap analysis was conducted using the Automatic Barcode Gap Discovery (ABGD) tool on the online web server (https://bioinfo.mnhn.fr/abi/public/abgd/abgdweb.html) [56]. Analysis was conducted using default parameters (Pmin = 0.001; Pmax = 0.1; 10 steps and relative gap width X = 1.5) using the Kimura (K80) TS/TV model.

Results

In total, 7734 adult Amblyomma spp. ticks were obtained from Angola, South Africa, Mozambique, Zambia and Zimbabwe (Fig. 3). These ticks were identified morphologically to the species level; representative specimens of each sex are illustrated in Fig. 4. Four species were observed [A. eburneum (n = 208), A. hebraeum (n = 4758), A. pomposum (n = 191) and A. variegatum (n = 2577)], and the main morphological differences are summarised in Table 1. Amblyomma eburneum was only collected in one location in central Mozambique (18°S; Fig. 2). Amblyomma hebraeum was collected in the northeastern parts of South Africa, in the southern and central regions in Zimbabwe and in the southern parts of Mozambique (below 21°S), with two sampling points extending beyond what is currently documented as the A. hebraeum endemic zone (19°S; Fig. 2). Amblyomma pomposum was only collected in Angola in the central regions expanding westwards (Fig. 2). Amblyomma variegatum was collected in central northern regions of Mozambique (above 21°S), in northern regions of Zimbabwe, latitudinally across Zambia and in eastern parts of Angola (Fig. 2).

Fig. 3
figure 3

The number and species of Amblyomma ticks collected from Angola, Mozambique, South Africa, Zambia and Zimbabwe over the course of this study

Full size image
Fig. 4
figure 4

Morphological comparison of males (indicated by ♂) and females (indicated by ♀), where plate A represents A. eburneum, plate B represents A. hebraeum, plate C represents A. pomposum and plate D represents A. variegatum. Dorsal and ventral views are illustrated. Photographs were taken by Prof. Melvyn Quan and Ms. Zandile Mkhize

Full size image
Table 1 Main morphological differences between Amblyomma eburneum, Amblyomma hebraeum, Amblyomma pomposum and Amblyomma variegatum
Full size table

Phylogenetics

From the selected 204 Amblyomma ticks used for phylogenetic analyses, 24 (11.8%) did not amplify with any of the selected markers and were removed from further analyses. The remaining 180 samples had varying success with amplification and contig construction amongst the genes; success rates were 69.4% (125/180) for 12S rRNA, 57.2% (103/180) for 16S rRNA, 71.1% (128/180) for coi, 64.4% (116/180) for cytB and 69.4% (125/180) for ITS2. Although the majority of the sequences amplified using ITS2, it was excluded from further analyses due to the genetic variability only consisting of uninformative single nucleotide mutations preventing any systematic analyses. Difficulties arose during the contig construction of the 16S rRNA sequences due to low sequence quality. In contrast, 12S rRNA and coi were the most successful in sample amplification and produced sequences of good quality resulting in a high rate of contig assembly of these sequences. The number of sequences per species analysed for each gene varied (Table 2). All sequences were deposited in GenBank (Additional file 3: Dataset S2).

Table 2 The number of sequences analysed for the pairwise distance matrix and for the Automatic Barcode Gap Discovery (ABGD) analysis
Full size table

The 12S rRNA gene exhibited an average amplified fragment length of 400 bp, while the final fragment length for the alignment was 383 bp. The 16S rRNA had the shortest average amplified fragment length at 340 bp, with the final fragment alignment length for the 16S rRNA alignment was 328 bp. The average length of the amplified fragment of coi was bp, with the final fragment length in the coi alignment being 650 bp. Lastly, the average amplified fragment length for cytB was 500 bp, while the final fragment length for the cytB alignment was 483 bp.

The average intraspecific pairwise distances and the average interspecific pairwise distances are given in Additional file 4: Dataset S3. In nearly all interspecific evaluations, A. pomposum and A. variegatum had the least amount of distance between them. The intraspecific pairwise distances were on average lower than the average interspecific pairwise distances. The pairwise difference between individual sequences for each gene were also compared (Additional file 5: Dataset S4 to Additional file 9: Dataset S8).

When evaluating the 12S rRNA estimations of evolutionary divergence between each of the sequences, low levels of intraspecific variation were observed. The intraspecific variation for A. eburneum was the same as the interspecific variation between A. eburneum and A. hebraeum. Amblyomma hebraeum had low intraspecific variation reflecting high levels of co-linearity. The interspecific variation between A. pomposum and A. variegatum was nearly identical to the intraspecific variation of A. variegatum.

The ML phylogenetic topology of 12S rRNA depicted a clear separation between A. hebraeum from all other species, forming a single clade. This separation was corroborated by the ABGD analysis, in which A. hebraeum clustered in a single operational taxonomic unit (OTU). The A. eburneum sequences were observed to be divided into three main clades, separated from all the other species. The first clade (OTU 3) was separated from the A. variegatum/pomposum cluster, forming a sister clade with the remaining A. eburneum and A. hebraeum sequences with high bootstrap support, but contained only two sequences. The main clade of A. eburneum sequences (OTU 4) was resolved with strong support, while a third sequence (OTU 2) branched from this main group with moderate support.

The A. pomposum and A. variegatum sequences formed two main clades. The first was a minor clade containing only five A. variegatum sequences, all originating from Mozambique. The second, much larger clade exhibited strong support (100 bootstrap value) for a subclade consisting of nine sequences (four from Zambia and five reference sequences from GenBank). Otherwise, phylogenetic evidence for population structure within the larger clade was poor, including for A. pomposum as a distinct subclade. In the ABGD analysis, the A. pomposum and A. variegatum sequences were divided into three OTUs (#5, #7 and #8). While A. pomposum sequences segregated together in the tree, they were grouped with a majority of A. variegatum sequences into a single OTU (#5). Notably, the minor clade from Mozambique and the subclade described above of nine Zambian and published reference sequences formed a separate OTU (#8). A final, singleton OTU (#7) consisted of an A. pomposum sequence located on a long branch, although this was not well supported in the tree. This sequence contained several single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) when compared with others of the same species (Additional file 10: Fig. S1).

The 16S rRNA pairwise sequence matrix revealed low intraspecific variation in both A. hebraeum and A. pomposum, while interspecific variation was lower between A. pomposum and A. variegatum as compared with other species. The ML topology of the 16S rRNA depicted a clear separation between A. eburneum, A. hebraeum and the A. variegatum complex. The A. hebraeum sequences formed two distinct clades, sister to an A. eburneum clade (OTU 4), with high bootstrap support. However, A. hebraeum was classified into a single OTU (#5) in the ABGD analysis. The A. eburneum specimens were divided into two main clades, one sister to A. hebraeum and the other separated from all other species (OTU 2). The larger clade (OTU 2) contained nine sequences from this study alongside the only reference sequence from GenBank, whereas the other cluster (OTU 4) comprised only two sequences from this study.

The A. variegatum and A. pomposum cluster was divided into two clades. The first clade consisted of a single A. variegatum reference sequence from Sao Tome and Principe, which was supported with a moderate bootstrap value. The second clade comprised the remaining A. variegatum and A. pomposum sequences, and these were poorly resolved, with a lack of phylogenetic support for population structuring. While most A. pomposum sequences were located together in the tree, one reference sequence from Zambia was nestled among A. variegatum. Regardless, there was no bootstrap support for the separation of A. pomposum from A. variegatum, and this was corroborated by the ABGD analysis, which defined a single OTU (#3) encompassing all A. pomposum and A. variegatum sequences (Additional file 11: Fig. S2).

