Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T22:01:38.721Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Diversity and distribution of ectoparasite taxa associated with Micaelamys namaquensis (Rodentia: Muridae), an opportunistic commensal rodent species in South Africa

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 June 2022

L. Stevens
Affiliation:
Department of Conservation Ecology and Entomology, Stellenbosch University, Private Bag X1, Matieland 7602, South Africa
A. A. Stekolnikov
Affiliation:
Zoological Institute, Russian Academy of Sciences, Saint Petersburg, Russia
E. A. Ueckermann
Affiliation:
Unit for Environmental Sciences and Management, Potchefstroom Campus, North-West University, Private Bag X6001, Potchefstroom 2520, South Africa
I. G. Horak
Affiliation:
Department of Zoology and Entomology, Rhodes University, PO Box 94, Makhanda 6140, South Africa
S. Matthee*
Affiliation:
Department of Conservation Ecology and Entomology, Stellenbosch University, Private Bag X1, Matieland 7602, South Africa
*
Author for correspondence: S. Matthee, E-mail: [email protected]

Abstract

South Africa boasts a rich diversity of small mammals of which several are commensal and harbour parasites of zoonotic importance. However, limited information is available on the parasite diversity and distribution associated with rodents in South Africa. This is particularly relevant for Micaelamys namaquensis (Namaqua rock mouse), a regionally widespread and locally abundant species that is often commensal. To address the paucity of data, the aims of the study were to record the ectoparasite diversity associated with M. namaquensis and develop distribution maps of lice and mites associated with M. namaquensis and other rodents in South Africa. Micaelamys namaquensis individuals (n = 216) were obtained from 12 localities representing multiple biomes during 2017–2018. A total of 5591 ectoparasites representing 5 taxonomic groups – fleas, lice, mesostigmatid mites, chiggers and ticks was recorded. These consisted of at least 57 taxa of which ticks were the most speciose (20 taxa). Novel contributions include new host and locality data for several ectoparasite taxa and undescribed chigger species. Known vector species were recorded which included fleas (Ctenocephalides felis, Dinopsyllus ellobius and Xenopsylla brasiliensis) and ticks (Haemaphysalis elliptica, Rhipicephalus appendiculatus and Rhipicephalus simus). Locality records indicate within-taxon geographic differences between the 2 louse species and the 2 most abundant mite species. It is clear that M. namaquensis hosts a rich diversity of ectoparasite taxa and, as such, is an important rodent species to monitor in habitats where it occurs in close proximity to humans and domestic animals.

Type
Research Article
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution and reproduction, provided the original article is properly cited.
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press

Introduction

Small mammals, and particularly rodents, play an integral role in ecosystems, serving as both secondary consumers of seeds and other plant material (Heithaus, Reference Heithaus1981) and as a food resource for various raptors and mesopredators (Preston, Reference Preston1990; Mahmood et al., Reference Mahmood, Niazi and Nadeem2013). The Rodentia is the largest mammalian order, and species within this order have diverse biological and behavioural characteristics. Characteristics such as social structure, habitat usage and nest type are important factors that influence the exposure of rodents to ectoparasites (e.g. fleas and ticks). For example, fossorial species (e.g. mole rats) that make complex permanent underground nests generally harbour a high proportion of mites that are associated with soil and the host nest (Archer et al., Reference Archer, Bennett, Ueckermann and Lutermann2014; Lutermann et al., Reference Lutermann, Carpenter-Kling, Ueckermann, Gutjahr and Bennett2015, Reference Lutermann, Archer, Ueckermann, Junker and Bennett2020). Similarly, arboreal species (e.g. tree squirrels) that have limited contact with the soil surface tend to have few or no ticks which are associated with grass and low-lying vegetation (Patrick and Wilson, Reference Patrick and Wilson1995; Romeo et al., Reference Romeo, Pisanu, Ferrari, Basset, Tillon, Wauters, Martinoli, Saino and Chapuis2013). Opportunism (adaptability) is another characteristic that can influence the parasite profile of a host species. Opportunistic rodent species often have large numbers of parasites due to the fact that they occupy larger geographic areas, often covering multiple vegetation types, and are able to effectively inhabit diverse land-use types (e.g. natural and transformed areas) at a local scale (Feliu et al., Reference Feliu, Renaud, Catzeflis, Hugot, Durand and Morand1997; Lindenfors et al., Reference Lindenfors, Nunn, Jones, Cunningham, Sechrest and Gittleman2007). The presence of rodents and their parasites in anthropogenic areas not only provides a food security risk (Muteka et al., Reference Muteka, Chimimba and Bennett2006) but also creates opportunities for parasite transmission and disease risk in domestic animals and humans (Lecompte et al., Reference Lecompte, Fichet-Calvet, Daffis, Koulémou, Sylla, Kourouma, Doré, Soropogui, Aniskin, Allali, Kan, Lalis, Koivogui, Günther, Denys and Ter Meulen2006; Brettschneider et al., Reference Brettschneider, Bennett, Chimimba and Bastos2012; Mayamba et al., Reference Mayamba, Byamungu, Leirs, Moses, Makundi, Kimaro, Massawe, Kifumba, Nakiyemba, Mdangi, Isabirye and Mulungu2021). It is therefore important that parasite profiles are developed for commensal rodent species as this may identify potential disease-risk areas and facilitate sustainable disease surveillance.

