Microbial communities in Ornithodoros phacochoerus ticks: spatial structure and influence of African swine fever virus infectious status

preprint OA: closed
Full text JSON View at publisher
Full text 1,937 characters · extracted from oa-doi-fallback · click to expand
Abstract Ornithodoros phacochoerus are nidicolous soft ticks of the Ornithodoros moubata complex of species known to be vectors of the African swine fever (ASF) virus. These Ornithodoros ticks depend on endosymbionts to produce essential nutrients necessary for their development. However, endosymbionts are only a part of the complex microbiota hosted by the tick. This microbiota often includes primary or secondary endosymbionts, commensal species from the environment, and, most of the time, some pathogens. The present study was performed to understand the organization and spatial distribution of the microbiota of O. phacochoerus. One of the objectives was to investigate if the pathogen of interest (ASF virus) is involved in the organization of the microbiota through pathogen-induced dysbiosis or other interactions. For this purpose, 704 O. phacochoerus ticks were collected from two conservation areas in Mozambique. Sequencing was performed targeting the V3-V4 region of the 16S rRNA gene, and the resulting dataset was processed using FROGS to characterize the bacterial microbiota hosted by the ticks. The results indicate that the microbiota of Ornithodoros phacochoerus contains very low bacterial diversity, with one primary endosymbiont (Francisella-like endosymbiont), one potential secondary endosymbiont (Rickettsiella), and very few environmental or pathogenic bacterial species. We found a clear spatial structure of the microbiota, with ticks from the same sampling site showing similar patterns. On the contrary, no association with the infectious status for African swine fever virus was detected, suggesting that this pathogen does not shape Ornithodoros microbial communities. Our results on tick – microbiota – pathogen – environment interactions in nidicolous soft ticks, showed patterns that differ from most hard tick studies. Competing Interest Statement The authors have declared no competing interest.

Text is read by the "Ask this paper" AI Q&A widget below. Extraction quality varies by source — PMC NXML preserves structure cleanly, OA-HTML may include some navigation residue, and OA-PDF can have broken hyphenation. The publisher copy (via DOI) is the canonical version.

My notes (saved in your browser only)

Ask this paper AI returns verbatim quotes from the full text · source: oa-doi-fallback

Answers must be backed by verbatim quotes from this paper's full text. Hallucinated quotes are dropped automatically; if no verbatim passage answers the question, we say so. How this works

Citation neighborhood (no data yet)

We don't have any in-corpus citations linked to this paper yet. This is a recent paper (2026) — citers typically take a year or two to land, and the OpenAlex reference graph may still be filling in.

Source provenance

europepmc
last seen: 2026-05-20T01:45:00.602351+00:00