The analysis of the coi pairwise sequence matrix illustrated higher intraspecific variation compared with the other markers, except for A. hebraeum, which still exhibited low levels of polymorphism. The ML phylogenetic topology for coi depicted a clear separation of A. hebraeum from the other Amblyomma species. Although A. hebraeum was divided into two main clades, supported by a moderate bootstrap value, it formed one OTU (#5) in the ABGD analysis. The first clade consisted of two A. hebraeum sequences from Zimbabwe, while the second clade consisted of all other remaining sequences generated during this study alongside reference sequences from GenBank. Similarly, Amblyomma eburneum was divided into two well-supported clades. The first contained only two sequences obtained from this study (OTU 3), whereas the other (OTU 2), a sister clade to A. hebraeum, consisted of the bulk of the sequences from this study alongside the two reference sequences currently available on GenBank. Amblyomma pomposum and A. variegatum were segregated into a single clade with no bootstrap support for their separation. Within A. variegatum, 14 sequences 7 from Zambia, four from Mozambique, 1 from Senegal and 1 from Guinea-Bissau) formed a well-supported subclade, although they were not classified as a separate OTU. Moreover, within the main A. pomposum/A. variegatum clade, one A. pomposum sequence (AHB015) branched from the others with high bootstrap support. Nevertheless, the ABGD analysis grouped A. pomposum and A. variegatum into a single OTU (#4) (Additional file 12: Fig. S3).

The cytB pairwise distance matrix depicted low levels of intraspecific variation, especially for A. eburneum and A. hebraeum. The interspecific variation between A. pomposum and A. variegatum was much lower than between the other species. The cytB ML phylogenetic topology depict a clear separation between A. eburneum and A. hebraeum with moderate bootstrap support, and these sister clades were separated into their own OTUs (#2 and #3). Both A. hebraeum and A. eburneum exhibited evidence of intraspecific population structure, with some branches displaying moderate or strong support. The A. variegatum sequences were divided into two main subclades, with high bootstrap support. The first subclade contained representatives from Angola, Mozambique, Zambia and Zimbabwe, while the second consisted of A. pomposum sequences alongside some A. variegatum specimens from Mozambique and Zambia. These two subclades were grouped into a single OTU (#4) by ABGD analysis, with the exception of one A. variegatum sequence from Mozambique that formed its own OTU (#5) on a long branch. When examining this sequence, several SNPs were evident (Additional file 13: Fig. S4).

For the concatenated alignment (12S rRNA and 16S rRNA genes, coi and cytB), the pairwise distance matrix illustrated low levels of intraspecific variation, especially for A. hebraeum. The interspecific variation between A. pomposum and A. variegatum was nearly five times lower than that between the other species. The ML phylogenetic topology indicated clear separation between all four species with high bootstrap support (Fig. 5). Within the A. hebraeum clade, multiple branches were observed with moderate to high bootstrap support; however, only one OTU (#5) was indicated by ABGD analysis. Amblyomma eburneum was separated into two clades with moderate to high bootstrap support. The smaller clade contained the two sequences from Mozambique that clustered separately in the individual gene trees, whereas the larger clade comprised the remaining A. eburneum sequences. This separation was supported by the ABGD analysis, which divided A. eburneum into two OTUs (#1 and #4). Unfortunately, only two A. pomposum sequences could be used in the concatenated analysis due to low amplification and sequencing success as described above. These two sequences were separated from A. variegatum with high bootstrap support, but the ABGD analysis placed both species in the same OTU (#2).

Fig. 5
figure 5

Maximum likelihood (ML) analysis of all concatenated genes. The ML analysis used the individual models for each gene: HKY + F + G4 for 12S rRNA, K3Pu + F + I for 16S rRNA and HKY + F + I for both coi and cytB. Bootstrap support is indicated at each branch node, and values under 70 were removed. Blue, pink, green and purple highlighted regions indicate A. hebraeum, A. eburneum, A. variegatum and A. pomposum, respectively. Species names are included with a three-letter country code and the sample name or GenBank accession number. Country codes: AGO, Angola; MOZ, Mozambique; ZAF, South Africa; ZM, Zambia; and ZWE, Zimbabwe.GenBank reference strains are marked with ✦

Full size image

Discussion

This study investigated the intra- and inter-species variation of Amblyomma spp. collected in southern Africa. In total 7734 adult Amblyomma ticks were collected and morphologically identified as A. eburneum, A, hebraeum, A. pomposum and A. variegatum. However, on the basis of our analyses of multiple genes, we cannot conclude that A. pomposum and A. variegatum are distinct species.

Amblyomma eburneum was only collected in one location in central Mozambique (18°S) from wildlife (mainly African buffalo, Syncerus caffer). Information on A. eburneum is scant; however, it is described as an East African species with a documented geographical distribution as illustrated in Fig. 1 [8, 41]. The sympatric occurrence between A. eburneum and A. variegatum, as found in Mozambique, is uncommon for the genus Amblyomma [57]. While no definitive conclusions can be drawn for this co-occurrence, lack of sexual interference between the two species is one hypothesis. This sympatric distribution between A. eburneum and A. variegatum [41] and the parapatric distribution between A. hebraeum and A. variegatum [57] would be an ideal model for further investigation into the sexual behaviours of these tick species and their impact on interspecific competition and boundary formation.

Amblyomma hebraeum was collected in northeastern parts of South Africa, southern and central regions of Zimbabwe and in southern areas of Mozambique (below 21 ̊S), which agrees with the current literature [7, 24, 38, 58]. Amblyomma hebraeum was also collected at two sampling points extending beyond what is currently documented as its endemic zone (19°S), indicating expansion of its geographical distribution. Indeed, it has been documented that the geographical distribution of Amblyomma spp. has widened in the past few years [59]. The main culprit for these expansions is always assumed to be climate change; however, albeit a major factor, it is not the only cause for these observations [59]. The transportation of livestock within and across countries greatly impacts the distribution potential of ticks. Regarding our data, it is more likely that A. hebraeum was introduced from other parts of Mozambique or from South Africa by the transportation of infested animals to the new region; this is supported by the fact that the parapatric boundary between A. hebraeum and A. variegatum in Mozambique has been maintained for almost a century, with no geographical expansion [57]. Both male and female A. hebraeum ticks were collected, which could lead to the establishment of this species in this new geographical area. It would be of interest to continuously observe this subpopulation of A. hebraeum in an area where A. variegatum is known to occur and document the competitive behaviour between the two species.