South Africa is known for its rich biodiversity that includes rodents (Skinner and Chimimba, Reference Skinner and Chimimba2005). Micaelamys namaquensis (Namaqua rock mouse, previously Aethomys namaquensis) is a locally abundant and regionally widespread rodent species that is often associated with natural and anthropogenic areas (Withers et al., Reference Withers, Louw and Henschel1980; Skinner and Chimimba, Reference Skinner and Chimimba2005; Starik et al., Reference Starik, Mbango, Bengsch, Göttert and Zeller2020). The rodent occurs throughout South and southern Africa (Skinner and Chimimba, Reference Skinner and Chimimba2005; Apps, Reference Apps2012; Monadjem et al., Reference Monadjem, Taylor, Denys and Cotterill2015). However, recent phylogeographic studies on M. namaquensis suggest biome-associated molecular differentiation in South Africa (Chimimba, Reference Chimimba2001; Russo et al., Reference Russo, Chimimba and Bloomer2010; Bothma et al., Reference Bothma, Matthee and Matthee2021). Though the species can inhabit a wide variety of biomes, it distinctly prefers rocky substrates such as outcrops, boulders and hillsides (Skinner and Chimimba, Reference Skinner and Chimimba2005; Fagir et al., Reference Fagir, Ueckermann, Horak, Bennett and Lutermann2014). Micaelamys namaquensis often uses dry grass to construct nests in rock crevices and overhangs as well as occasionally in hollows of trees (Roberts, Reference Roberts1951; Ansell, Reference Ansell1960; Choate, Reference Choate1972). The species feeds on seeds, green plant material and insects (Woodall and Mackie, Reference Woodall and Mackie1987; Kerley et al., Reference Kerley, Knight and Erasmus1990; Monadjem, Reference Monadjem1997). Micaelamys namaquensis is described as social (Skinner and Chimimba, Reference Skinner and Chimimba2005) and makes communal nests (Choate, Reference Choate1972; Flemming and Nicolson, Reference Flemming and Nicolson2004).

