« PreviousContinue »
ZTTANGANYIKA specimens identified by E. A. Lewis as H. dronedarii have been reported by Cornell (1936). This improbable record should be verified by checking the materiali7
ZSOTHERN AFRICA: Although southern Africa is out of the normal range of H. oromedarii. Theiler (correspondence) has material of this_species from camels introduced into the Vryburg and Gordonia districts on the old camel patrol route with head. quarters at Rietfontein on the border of the Union and Southwest Africa. Another collection is from the ears of a camel at 0kalan_ ga in the extreme west of Ovamboland, Southwest Africa. This material was collected between 1939 and 1942, before the discontinuance of the camel corps. Whether H. dromedarii survives in these localities is not known£7 _
NEAR EAST: PALESTINE (Bodenheimer 1937. Adler and Feldman_ Muhsam 1945,1948. Fe1dman.Muhsam 1948). YEMEN (Sanborn and Hoogstraal 1953. Hoogstraal, ms.). IRAQ (Khayyat and Gilder 1947. Hoogstraal ms.). TRANSJORDAN, SAUDI ARABIA, and mm (Hoogstraal, mss.$. IRAN (Delpy 1936,1937B,1946A,l949A,B,C. Lelpy and Gouchey 1937. Nemenz 1953. As H. akimovi rsiacum: Olenev l93lA,C. As H. 'akimovi: Pospe1ov§_S£trom I93 . s .
a<=.-1211: Schulze 19361)). (Koch 1844. Kratz 191.0. 1<u'£~r..
pinar 1954. Mimioglu 1954. Common throughout central and eastern Anatolia, even where camels have recently become scarce; rare in western Anatolia: Hoogstraal, ms.).
RUSSIA: As H. asiaticum or H. a. asiaticum: Galuzo 1935. Pomerantzev 1937Q_ Bogoroditsky and §ernadsEZIa 1938. Bernadskaia 1939B,C. Chumakov, Petrova, and Sondak 1945. Pervomaisky 1947. Markov, Gildenblat, Kurchatov, and Petunin 1948. Olenev 1950. Pomerantzev 1950. Rementsova 1953. Pavlovsky, Pervomaisky, and Chagin 1954. Tselishcheva 1954. Petrisheheva 1955- Zhmaeva, Pchelkina, Mishchenko, and Karulin 1955- Serdyukova 1955.
As H. asiaticu caucasium Pomerantzev: in Pomerantzev,
Matikash§i1y, and fototsE§ I940. Pomerantzev 1950.
As H. dromedarii: Yalcimov 1923. Olenev 192913. Pomerantzev 1934,1956. Pavlovsky and Pomerantzev 1934. Kurchatov 1941. Pomerantzev, Matikashvily, and Lototsky 1940. Pavlovsky 1940. Chumakov, Petrova, and Sondak 1945. Alfeev 1948,1951. Perve
As H. dromedarii asiaticum: Schulze and Schlottke 1930. Olenev l929~l9f§Z. 7e'§.Iuzo 1934. Pomerantzev 1950. Some of these may apply to H. excavatum, this is especially likely in the case of Galuzo 1931. F'eIdman_1-iuhsam 1954 does not accept Delpy's synonymy of this form under H. dromedarii but does not provide reasons or suggest a su‘ostit'1'1te.
As "H. tunesiacum amurense Schulze": described and illus..
trated by—Kratz I971). DeIpy I9l,9B attributed "H. amurense Olenev, 19310" to H. excavatum.
As i_i. avlovs i: Olenev 1931C. Galuzo 1935. As H. yakimovi: enev lA,C. Galuzo 1935. Pospe1ova..Shtr3m
znnnm EAS1‘: AFGHANISTAN (Hoogstraal, ms.). 1111111 and PMHS~. asiaticum citri es: Schulze (1931.11). As g. Q. citrig : Kratz (I910). Ecording to Delpy (19/+95) these are synonyms of H. dromedarii. Fe1dman..I-Iuhsam (1954) states, without further Explanation, that they are not. Records of H. dromedarii by Sharif (1928) and Sen (1938) are questionable]
FAR mar: TIBE'I‘ (and 1401100111): As g. kozlovi: Olenev 1931B. Eatz 191,0. As H. asiaticum kozlovi: Pomerantzev 1950.
Z-INDOCHINA: The g. d. indosinensis of Toumanoff (191.4) refers to H. marginatum.
IMPORTED SPEED-TENS: ARGENTINA (Found on camels from Dakar:
Lahille I911) .
NOTE: Port ese material under this name (da Silva Leitao 1945) 15 assumedw(HH) to be misidentified.
