Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-8r8nv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-06T18:11:40.818Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Survival and energy use of Ixodes scapularis nymphs throughout their overwintering period

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 January 2019

James C. Burtis*
Affiliation:
Department of Natural Resources, Cornell University, 310 Fernow Hall, Ithaca NY 14853, USA Department of Entomology, Cornell University, 3132 Comstock Hall, Ithaca NY 14853, USA
Timothy J. Fahey
Affiliation:
Department of Natural Resources, Cornell University, 310 Fernow Hall, Ithaca NY 14853, USA
Joseph B. Yavitt
Affiliation:
Department of Natural Resources, Cornell University, 310 Fernow Hall, Ithaca NY 14853, USA
*
Author for correspondence: James C. Burtis, E-mail: jb766@cornell.edu

Abstract

The blacklegged tick (Ixodes scapularis) spends up to 10 months in the soil between feeding as larvae and questing for hosts as nymphs the following year. We tracked the survival and energy use of 4320 engorged larvae evenly divided across 288 microcosms under field conditions from September to July on sites with high (>12 nymphs/150 m2) and low (<1.2 nymphs/150 m2) densities of naturally questing I. scapularis in New York State. Subsets of microcosms were destructively sampled periodically during this period to determine tick survivorship and physiological age. Across all sites tick mortality was low during the winter and increased in the spring and early summer, coincident with increasing energy use. Neither energy use nor mortality differed significantly between sites with high vs low natural tick density, but we did observe a significant positive relationship between soil organic matter content and the survival of I. scapularis during the spring. Our results suggest that the off-host mortality and energy use of I. scapularis nymphs is relatively low in the winter and increases significantly in the spring and early summer.

Information

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2019 
Figure 0

Table 1. The AIC values for the mixed-effects model used to determine the relationship between tick survival in the microcosms in Dutchess County, with the fixed effects listed below

Figure 1

Table 2. The AIC values for the mixed-effects model used to determine the relationship between the lipid index values of the ticks collected in Dutchess County, with the fixed effects listed below

Figure 2

Table 3. The AIC values for the mixed-effects model used to determine the relationship between tick survival in the microcosms, with the fixed effects listed below between the two collection years

Figure 3

Table 4. The AIC values for the mixed-effects model used to determine the relationship between the lipid index values of ticks in the microcosms, with the fixed effects listed below between the two collection years

Figure 4

Fig. 1. Survival (A) and lipid index values (B) of the nymphal I. scapularis collected from the microcosms in Dutchess County. The points represent the means for the high (solid lines) and low (dashed lines) density sites, and the error bars show the 95% confidence interval for each collection date. The first points (in September) on both figures represent the survival and lipid index of ticks reared under laboratory conditions. Letters represent those time periods which differ significantly (P < 0.05) from one another according to the post-hoc Tukey tests. The sample sizes shown on the figure (n) represent the number of microcosms collected from the high- (top) and low-density (bottom) sites. The points are placed on a continuous axis based upon collection date with t = 0 at the establishment of the field plot.

Figure 5

Fig. 2. Scatterplots showing the relationship between nymphal survival and soil organic matter (% SOM) during each of the six collections in Dutchess County. The line is the line of best fit, and no significant relationship (P < 0.05) between survival and % SOM was observed for those collection days which lack lines of best fit and P values in the upper left corner of their scatterplots (A–D). The relationship was significant on those collection dates with P values (E and F).

Figure 6

Table 5. Results of the mixed-effects model analysing the lipid index values of the ticks in the microcosms in Dutchess County

Figure 7

Table 6. Results of the mixed-effects model for tick survival in the microcosms in Dutchess County

Figure 8

Fig. 3. The comparison of I. scapularis nymphal survival (A) and lipid index values (B) in 2013–2014 in Ithaca NY (solid lines) and 2015–2016 (dashed lines) in Dutchess County NY. Points represent the mean for that sampling period, and the error bars represent the 95% confidence intervals. The first points (in September) on both figures represent the survival and lipid index of ticks reared under laboratory conditions. The * symbol represents a significant (P < 0.01) difference during that sampling period. The sample sizes shown on the figure (n) represent the number of microcosms collected in Ithaca (top) and Dutchess County (bottom). The points are placed on a continuous axis based upon collection date with t = 0 at the establishment of the field plot.

Figure 9

Fig. 4. The weekly mean temperatures during the field seasons in Dutchess County (A) and Ithaca (B). The dashed vertical lines show the collection periods for each field season and a smooth line is included to show the general temperature trends.

Figure 10

Table 7. Results of the mixed-effects model for tick survival in the microcosms between the 2 years (2014 – Ithaca + 2016 – Dutchess County)

Figure 11

Table 8. Results of the mixed effects model analyzing lipid index values of ticks in the microcosms between the two years (2014 – Ithaca + 2016 – Dutchess County)

Figure 12

Fig. 5. The density of questing nymphs in 2015 (A) and 2016 (B) and larvae in 2015 (C) and 2016 (D) for the high (solid lines) and low (dashed lines) density sites. The points represent the density on the given collection date for each of the sites. All densities are presented as the number of ticks per 150 m2.

Supplementary material: Image

Burtis et al. supplementary material

Figure S1

Download Burtis et al.  supplementary material(Image)
Image 262 KB
Supplementary material: File

Burtis et al. supplementary material

Table S1

Download Burtis et al.  supplementary material(File)
File 13.9 KB