As yet, little is known about the ectoparasite species associated with naturally occurring rodents in South Africa. Though parasite–host and host–parasite lists are available for most rodent taxa (e.g. Zumpt, Reference Zumpt1961; Theiler, Reference Theiler1962; Ledger, Reference Ledger1980; Segerman, Reference Segerman1995; Horak et al., Reference Horak, Heyne, Williams, Gallivan, Spickett, Bezuidenhout and Estrada-Peña2018) the data are often outdated and in need of revision (van der Mescht and Matthee, Reference van der Mescht and Matthee2017). The main critique of these reports and monographs includes incomplete sample ranges and inadequate sample sizes (Shvydka et al., Reference Shvydka, Sarabeev, Estruch and Cadarso-Suárez2018; Wilson et al., Reference Wilson, Dobson, Merler, Poglayen, Randolph, Read, Skorping, Hudson, Rizzoli, Grenfell, Heesterbeek and Dobson2001; Stockwell and Peterson, Reference Stockwell and Peterson2002). In addition, at present there is a lack of geographic distribution maps for lice and mite species that are associated with rodents in South Africa. In recent years, empirical studies, based on larger sample sizes, have been conducted on a few rodent species (Matthee et al., Reference Matthee, Horak, Beaucournu, Durden, Ueckermann and McGeoch2007, Reference Matthee, Horak, van der Mescht, Ueckermann and Radloff2010; Hillegass et al., Reference Hillegass, Waterman and Roth2008; Archer et al., Reference Archer, Bennett, Ueckermann and Lutermann2014; Barnard et al., Reference Barnard, Krasnov, Goff and Matthee2015; Lutermann et al., Reference Lutermann, Carpenter-Kling, Ueckermann, Gutjahr and Bennett2015); these include a study on M. namaquensis (Fagir et al., Reference Fagir, Ueckermann, Horak, Bennett and Lutermann2014). Although this is a step in the right direction, these studies are limited in extent as they are restricted to a single locality and/or biome. Based on current literature, M. namaquensis acts as a host for numerous ectoparasite taxa (Zumpt, Reference Zumpt1961; Theiler, Reference Theiler1962; Ledger, Reference Ledger1980; Segerman, Reference Segerman1995; Fagir et al., Reference Fagir, Ueckermann, Horak, Bennett and Lutermann2014; Horak et al., Reference Horak, Heyne, Williams, Gallivan, Spickett, Bezuidenhout and Estrada-Peña2018) and is also a reservoir host for vector-borne pathogens such as Bartonella (Brettschneider et al., Reference Brettschneider, Bennett, Chimimba and Bastos2012). Given the wide distribution and opportunistic behaviour of M. namaquensis, it is predicted that the ectoparasite diversity is currently underestimated. This prediction is supported by a recent country-wide study on flea species associated with murid rodents (van der Mescht and Matthee, Reference van der Mescht and Matthee2017). To address this paucity in data, M. namaquensis was sampled and the ectoparasites were recorded at multiple localities and across several biomes within its distribution range in South Africa. The aim of the study was to quantify the species richness and infestation parameters of ectoparasites associated with M. namaquensis in South Africa. In addition, by combining the results from the current study with those of previous studies, the study aimed to provide preliminary distribution maps for the lice and more common mite species that occur on M. namaquensis and other rodent species in South Africa. Lastly, the development of a comprehensive ectoparasite species list provides information on the importance of M. namaquensis as a host for ectoparasite species of which some species are of veterinary and medical importance.

Materials and methods

The ectoparasite material used in the study was obtained from a previous study conducted on the molecular ecology of sucking lice (Anoplura) associated with the Aethomys/Micaelamys rodent complex (Bothma et al., Reference Bothma, Matthee and Matthee2020, Reference Bothma, Matthee and Matthee2021).

Micaelamys namaquensis individuals (n = 216) were trapped at 12 localities across South Africa during austral summer, autumn and winter in 2017 and 2018. The localities represented several biomes: Fynbos (1), Grassland (3), Savanna (7) and Succulent Karoo (1) (Fig. 1; Table 1). Sampling was conducted using Sherman-like live traps that were baited using a mixture of peanut butter and oats. Traps were set for 2–4 days per locality during which time they were checked twice per day. The morphological identification of M. namaquensis was confirmed molecularly using mitochondrial cytochrome oxidase subunit I (Bothma et al., Reference Bothma, Matthee and Matthee2020; S. Matthee, unpublished data).

Fig. 1. Sampling localities (n = 12) and biomes where Micaelamys namaquensis (n = 216) were trapped in South Africa during 2017–2018.