The geographical spread of A. pomposum, as illustrated in Fig. 1, was described by Robinson [60], Walker and Olwage [24] and Petney et al. [58] to range from Angola to the western regions of Zambia, and northwards to the southern parts of the Democratic Republic of Congo. In the present study, Amblyomma spp. were also collected from the western parts of Angola and latitudinally to the eastern parts of Zambia. We found A. pomposum to be restricted to the central-western parts of Angola, whereas Amblyomma specimens collected in eastern Angola were identified as A. variegatum. The most probable reason for this discrepancy is the misidentification of A. variegatum as A. pomposum in these earlier studies due to their close morphological appearance. However, cattle are known to migrate from Angola to Zambia during drier periods when the marshlands are not flooding; thus, cattle harbouring A. pomposum could possibly be found in Zambia at these times. Yet, if this was the case, we would expect to see the establishment of A. pomposum in eastern Angola and Zambia, which was not observed in this study. Since no voucher material of A. pomposum from Zambia is available and the one of the 16S rRNA sequences for A. pomposum on GenBank appears to be an outlier in our analyses, we maintain that A. pomposum is unlikely to occur in Zambia. In this study, A. variegatum was collected in Angola, Mozambique, Zambia and Zimbabwe, corresponding with the records of Petney et al. [58] and Walker and Olwage [24].

The most predominant collected species was A. hebraeum from South Africa and Mozambique, while the species with the lowest representation was A. pomposum from Angola. The low recovery of A. pomposum and A. variegatum in Angola could be ascribed to the collections occurring in March, which is at the end of the season for the adult stage (the months when the maximum infestations occur have been documented as November and December [58]). Amblyomma eburneum was also collected in low numbers, but this can be attributed to the difficulty of collecting ticks from wildlife species, as we were highly dependent on the number of wild animals that was legally hunted in the timeframe of this study. The low prevalence of Amblyomma spp. from Zimbabwe was likely the result of a vigorous campaign by the government to assist livestock farmers in treating their cattle against ticks by encouraging regular dipping of the animals with acaricides, in an attempt to control major outbreaks of bovine theileriosis.

This study aimed to provide insight into the unresolved debate that has been ongoing for decades as described in the introduction. Both Robinson [27] and Dias [22, 28] described morphological variation in A. variegatum found in Mozambique and suggested the new species names A. variegatum var. nocens and A. variegatum var. govurensis, respectively. Dias [22] also examined what was described as A. pomposum from Angola and concluded that it does not resemble the A. pomposum as described by Dönitz [26], suggesting a new species description as Amblyomma superbum. In this study, morphological variation in the collected A. variegatum ticks were observed; however, the majority resembled that of the original description by Fabricius [25]. Morphology is an important aspect in tick taxonomy, highlighting the importance of variation in ornamentation. These conflicting observations of the morphology in A. variegatum is reminiscent of the controversy regarding the Amblyomma marmoreum complex [61].

The Amblyomma marmoreum complex encompasses five African species, namely: A. marmoreum sensu stricto, A. sparsum, A. falsomarmoreum, A. nuttalli and A. paulopunctatum [61]. As with this study, the A. marmoreum complex was placed under scrutiny due to a lack of genetic and ecological data on its members. Although meticulous descriptions of the five species in the A. marmoreum complex are available, identification remains a challenge, and misidentification often occurs, even confusing these species with other Amblyomma spp. outside of the complex [23, 42, 61]. Cotes-Perdomo et al. [61] was, however, able to differentiate between the species with the use of molecular techniques targeting a large part of the mitogenome. Overall, they were able to concatenate and compare 13 protein-coding genes and two ribosomal genes of several Amblyomma spp.

In an attempt to provide clarity on the phylogenetic positioning of A. pomposum and A. variegatum, molecular analyses were conducted on four Amblyomma spp. of southern Africa using 12S rRNA, 16S rRNA, coi, cytB and ITS2 molecular markers. The ITS2 marker was, however, excluded from further analyses due to uninformative single nucleotide mutations. Our research provides additional sequences that have been deposited in the GenBank database for all other markers utilised here, including the first for the 12S rRNA and cytB genes of A. eburneum and first for the 12S rRNA, coi and cytB genes of A. pomposum. During the course of this study, several challenges with amplification occurred for all genes. The Chelex extraction method has several drawbacks including the rapid degradation of the extracted DNA after 2 years of storage and the effects of long-term storage on the binding of impurities to DNA. Singh et al. [62] noted that samples extracted with the Chelex 100 resin method and stored for extended periods of time tended to contain contaminants such as proteins attached to the DNA helix, and these prevented successful PCR reactions. The importance of the impact of storage time on DNA integrity was evident through the successful amplification of cytB, which was conducted with DNA extracted less than 1 year previously, compared with the less successful amplification of 12S rRNA, 16S rRNA, coi and ITS2, which were conducted using DNA stored for approximately 2 years. Additionally, several amplified products did not generate sequences of good quality, and were thus excluded from further analysis, lowering the sample size. The coi gene marker was particularly difficult to amplify in A. pomposum samples, and those that did produce bands for these markers did not provide high-quality sequences. For future studies, it would be ideal to use recently extracted DNA when using the Chelex extraction method, and DNA should be stored at −80 °C, which would maintain the integrity of the DNA for a longer period, or alternative DNA extraction methods should be used that will not compromise the DNA integrity during storage.

The ML and ABGD analysis indicated that A. eburneum and A. hebraeum were sister groups but consistently formed their own OTUs. In the case of A. hebraeum, a single OTU was resolved in the single-gene and concatenated analyses with relatively low intraspecific variation. Amblyomma eburneum was divided into three OTUs in the 12S rRNA analysis; two OTUs in the 16S rRNA, coi and concatenated analyses; and a single OTU in the cytB analysis. In all the ML trees, excluding cytB, two A. eburneum samples from Mozambique (MSMun 1039 and MSMun 1026) were separated from the main clade with moderate to high bootstrap support, although it is unclear why this is the case. The samples were collected in the same area as all other A. eburneum, on the same hosts and over the same timeframe. A possible explanation for both the low polymorphism observed in A. hebraeum and the higher genetic diversity observed within A. eburneum is the influence of host dispersal on gene flow between generalist and specialist ectoparasites [63]. Matthee [63] documented that A. hebraeum, which occurs on hosts with low global range values (i.e. that are located close together), showed the lowest levels of population differentiation and high levels of gene flow. These findings contradicted those of other generalist species studied by Matthee [63]. Amblyomma hebraeum was also documented to have the lowest haplotype diversity amongst generalist species [63]. In contrast, A. eburneum, is a specialised species that occurs only on wild ungulates, and in Mozambique, is restricted to hosts with a limited geographical range. According to Matthee [63], the low gene flow could results in high population differentiation. We speculate that the two unique A. eburneum samples could be from a subpopulation that has undergone more genetic isolation compared with the main clade. This suggests an opportunity to study the intraspecific diversity of A. eburneum across its whole latitudinal range, from Ethiopia to Mozambique.

Strikingly, A. pomposum clustered with A. variegatum in the ABGD analyses for all the individual genes and in the concatenated analyses. Similarly, in the single-gene trees, A. pomposum samples were nested within the A. variegatum clade, usually as a single cluster with low bootstrap support. However, in the concatenated ML tree, separation of A. pomposum from A. variegatum was well supported, albeit at a short genetic distance and with limited sequences available for A. pomposum. Amblyomma variegatum formed a single OTU in all analyses except for the 12S rRNA gene and cytB. In the 12S rRNA, coi and cytB ML topologies, several A. variegatum samples from Zambia formed a subclade with moderate to high bootstrap support. Similarly to A. hebraeum, A. variegatum can be considered a generalist species in which high gene flow is expected. However, Matthee [63] noted that, unlike A. hebraeum, many generalist ectoparasite species show high levels of haplotype diversity. There are several potential reasons why species with similar ecology might exhibit different population genetics (especially with regard to mitochondrial markers), such as bottlenecks in evolutionary history, differential effects of migration or even the impact of vertically transmitted bacterial symbionts [64].