Until recently, only the hosts of adult H. dromedarii were known. These are chiefly camels, but also include cattle and
horses and, to some extent, sheep, goats, and dogs. Man is un_ commonly attacked by adults, but more frequently by larvae and nymphs. H. dromedarii is so intimately associated with camels that it does not occur outside the normal range of these animals. However in parts of Anatolia where camels are now considerably less numerous than heretofore, large numbers of adults have been found on cattle and horses, fewer on sheep and goats (Hoogstraal, ms! 0
In nature, remote from large concentrations of domestic ani_ mals, larvae and nymphs feed on small burrowing mammals and hares, rarely on lizards. Adults venture forth in search of larger hosts. Nymphs appear to be more versatile, depending on local situations, and may infest camels, cattle, and horses in large numbers. Factors inducing the selection of hosts by nymphs are in need of
In the laboratory, Delpy and Gouchey (1937) fed larvae on hares and calves but this stage rarely engorged on camels or sheep. The same was true for nymphs. Adults attached rapidly to camels and cattle, rarely to sheep. It was often difficult to rear on a calf the F1 generation of a female collected on a camel. Further review of Delpy and Gouchey's report is presented in BIOLOGY below. '
In Yemen, Southwestern Arabia, numerous larvae and nymphs have been collected from the following hosts (Hoogstraal, ms.):
Le us arabicus arabicus Ehrenberg
In Egypt, including Sinai, nymphs have been taken from hedgehogs, hares, rodents, and lizards (identifications based on adults reared from nymphs) (Hoogstraal, ms.).
Hemiechinus auritus ae tius Fischer (common on
(few hos s examined’
us capensis sinaiticus Ehrenberg (few hosts examined)
re us a nsis ae ius Desmarest (common)
Gerbillus (Di diIIus) uadrimaculatus Lataste (rare)
er i us ». ¢er5iIIus Olivier (fairly comon
Oer5i'IIus 5. EE9J‘.'1].|<i'L1IY1 Geoffroy (common)
Meriones 2. crassus devall (common, also in burrows)
Icanthodactylus Bdskianus Daud.(Lizard) (uncomon)
According to Pomerantzev (1934) hosts of the immature stages in Armenia include reptiles and wild birds. The fatty subs cutaneous layers of ground squirrels, Citellus sp., used as laboratory hosts (Pospelova.Shtrom 1935), may hinder the attach. ment and feeding of larval H. dromedarii (= H. yakimowi).
In Russia (Pomerantzev 1950), adult hosts are camels, horses, and sheep while nymphs feed in large numbers on cattle and camels. Hosts of adults of the synonymous H. asiaticum are camels, cattle, horses, and sheep; rarely donkeys,_goats, domestic and wild pigs, hares and hedgehogs; sometimes man. Nymphs of this latter form occur on hedgehogs, in burrows of large 'peschanki" and gophers, while larvae are often on hedgehogs. Both immature stages are found (?together) on hares, gophers, jerboas, "peschanki", cats and dogs, and single nymphs are found on cattle and sheep (Bogoroditsky and Bernadskaia 1938).
The question of the normal number of hosts of H. dromedarii is moot. Delpy and Gouchey (1937) consider it as aIthree.Host tick that may utilize only two hosts under unfavorable conditions; i.e. great heat, when larvae molt quickly and reattach as nymphs nearby on the same host in order to avoid desiccation. It would appear that normally, on burrowing mammals, this need would not arise since the hosts venture from their relatively cool tunnels only after the sun goes down (deserts are usually cool at night).
Alfeev (1951) reared_§. dromedarii as a single host tick on rabbits and noted that adults move £3 new positions shortly after molting and remain unattached to the host for a day or two afterwards.
Field observations suggest that this is normally a two host tick, the change in hosts usually occurring after the nymphal. adult molt, infreuently after the larval-nymphal molt (Hoogstraal,
ms.)S In Russia the former type appears most common CPomerantzev 1950 .
Experimentally, Pospelova-Shtrom (1932) bred H. domedarii C: H. akimowi) on one, two, or three hosts. For the single Host life cycle, she eployed the hedgehog. The highly artificial conditions and exceptional hosts utilize in this experiment pre_ clude additional deductions from the results._7
During the warm season in Iran, the briefest life cycle ob. served by Delpy and Gouchey (1937) was 93 days; During cold weather, 280 or more days were necessary. Two generations a year may occur in nature. Variations in life cycle length are due to external or climatic factors affecting oviposition, hatching, and premolting periods; feeding times are similar at all seasons. These findings are diametrically opposed to those of Pospelova. Shtrom loc. cit.), who concluded, after rearing two generations under di eréHt_temperature and huidity conditions, that varia. tions in the length of different stages depends more on host body. temperature than on atmospheric differences. The Delpy.Gouchey conclusions are more in line with usual concepts concerning factors affecting tick life cycles. (399 Page 70$)
In Egypt, some slight seasonal variation in incidence of adults on camels is noticed (Hoogstraal, ms.). Normal life cycle activity appears to continue the year around, except that it is slower during the winter. For instance, duing the summer, nymphs molt to adults from seventeen to 26 days after dropping from the host while in winter this period is extended to from 27 to 48
Feeding time for each stage, according to Delpy and Gouchey, is as follows: