Algeria study links Cape hares to tick-borne pathogen surveillance
Bottom line
A new Frontiers in Veterinary Science study reports that Cape hares in Algeria may be an underrecognized part of the tick-borne disease picture. Researchers examined 47 wild lagomorphs collected across 20 sites in Algeria’s High Plateaus during the 2023–2024 hunting seasons and found ticks on 22 of 44 Cape hares, while none of the three wild rabbits sampled were infested. Most of the 165 ticks collected were Rhipicephalus sanguineus sensu lato, and molecular screening identified multiple zoonotic Rickettsia species, along with Borrelia afzelii and Borrelia burgdorferi sensu stricto. The authors say the findings point to a possible role for wild lagomorphs in local tick-borne pathogen ecology. (frontiersin.org)
Why it matters: For veterinary professionals, the study adds wildlife surveillance data from a region where published evidence has been weighted heavily toward livestock and companion animals, leaving important gaps around wildlife reservoirs and spillover risk. The work also fits with broader North African and regional literature calling for more surveillance at the wildlife-livestock-human interface, particularly as tick distributions and pathogen movement remain incompletely mapped. For clinicians and public health veterinarians, that’s a reminder that local tick-borne disease risk may be shaped by wildlife hosts that rarely appear in routine practice data. (frontiersin.org)
What to watch: Whether follow-up studies expand sampling beyond hunted hares, add environmental and livestock-linked tick surveillance, and clarify whether these wildlife-associated findings translate into measurable risk for domestic animals, veterinary staff, or pet parents. (frontiersin.org)
Key facts
- Study
- Frontiers in Veterinary Science study on ticks and tick-borne pathogens in Cape hares in Algeria
- Species sampled
- 47 wild lagomorphs: 44 Cape hares and three wild rabbits
- Study area
- 20 sites in Algeria’s High Plateaus
- Study period
- 2023–2024 hunting seasons
- Tick infestation in hares
- 22 of 44 Cape hares were infested
- Tick infestation in rabbits
- None of the three wild rabbits were infested
- Main tick species
- Rhipicephalus sanguineus sensu lato accounted for 94.5% of 165 ticks
- Pathogens detected
- Multiple zoonotic Rickettsia species, Borrelia afzelii, and Borrelia burgdorferi sensu stricto
Cape hares in Algeria are now in the spotlight as a potential wildlife link in tick-borne disease ecology. In a newly published Frontiers in Veterinary Science paper, investigators reported that half of the Cape hares they examined in Algeria’s High Plateaus carried ticks, and that those ticks harbored several zoonotic bacterial agents, including multiple Rickettsia species and two Borrelia species. (frontiersin.org)
The study arrives against a backdrop of widening concern about tick-borne diseases in North Africa and the broader Middle East and North Africa region. Reviews of the literature have described substantial surveillance gaps, especially in wildlife, even as climate pressure, animal movement, and fragmented monitoring systems complicate efforts to understand where pathogens are circulating and which hosts help maintain them. North African tick-borne zoonoses also matter beyond national borders because tick and pathogen movement can occur through wildlife, migratory birds, trade, and travel. (pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov)
In the Algeria study, researchers sampled 47 lagomorphs, 44 Cape hares and three wild rabbits, from 20 sites during the 2023–2024 hunting seasons. Twenty-two hares, or 50%, were infested, compared with none of the rabbits. They collected 165 ticks, with Rhipicephalus sanguineus sensu lato accounting for 94.5% and Ixodes hexagonus making up the remainder. Infestation peaked in September and dropped through October and November, with no ticks detected in December. (frontiersin.org)
Molecular testing of 56 tick pools found seven zoonotic Rickettsia species in R. sanguineus, with Rickettsia aeschlimannii the most prevalent at 19.6%. The team also detected Borrelia afzelii and Borrelia burgdorferi sensu stricto. By contrast, all tested ticks were negative for Anaplasma spp., Coxiella spp., Ehrlichia spp., and the panel of screened viruses, which included tick-borne encephalitis virus, Crimean-Congo hemorrhagic fever virus, West Nile virus, Usutu virus, and phleboviruses. The paper is currently available online as an original research article in Frontiers in Veterinary Science, volume 13, with DOI 10.3389/fvets.2026.1936427. (frontiersin.org)
The authors frame the work as a response to limited information on ticks in Algerian Cape hares and to population declines reported in this game species. That framing aligns with other recent Algeria-focused reviews, including work on Coxiella burnetii, that has emphasized how incomplete the country’s wildlife and vector data remain. A broader systematic review covering North and West Africa similarly concluded that most surveillance has centered on domestic animals, leaving major blind spots in wildlife-associated tick and pathogen circulation. (frontiersin.org)
Why it matters: For veterinary professionals, this isn’t just a wildlife note. It’s a reminder that companion animal, livestock, and public health risk assessments can miss part of the picture when wildlife hosts are under-sampled. The dominance of R. sanguineus sensu lato is especially notable because that tick complex is already familiar in small animal medicine, even though the ecology of ticks collected from wildlife may differ from those encountered in homes or clinics. The study doesn’t show direct transmission to domestic animals or people, but it does strengthen the case for integrated surveillance that links wildlife findings with field data from dogs, livestock, environmental tick drags, and human exposure patterns. (frontiersin.org)
There wasn’t readily available outside expert commentary tied specifically to this paper in the sources I could verify, but the broader industry and academic reaction across recent reviews is consistent: more One Health surveillance is needed, especially at wildlife-livestock-human interfaces and in under-sampled geographies. That consensus gives this paper added relevance, even though its sample size was modest and geographically specific. (pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov)
What to watch: The next step will be whether researchers build on these findings with larger, longitudinal studies, host-seeking tick surveillance, and paired sampling in domestic animals to determine whether the pathogens detected in hare-associated ticks are part of wider transmission cycles in Algeria. (frontiersin.org)
How this developed
-
Researchers collected 47 wild lagomorphs across 20 sites in Algeria’s High Plateaus during the hunting seasons.
-
Frontiers in Veterinary Science published the study.
Common questions
Which animals were sampled?
Researchers examined 47 wild lagomorphs: 44 Cape hares and three wild rabbits.How common were ticks on the Cape hares?
Ticks were found on 22 of 44 Cape hares, or 50%.Which tick species was most common?
Rhipicephalus sanguineus sensu lato made up 94.5% of the 165 ticks collected.What pathogens were found in the ticks?
Molecular screening found multiple zoonotic Rickettsia species, plus Borrelia afzelii and Borrelia burgdorferi sensu stricto.