Phylogenetic analysis of the Amblyomma spp. indicated that all genes used in this study were adequate to differentiate between A. eburneum, A. hebraeum and the A. variegatum/A. pomposum complex. The different patterns that emerge between the phylogenetic trees could be a result of the differential mutation rates of each of the molecular markers [65]. Erster et al. [66] (and Koroiva and Santana [67]) evaluated the marker efficiency of 12S rRNA, 16S rRNA, coi and cytB, which were also used in the current study, and demonstrated that the mitochondrial markers coi and cytB were most suitable for intra- and inter-species analyses due to their high variability. Accordingly, Erster et al. [66] recorded barcode gaps of 12S [0.00 ± 0.03], coi [0.03 ± 0.05] and cytB [0.04 ± 0.06], while the 16S displayed a negative barcoding gap [−0.01 ± 0.06]. Furthermore, Vences et al. [68] reported that cytB was more variable than coi, allowing for clearer separation between closely related species of amphibians. Norris et al. [69] found that 16S rRNA was the least variable marker when comparing 12S rRNA and 16S rRNA markers for Ixodes scapularis population genetics. The 16S rRNA marker was also shown to be unable to differentiate between closely related species in the Rhipicephalus sanguineus group, including Rhipicephalus turanicus and Rhipicephalus sanguineus, and between Rhipicephalus guilhoni, Rhipicephalus leporis and Rhipicephalus camicasi [70]. The same limitation was observed for Ixodes ricinus and Ixodes inopinatus, which could not be differentiated between each other using 16S rRNA [71]. In the current study, cytB proved to be the most efficient single marker to differentiate between southern African Amblyomma spp. (Additional file 4: Dataset S3), while none of the markers in isolation allowed for clear discrimination between samples of the same species from different geographical regions.

In this context, a previous analysis of intraspecific variation of A. variegatum molecular markers concluded that genetic diversity was low in West Africa and in introduced Caribbean populations (i.e. nucleotide diversity of 0.02–0.25% for 12S), with higher variation in East Africa (i.e. 0.65% for 12S) [20]. Although the study did not apply the more variable markers used in the present work, the 12S data alone suggest that southern populations of A. variegatum show greater genetic variation (nucleotide diversity of 1%) than elsewhere on the continent. Notably, a population genetic study of A. variegatum in Burkina Faso used microsatellites and concluded that effective population sizes were low at the village level when sampling domestic ruminants [72]. Similar approaches could also be applied to populations from southern Africa in future studies. Recently, mitochondrial markers were analysed to determine the genetic structure of another African Amblyomma sp., the elephant tick A. tholloni, on host populations in Kenya. The intra-specific variation at the coi locus was found to be low and of similar magnitude to that of A. hebraeum and A. pomposum in the current study (< 1%) [73].

Population genetic studies of Amblyomma spp. have been more extensive in the New World and offer important lessons for understanding intraspecific variation in the Afrotropical species. There are marked differences between the low intraspecific variation observed in some Neotropical species (e.g., Amblyomma triste [74] and Amblyomma aureolatum [75], where it was < 1% for mitochondrial markers) compared with others such as Amblyomma ovale [76, 77] and Amblyomma mixtum [33], where pairwise distances for concatenated mitochondrial markers can reach 3–5%. Amblyomma cajennense, which has an extensive distribution across subtropical and tropical regions of the Americas, constitutes a particularly interesting paradigm for the genus. Variation exceeding 8% at the whole mitogenome level between geographically and ecologically distinct populations of A. cajennense formed part of the evidence that was used to designate a species complex and formally describe its members as distinct species [78, 79]. The Afrotropical species await similar rigorous analyses using whole mitogenome data across the entirety of their range, as also highlighted in a recent study of A. sparsum in the A. marmoreum complex [61]. While the current study was not designed to address intraspecific population structure in depth, the concatenated phylogenetic analysis depicted clear differentiation between each of the analysed species. An important limitation was that the concatenated tree only had two representatives from A. pomposum. This was because not all loci had amplified successfully for each specimen.

Thus, on the basis of the phylogenetic analysis of the individual genes, the pairwise distance analyses and the ABGD analyses, we cannot conclude that A. pomposum and A. variegatum are distinct species. Literature on systematic work with A. pomposum is scarce, and currently there are no alternative methods to compare differences or similarities between these two species, except for morphological descriptions. No previous studies on the phylogenetic relationship of these two species have been conducted, and as discussed above, there is a scarcity of A. pomposum sequences available in GenBank. Kobayashi et al. [80] were the first authors who published the only sequences currently available for the A. pomposum on the GenBank database. They collected 15 Amblyomma spp. ticks and morphologically identified them as A. variegatum (n = 13) and A. pomposum (n = 2) with the use of Walker et al. [38]. They then conducted a phylogenetic analysis using the 16S rRNA gene. The A. pomposum that they identified clustered within the A. variegatum clade as in our study. Balinandi et al. [81] morphologically identified ticks they collected from Uganda as belonging to A. pomposum and A. variegatum; however, due to a lack of A. pomposum sequences at the time, phylogenetic analyses of the 16S rRNA gene clustered A. pomposum with A. variegatum. This discovery led the authors to believe that they had misidentified A. variegatum ticks as A. pomposum. Our 16S rRNA phylogenetic analysis also placed A. pomposum within the A. variegatum cluster. Moreover, based on our analysis of several genes, it is possible that Balinandi et al. [81] correctly identified their ticks as A. pomposum; however, since they did not upload any sequences nor depict the morphological discrepancy, no definite conclusion can be made on the basis of this information. Similarly, Barradas et al. [82] collected 116 ticks from the Huambo province in Angola. With the use of morphological identification using the key of Walker et al. [38], as well as molecular identification targeting the 12S rRNA and 16S rRNA genes, they identified 11 (10%) Amblyomma ticks as A. variegatum. As with the 16S rRNA analyses, the phylogenetics of 12S rRNA also indicated nesting of A. pomposum within A. variegatum. In our study, we collected from the same sites in Huambo and identified the Amblyomma spp. circulating in the area as A. pomposum. Our findings are also supported by Sili et al. [83], who identified all the Amblyomma spp. in this area as A. pomposum. On the basis of our morphological examinations at this geographic location, we believe that Barradas et al. [82] misidentified their Amblyomma spp. as A. variegatum instead of A. pomposum.

Although the phylogenetic analyses cannot differentiate between A. variegatum and A. pomposum currently, sufficient morphological features are documented to distinguish these species from each other (Table 1; Fig. 4). The other main factors defining a species are its ecological niche and reproductive behaviour [84]. Mayr [84] stated that a species can be described as “The segregation of the total genetic variability of nature into discrete packages, so called species, which are separated from each other by reproductive barriers, prevents the production of too great a number of disharmonious, incompatible gene combinations. This is the basic biological meaning of species and this is the reason why there are discontinuities between sympatric species”. A clear parapatric boundary was observed between A. pomposum and A. variegatum; however, a hypothesis of incipient speciation has yet to be tested. We suggest, alongside whole genome phylogenetic analysis, that mating and hybrid viability studies are performed between the two species to confirm their reproductive isolation.

Conclusions

In this study, cytB was the most successful marker in differentiating between A. eburneum, A. hebraeum, A. pomposum and A. variegatum, closely followed by coi. The concatenated tree distinguished between A. pomposum and A. variegatum; however, the pairwise distance and ABGD analyses suggest there is insufficient evidence that A. pomposum and A. variegatum are distinct species. In our study, no A. pomposum ticks were collected in any country other than Angola, challenging the current distribution as proposed by Theiler and Salisbury [23], Walker et al. [38] and other current literature. On the basis of our findings, we suggest comparing whole mitochondrial genomes and several nuclear loci of A. pomposum with those of A. variegatum to determine whether these are distinct species, or whether A. pomposum is a subspecies of A. variegatum. Moreover, further investigations should also be conducted using mating and hybrid viability studies between the two species to determine whether they are reproductively isolated.

Availability of data and materials

The data supporting the main findings of this study are included in the manuscript and its supplementary files. Sequences generated in this study were deposited in GenBank and the accession numbers are available in Additional file 3: Dataset S2.

Abbreviations

ABGD:

Automatic Barcode Gap Discovery

BI:

Bayesian inference

CAF:

Central Analytical Facility

ESS:

Estimates sample size

ML:

Maximum likelihood

OTUs:

Operational taxonomic units

SE:

Standard error

SNP:

Single nucleotide polymorphisms

References

  1. Nicholson WL, Sonenshine DE, Noden BH, Brown RN. Ticks (ixodida). In: Medical and veterinary entomology. Amsterdam: Elsevier; 2019. p. 603–72.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  2. Guglielmone A, Robbins R, Apanaskevich D, Petney T, Estrada-Peña A, Horak I. The hard ticks of the world (Acari: Ixodida: Ixodidae) Dordrecht. The Netherlands: Springer; 2014.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  3. Estrada Pena A, Mangold AJ, Nava S, Venzal JM, Labruna M, Guglielmone AA. A review of the systematics of the tick family Argasidae (Ixodida). Acarologia. 2010;50:317–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Dantas-Torres F, Otranto D. Ixodid and Argasid ticks. In: Rezaei N, editor. Encyclopedia of infection and immunity. 1st ed. Amsterdam: Elsevier; 2022. p. 1049–63.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  5. Warnecke M, Schein E, Voigt W, Uilenberg G, Young A. Development of Theileria mutans (Theiler, 1906) in the gut and the haemolymph of the tick Amblyomma variegatum (Fabricius, 1794). Z Parasitenkd. 1980;62:119–25.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Walker JB. A review of the ixodid ticks (Acari, Ixodidae) occurring in southern Africa. Onderstepoort J Vet Res. 1991;58:81–105.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Horak IG, Heyne H, Williams R, Gallivan GJ, Spickett AM, Bezuidenhout JD, et al. The ixodid ticks (Acari: Ixodidae) of Southern Africa. Cham: Springer; 2018.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  8. Voltzit O, Keirans J. A review of African Amblyomma species (Acari, Ixodida, Ixodidae). Acarina. 2003;11:135–214.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Theiler G, Robinson BN. Tick survey. VIII. Checklists of ticks recorded from the Belgian Congo and Ruanda Urundi, from Angola, and from Northern Rhodesia. Onderstepoort J Vet Res. 1954;26.

  10. MacLeod J. Tick infestation patterns in the southern province of Zambia. Bull Entom Res. 1970;60:253–74.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Jack R. Ticks infesting domestic animals in S. Rhodesia. Rhod Agric J. 1936;33:12.

  12. Hoogstraal H, Theiler G. Ticks (Ixodoidea, Ixodidae) parasitizing lower primates in Africa, Zanzibar, and Madagascar. J Parasitol Res. 1959;45:217–22.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Howard C. A list of the ticks of South Africa. Ann Transvaal Museum. 1908;1:73–169.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Horak IG. A century of tick taxonomy in South Africa. Onderstepoort J Vet Res. 2009;76:67–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Hoogstraal H, Aeschlimann A. Tick-host specificity. Bulletin de la Société Entomologique Suisse. 1982;55:5–32.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Burger TD, Shao R, Beati L, Miller H, Barker SC. Phylogenetic analysis of ticks (Acari: Ixodida) using mitochondrial genomes and nuclear rRNA genes indicates that the genus Amblyomma is polyphyletic. Mol Phylogenet Evol. 2012;64:45–55.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Nava S, Guglielmone AA, Mangold AJ. An overview of systematics and evolution of ticks. Front Biosci. 2009;14:2857–77.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Kushimo O. The tick genus Amblyomma in Africa: phylogeny and mutilocus DNA barcoding. Georgia Southern University; 2013.

  19. Pillay A, Nyangiwe N, Mukaratirwa S. Low genetic diversity and population structuring of Amblyomma hebraeum and Rickettsia africae from coastal and inland regions in the Eastern Cape Province of South Africa. Med Vet Entomol. 2022;37:275–85.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Beati L, Patel J, Lucas-Williams H, Adakal H, Kanduma EG, Tembo-Mwase E, et al. Phylogeography and demographic history of Amblyomma variegatum (Fabricius) (Acari: Ixodidae), the tropical bont tick. Vector Borne Zoonotic Dis. 2012;12:514–25.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. Kelava S, Mans BJ, Shao R, Moustafa MAM, Matsuno K, Takano A, et al. Phylogenies from mitochondrial genomes of 120 species of ticks: Insights into the evolution of the families of ticks and of the genus Amblyomma. Ticks Tick Borne Dis. 2021;12:101577.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Dias J. Sobre a posição sistemática de algumas espécies africanas do género Amblyomma CL Koch (Acarina–Ixodoidea). Moçambique. 1953;73:119–39.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Theiler G, Salisbury LE. Ticks in the South African zoological survey collection – Part IX – the Amblyomma marmoreum group. Onderstepoort J Vet Res. 1959;28:47–124.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Walker JB, Olwage A. The tick vectors of Cowdria ruminantium (Ixodoidea, Ixodidae, genus Amblyomma) and their distribution. Onderstepoort J Vet Res. 1987;54:353–79.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Fabricius JC. Entomologia systematica: impensis CG Proft; 1794.

  26. Dönitz. Dber das Zeckengenus Amblyomma. Schrift Ges Nat Freund Berlin. 1909;8: 440–82.

  27. Robinson L. New species of ticks (Haemaphysalis, Amblyomma). Parasitology. 1911;4:478–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Dias J. List of Mozambique ticks and their known hosts. Anais dos Servicos de Veterinaria e Industria Animal. 1950;3:227.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Guglielmone AA, Robbins RG, Apanaskevich DA, Petney TN, Estrada-Peña A, Horak IG. Comments on controversial tick (Acari: Ixodida) species names and species described or resurrected from 2003 to 2008. Exp Appl Acarol. 2009;48:311–27.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Hornok S, Kontschán J, Takács N, Chaber A-L, Halajian A, Abichu G, et al. Molecular phylogeny of Amblyomma exornatum and Amblyomma transversale, with reinstatement of the genus Africaniella (Acari: Ixodidae) for the latter. Ticks Tick Borne Dis. 2020;11:101494.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Santodomingo A, Uribe JE, Lopez G, Castro LR. Phylogenetic insights into the genus Amblyomma in America, including the endangered species Amblyomma albopictum, Amblyomma macfarlandi, and Amblyomma usingeri. Int J Acarol. 2021;47:427–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Uribe JE, Kelava S, Nava S, Cotes-Perdomo AP, Castro LR, Rivera-Paéz FA, et al. New insights into the molecular phylogeny, biogeographical history, and diversification of Amblyomma ticks (Acari: Ixodidae) based on mitogenomes and nuclear sequences. Parasit Vectors. 2024;17:139.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  33. Cotes-Perdomo AP, Nava S, Castro LR, Rivera-Paéz FA, Cortés-Vecino JA, Uribe JE. Phylogenetic relationships of the Amblyomma cajennense complex (Acari: Ixodidae) at mitogenomic resolution. Ticks Tick Borne Dis. 2023;14:102125.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. McVay J, Carstens B. Phylogenetic model choice: justifying a species tree or concatenation analysis. J Phylogen Evolution Biol. 2013;1:3.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Gatesy J, Springer MS. Concatenation versus coalescence versus “concatalescence.” Proc Natl Acad Sci. 2013;110:E1179-E.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Gadagkar SR, Rosenberg MS, Kumar S. Inferring species phylogenies from multiple genes: concatenated sequence tree versus consensus gene tree. J Exp Zool B Mol Dev Evol. 2005;304:64–74.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Dlamkile Z, Neves L, Morar-Leather D, Brandt C, Pretorius A, Steyn H, et al. Characterisation of South African field Ehrlichia ruminantium using multilocus sequence typing. Onderstepoort J Vet Res. 2023;90:1–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Walker AR, Bouattour A, Camicas JL, Estrada-Pena A, Horak IG, Latif AA, et al. Ticks of domestic animals in Africa: a guide to identification of species: Bioscience Reports Edinburgh; 2003.

  39. Erni S. Capture One Pro 9: mastering raw development, image processing, and asset management. Rocky Nook, Inc.; 2016.

  40. Systems Z. Zerene Stacker, Version 1.04. Zerene Systems Richland, WA; 2018.

  41. Smit A, Mulandane FC, Wojcik SH, Horak IG, Makepeace BL, Morar-Leather D, et al. Sympatry of Amblyomma eburneum and Amblyomma variegatum on African buffaloes and prevalence of pathogens in ticks. Ticks Tick Borne Dis. 2023;14:102247.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Beati L, Keirans JE. Analysis of the systematic relationships among ticks of the genera Rhipicephalus and Boophilus (Acari: Ixodidae) based on mitochondrial 12S ribosomal DNA gene sequences and morphological characters. J Parasitol. 2001;87:32–48.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Black WC, Piesman J. Phylogeny of hard-and soft-tick taxa (Acari: Ixodida) based on mitochondrial 16S rDNA sequences. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 1994;91:10034–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  44. Simon C, Frati F, Beckenbach A, Crespi B, Liu H, Flook P. Evolution, weighting, and phylogenetic utility of mitochondrial gene sequences and a compilation of conserved polymerase chain reaction primers. Ann Entomol Soc Am. 1994;87:651–701.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  45. Folmer O, Black M, Hoeh W, Lutz R, Vrijenhoek R. DNA primers for amplification of mitochondrial cytochrome c oxidase subunit I from diverse metazoan invertebrates. Mol Mar Biol Biotechnol. 1994;3:294–9.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Altschul SF, Gish W, Miller W, Myers EW, Lipman DJ. Basic local alignment search tool. J Mol Biol. 1990;215:403–10.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Ranwez V, Douzery EJ, Cambon C, Chantret N, Delsuc F. MACSE v2: toolkit for the alignment of coding sequences accounting for frameshifts and stop codons. Molec Biol Evol. 2018;35:2582–4.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  48. Tamura K, Stecher G, Kumar S. MEGA11: molecular evolutionary genetics analysis version 11. Mol Biol Evol. 2021;38:3022–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  49. Kalyaanamoorthy S, Minh BQ, Wong TK, Von Haeseler A, Jermiin LS. ModelFinder: fast model selection for accurate phylogenetic estimates. Nat Methods. 2017;14:587–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  50. Nguyen L-T, Schmidt HA, Von Haeseler A, Minh BQ. IQ-TREE: a fast and effective stochastic algorithm for estimating maximum-likelihood phylogenies. Mol Biol Evol. 2015;32:268–74.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Letunic I, Bork P. Interactive Tree Of Life (iTOL) v5: an online tool for phylogenetic tree display and annotation. Nucleic Acids Res. 2021;49:W293–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  52. Hillis DM, Bull JJ. An empirical test of bootstrapping as a method for assessing confidence in phylogenetic analysis. Syst Biol. 1993;42:182–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Chernomor O, Von Haeseler A, Minh BQ. Terrace aware data structure for phylogenomic inference from supermatrices. Syst Biol. 2016;65:997–1008.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  54. Hoang DT, Chernomor O, Von Haeseler A, Minh BQ, Vinh LS. UFBoot2: improving the ultrafast bootstrap approximation. Mol Biol Evol. 2018;35:518–22.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Minh BQ, Nguyen MAT, Von Haeseler A. Ultrafast approximation for phylogenetic bootstrap. Mol Biol Evol. 2013;30:1188–95.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  56. Puillandre N, Lambert A, Brouillet S, Achaz G. ABGD, Automatic Barcode Gap Discovery for primary species delimitation. Mol Ecol. 2012;21:1864–77.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Bournez L, Cangi N, Stachurski F, Lancelot R, Martinez D, Lefrançois T, et al., editors. Is the distribution of Amblyomma variegatum influenced by interspecific competition with Amblyomma hebraeum? Preliminary study: distribution range in Mozambique, 2012. European Society for Vector Ecology.

  58. Petney T, Horak I, Rechav Y. The ecology of the African vectors of heartwater, with particular reference to Amblyomma hebraeum and Amblyomma variegatum. Onderstepoort J Vet Res. 1987;54:381–95.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Nyangiwe N, Yawa M, Muchenje V. Driving forces for changes in geographic range of cattle ticks (Acari: Ixodidae) in Africa: a review. S Afr J Anim Sci. 2018;48:829–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. Robinson LE. The genus Amblyomma-ticks: a monograph of the Ixodea, part IV. In: Press CU, editor. Ticks: a monograph of the Ixodidae. 2. London1926. p. 99–103.

  61. Cotes-Perdomo AP, Sanchez-Vialas A, Thomas R, Jenkins A, Uribe JE. New insights into the systematics of the Afrotropical Amblyomma marmoreum complex (Acari, Ixodidae) and a novel Rickettsia africae strain using morphological and metagenomic approaches. Ticks Tick Borne Dis. 2024;15:102323.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Singh UA, Kumari M, Iyengar S. Method for improving the quality of genomic DNA obtained from minute quantities of tissue and blood samples using Chelex 100 resin. Biol Proced Online. 2018;20:1–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. Matthee CA. The influence of host dispersal on the gene flow and genetic diversity of generalist and specialist ectoparasites. Afr Zool. 2020;55:119–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  64. Cariou M, Duret L, Charlat S. The global impact of Wolbachia on mitochondrial diversity and evolution. J Evol Biol. 2017;30:2204–10.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Roth A, Akad F, Zonstein I, King R, Orshan L, Erster O. Molecular characterization of six Hyalomma species using mitochondrial markers. Ticks Tick-Borne Dis. 2019;10:911–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. Erster O, Roth A, Avni Z, King R, Shkap V. Molecular detection of Rickettsia bellii in Amblyomma rotundatum from imported red-footed tortoise (Chelonoides carbonaria). Ticks Tick Borne Dis. 2015;6:473–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Koroiva R, Santana D. Evaluation of partial 12S rRNA, 16S rRNA, COI and Cytb gene sequence datasets for potential single DNA barcode for hylids (Anura: Hylidae) An Acad Bras Cienc. 2022;94.

  68. Vences M, Thomas M, Bonett RM, Vieites DR. Deciphering amphibian diversity through DNA barcoding: chances and challenges. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2005;360:1859–68.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  69. Norris DE, Klompen JSH, Keirans JE, Black WC IV. Population genetics of Ixodes scapularis (Acari: Ixodidae) based on mitochondrial 16S and 12S genes. J Med Entomol. 1996;33:78–89.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  70. Sánchez-Montes S, Salceda-Sánchez B, Bermúdez SE, Aguilar-Tipacamú G, Ballados-González GG, Huerta H, et al. Rhipicephalus sanguineus complex in the Americas: systematic, genetic diversity, and geographic insights. Pathogens. 2021;10:1118.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  71. Noureddine R, Chauvin A, Plantard O. Lack of genetic structure among Eurasian populations of the tick Ixodes ricinus contrasts with marked divergence from north-African populations. Int J Parasitol. 2011;41:183–92.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  72. Huber K, Jacquet S, Rivallan R, Adakal H, Vachiéry N, Risterucci A-M, et al. Low effective population sizes in Amblyomma variegatum, the tropical bont tick. Ticks Tick Borne Dis. 2019;10:93–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  73. King’ori EM, Obanda V, Nyamota R, Remesar S, Chiyo PI, Soriguer R, et al. Population genetic structure of the elephant tick Amblyomma tholloni from different elephant populations in Kenya. Ticks Tick-Borne Dis. 2022;13:101935.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  74. Guglielmone AA, Nava S, Mastropaolo M, Mangold AJ. Distribution and genetic variation of Amblyomma triste (Acari: Ixodidae) in Argentina. Ticks Tick-Borne Dis. 2013;4:386–90.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  75. Bitencourth K, Amorim M, Oliveira SVD, Gazêta GS. Amblyomma aureolatum genetic diversity and population dynamics are not related to spotted fever epidemiological scenarios in Brazil. Pathogens. 2021;10:1146.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  76. Fournier GF, Pinter A, Santiago R, Muñoz-Leal S, Martins TF, Lopes MG, et al. A high gene flow in populations of Amblyomma ovale ticks found in distinct fragments of Brazilian Atlantic rainforest. Exp Appl Acarol. 2019;77:215–28.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  77. Uribe JE, Nava S, Murphy KR, Tarragona EL, Castro LR. Characterization of the complete mitochondrial genome of Amblyomma ovale, comparative analyses and phylogenetic considerations. Exp Appl Acarol. 2020;81:421–39.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  78. Beati L, Nava S, Burkman EJ, Barros-Battesti DM, Labruna MB, Guglielmone AA, et al. Amblyomma cajennense (Fabricius, 1787) (Acari: Ixodidae), the Cayenne tick: phylogeography and evidence for allopatric speciation. BMC Evol Biol. 2013;13:1–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  79. Nava S, Beati L, Labruna MB, Cáceres AG, Mangold AJ, Guglielmone AA. Reassessment of the taxonomic status of Amblyomma cajennense () with the description of three new species, Amblyomma tonelliae n. sp., Amblyomma interandinum n. sp. and Amblyomma patinoi n. sp., and reinstatement of Amblyomma mixtum, and Amblyomma sculptum (Ixodida: Ixodidae). Ticks Tick Borne Dis. 2014;5:252–76.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  80. Kobayashi T, Chatanga E, Qiu Y, Simuunza M, Kajihara M, Hang’ombe BM, et al. Molecular detection and genotyping of Coxiella-like endosymbionts in ticks collected from animals and vegetation in Zambia. Pathogens. 2021;10:779.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  81. Balinandi S, Chitimia-Dobler L, Grandi G, Nakayiki T, Kabasa W, Bbira J, et al. Morphological and molecular identification of ixodid tick species (Acari: Ixodidae) infesting cattle in Uganda. Parasitol Res. 2020;119:2411–20.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  82. Barradas PF, Mesquita JR, Ferreira P, Gärtner F, Carvalho M, Inácio E, et al. Molecular identification and characterization of Rickettsia spp. and other tick-borne pathogens in cattle and their ticks from Huambo, Angola. Ticks Tick Borne Dis. 2021;12:101583.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  83. Sili G, Byaruhanga C, Horak I, Steyn H, Chaisi M, Oosthuizen MC, et al. Ticks and tick-borne pathogens infecting livestock and dogs in Tchicala-Tcholoanga, Huambo Province, Angola. Parasitol Res. 2021;120:1097–102.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  84. Mayr E. What is a species, and what is not? Philos Sci. 1996;63:262–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

A special thank you to Delta Safaris, Mungari, who allowed us to collect ticks from the hunted wildlife and hosted us in their camp, and to all field technicians and state veterinarians who assisted in the collection of ticks in the represented countries. We would also like to acknowledge Prof Melvyn Quan and Ms Zandile Mkhize, who produced the micrographs of the ticks (Fig. 4).

Funding

This work was supported by AgriSETA, the Meat Industry Trust and the doctorate research bursary awarded to A. Smit by the University of Pretoria.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Veterinary Tropical Diseases, Faculty of Veterinary Science, University of Pretoria, Gauteng, Republic of South Africa

    Andeliza Smit, Martinet Labuschagne, Stephané Heike Wójick, Zinathi Dlamkile, Rebecca Ackermann, Wilhelm Heinrich Stoltsz, Ivan Gerard Horak, Darshana Morar-Leather & Luis Neves

  2. Biotechnology Center, Eduardo Mondlane University, Maputo, Mozambique

    Fernando Mulandane & Luis Neves

  3. Department of Genetics, Faculty of Natural and Agricultural Sciences, University of Pretoria, Gauteng, Republic of South Africa

    Martinet Labuschagne

  4. Central Veterinary Research Institute, Lusaka, Zambia

    Choolwe Malabwa

  5. Department of Basic Science, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University Jose Eduardo Dos Santos, Huambo, Angola

    Gourgelia Sili

  6. Department of Animal Production Sciences, Marondera University of Agricultural Sciences and Technology, Marondera, Zimbabwe

    Stephen Mandara

  7. Department of Infection Biology and Microbiomes, Institute of Infection, Veterinary and Ecological Sciences, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK

    Hannah Rose Vineer & Benjamin Lawrence Makepeace

  8. ASTRE, Univ Montpellier, CIRAD, INRAE, Montpellier, France

    Karine Huber

Authors
  1. Andeliza Smit
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Fernando Mulandane
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Martinet Labuschagne
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Stephané Heike Wójick
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Choolwe Malabwa
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Gourgelia Sili
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Stephen Mandara
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Zinathi Dlamkile
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Rebecca Ackermann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Hannah Rose Vineer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  11. Wilhelm Heinrich Stoltsz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  12. Karine Huber
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  13. Ivan Gerard Horak
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  14. Darshana Morar-Leather
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  15. Benjamin Lawrence Makepeace
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  16. Luis Neves
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

A. Smit: Conceptualisation, sample collection, methodology, investigation, data curation, writing – original draft and visualisation. F.C. Mulandane: Sample collection and writing – review and editing. M. Labuschagne: Investigation and writing – review and editing. S.H. Wojick: Investigation and writing – review and editing. C. Malabwa: Sample collection, investigation and writing – review and editing. G. Sili: Sample collection and writing – review and editing. S. Mandara: Sample collection and writing – review and editing. Z. Dlamkile: Sample collection and writing – review and editing. R. Ackermann: Visualisation and writing – review and editing. H. Rose Vineer: Visualisation and writing – review and editing. W.H. Stoltsz: Review and editing. K. Huber: Review and editing. I. G. Horak: Review and editing. D. Morar-Leather: Writing – review and editing, supervision and funding acquisition. B. L. Makepeace: Writing – review and editing and supervision. L. Neves: Conceptualisation, sample collection, methodology, writing – review and editing, supervision and funding acquisition.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Andeliza Smit.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

This study was approved by the Research Ethics Committee of the University of Pretoria (REC 121-20) and the Department of Agriculture, Land Reform and Rural Development (DALRRD), South Africa, under Section 20 of the Animal Diseases Act 1984 (Act no. 35 of 84; 12/11/1/1 (1937SS)).

Consent for publication

All authors have contributed as described and give consent to publish this article.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

13071_2024_6394_MOESM1_ESM.docx

Additional file 1. Text S1. Collection countries with the provinces, main locations, number of ticks collected, and the GPS co-ordinates for this stud.

13071_2024_6394_MOESM2_ESM.xlsx

Additional file 2: Table S1: Primer and PCR information. Table contains the primer target region, primer name, primer sequence, the expected product size, PCR master-mix volumes, annealing temperatures and reference article.

Additional file 3: GenBank accession numbers for the sequences used and obtained in this study.

13071_2024_6394_MOESM4_ESM.xlsx

Additional file 4: Dataset S3: Estimates of evolutionary divergence over sequence pairs between groups (interspecies p-distances). Values in red indicate the intraspecies p-distances.

13071_2024_6394_MOESM5_ESM.xlsx

Additional file 5: Estimates of Evolutionary Divergence between Sequences. The number of base differences per site from between sequences are shown. Standard error estimate(s) are shown above the diagonal. This analysis involved 143 nucleotide sequences. All ambiguous positions were removed for each sequence pair (pairwise deletion option). There were a total of 387 positions in the final dataset. Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA11 [1].

13071_2024_6394_MOESM6_ESM.xls

Additional file 6: Estimates of Evolutionary Divergence between Sequences. The number of base differences per site from between sequences are shown. Standard error estimate(s) are shown above the diagonal. This analysis involved 111 nucleotide sequences. All ambiguous positions were removed for each sequence pair (pairwise deletion option). There were a total of 324 positions in the final dataset. Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA11 [1].

13071_2024_6394_MOESM7_ESM.xlsx

Additional file 7: Estimates of Evolutionary Divergence between Sequences. The number of base differences per site from between sequences are shown. Standard error estimate(s) are shown above the diagonal. This analysis involved 141 nucleotide sequences. Codon positions included were 1st+2nd+3rd+Noncoding. All ambiguous positions were removed for each sequence pair (pairwise deletion option). There were a total of 651 positions in the final dataset. Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA11 [1].

13071_2024_6394_MOESM8_ESM.xlsx

Additional file 8: Estimates of Evolutionary Divergence between Sequences. The number of base differences per site from between sequences are shown. Standard error estimate(s) are shown above the diagonal. This analysis involved 121 nucleotide sequences. Codon positions included were 1st+2nd+3rd+Noncoding. All ambiguous positions were removed for each sequence pair (pairwise deletion option). There were a total of 492 positions in the final dataset. Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA11 [1].

13071_2024_6394_MOESM9_ESM.xlsx

Additional file 9. The number of base differences per site from between sequences are shown. Standard error estimate(s) are shown above the diagonal. This analysis involved 51 nucleotide sequences. All ambiguous positions were removed for each sequence pair (pairwise deletion option). There were a total of 1844 positions in the final dataset. Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA11 [1].

13071_2024_6394_MOESM10_ESM.jpg

Additional file 10: Fig. S1 Maximum likelihood (ML) analysis of the 12S rRNA gene. The ML analysis used the HKY + F + I model. Bootstrap values are indicated at each branch node; values under 70 were removed. Blue, pink, green and purple highlighted regions indicate A. hebraeum, A. eburneum, A. variegatum and A. pomposum, respectively. Species names are included with a three-letter country code and the sample name or GenBank accession number. Country codes: AGO, Angola; MOZ, Mozambique; NGA, Nigeria; STP, São Tomé and Príncipe; SWZ, Eswatini; ZAF, South Africa; ZM, Zambia; and ZWE, Zimbabwe. GenBank reference strains are marked with ✦

13071_2024_6394_MOESM11_ESM.jpg

Additional file 11: Fig. S2 Maximum likelihood (ML) analysis of the 16S rRNA gene. The ML analysis used the HKY + F + R2 model. Bootstrap values are indicated at each branch node; values under 70 were removed. Blue, pink, green and purple highlighted regions indicate A. hebraeum, A. eburneum, A. variegatum, and A. pomposum, respectively. Species names are included with a three-letter country code and the sample name or GenBank accession number. Country codes: AGO, Angola; KEN, Kenya; MOZ, Mozambique; UGA, Uganda; ZAF, South Africa; ZM, Zambia; and ZWE, Zimbabwe. GenBank reference strains are marked with ✦

13071_2024_6394_MOESM12_ESM.jpg

Additional file 12: Fig. S3 Maximum likelihood (ML) analysis of the coi gene. The ML analysis used the TPM2 + F + G4 model. Bootstrap values are indicated at each branch node; values under 70 were removed. Blue, pink, green and purple highlighted regions indicate A. hebraeum , A. eburneum, A. variegatum and A. pomposum, respectively. Species names are included with a three-letter country code and the sample name or GenBank accession number. Country codes: AGO, Angola; CMR, Cameroon; GNB. Guinea-Bissau; KEN, Kenya; MOZ, Mozambique; SEN, Senegal; SWE, Eswatini; ZAF, South Africa; ZMB, Zambi; and ZWE, Zimbabwe. GenBank reference strains are marked with **

13071_2024_6394_MOESM13_ESM.jpg

Additional file 13: Fig. S4 Maximum likelihood (ML) analysis of the cytB gene. The ML analysis used the HKY + F + G4 model. Bootstrap values are indicated at each branch node; values under 70 were removed. Blue, pink, green and purple highlighted regions indicate A. hebraeum , A. eburneum, A. variegatum and A. pomposum, respectively. GenBank reference strains are marked with **

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Smit, A., Mulandane, F., Labuschagne, M. et al. Intra- and interspecific variation of Amblyomma ticks from southern Africa. Parasites Vectors 17, 364 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13071-024-06394-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13071-024-06394-3

Keywords

Parasites & Vectors

ISSN: 1756-3305

Contact us