Table 1. Locality information, sample size per locality and sampling period for Micaelamys namaquensis (n = 216) trapped in South Africa during 2017–2018

Only adult M. namaquensis (> 30 g) were included in the study. Captured individuals were placed in separate plastic bags along with a reference number and euthanized with 2–4 mL sodium pentobarbitone (200 mg kg−1) depending on individual body weight. After euthanasia, each individual was weighed and frozen at −20°C in the field and transferred to a −80°C freezer in the laboratory. Prior to parasite removal, the frozen carcasses were thawed and systemically examined under a stereoscopic microscope. All fleas, lice, mesostigmatid mites and ticks were removed, while only a subsample of larval trombiculid mites (chiggers) were removed with forceps. Ectoparasite taxa were placed in individual sample tubes containing 70% ethanol. Fleas, lice, mesostigmatid mites (hereafter referred to as mites) and chiggers were cleared, and the slide mounted using standard techniques, while ticks remained unmounted.

Ectoparasite identification was conducted using taxonomic reference keys. Fleas were identified according to Segerman (Reference Segerman1995). Lice were sorted into morphospecies and a subsample from each locality was slide mounted and identified using various reference sources (e.g. Johnson, Reference Johnson1960; Kleynhans, Reference Kleynhans1969; Ledger, Reference Ledger1980; Durden and Musser, Reference Durden and Musser1994). Two congeneric louse species, Hoplopleura patersoni and Hoplopleura aethomydis, share several morphological characteristics making differentiation between the 2 species troublesome. For this study the specimens were identified as H. cf. patersoni, as they share many morphological characters. However, the type specimens of these species will need to be studied to confirm whether they are indeed 2 distinct species. Due to technical difficulties not all the nymphs of the 2 lice species (H. cf. patersoni and Polyplax praomydis) could be identified, thus they were pooled and presented as undifferentiated nymphs. Given these restrictions, all calculations for lice species were based only on the adult stage. Mesostigmatid mites were identified according to Herrin and Tipton (Reference Herrin and Tipton1976) and Krantz and Walter (Reference Krantz and Walter2009). The larval stage of mites in the family Trombiculidae (referred to as chiggers) was identified following Stekolnikov (Reference Stekolnikov2018) and the extensive taxonomic literature referenced to therein. In addition, the parasitope (body region) of the chiggers on the host was recorded at 2 localities. Ticks were identified using various reference sources (e.g. Walker et al., Reference Walker, Keirans and Horak2000; Horak et al., Reference Horak, Heyne, Williams, Gallivan, Spickett, Bezuidenhout and Estrada-Peña2018). Conclusive species identifications were not possible for several ticks, notably immature stages, and they were subsequently allocated to either species groups or unknown species within a relevant genus.

The calculation of mean abundance and prevalence followed the guidelines provided in Bush et al. (Reference Bush, Lafferty, Lotz and Shostak1997). The mean parasite abundance was calculated as the total number of individuals of a particular species divided by the total number of hosts examined regardless of parasite presence. Species prevalence was calculated by recording the total number of hosts that had 1 or more individuals of a particular species present divided by the total number of hosts examined. The per-locality mean abundance and prevalence of each taxon and species were calculated similarly but the samples were restricted to these localities. Unless otherwise stated, mean abundance is presented as the mean value ± standard error. Species richness for individual parasite taxa was determined by counting the number of species present at a given locality for the parasite taxon. Only prevalence data are available for chiggers. As the chigger parasitope was not consistently recorded throughout, parasitope preference was only calculated for 2 localities (Bloemfontein and Kimberley) where the parasitope for all or the majority of samples was reported. Parasitope preferences were calculated based on chigger presence/absence on a parasitope and were reported as a percentage of chigger infestation.

Results

A total of 5591 ectoparasites (fleas, lice, mesostigmatid mites and ticks, excluding chiggers) was recorded from 216 M. namaquensis individuals. At least 57 ectoparasite taxa (represent species and species groups), representing at least 26 genera, were identified (Table 2). Ticks were the most speciose taxon (20 taxa), followed by chiggers (14 species), mesostigmatid mites (11 taxa) and fleas (10 species), while lice were the most prevalent (71.76%) followed by mesostigmatid mites (50.93%) (Table 3).

Table 2. Ectoparasite taxa collected from Micaelamys namaquensis (n = 216) trapped across South Africa during 2017–2018

Table 3. Infestation parameters for the ectoparasite taxa recorded on Micaelamys namaquensis (n = 216) in South Africa during 2017–2018

Bold text indicate the values at the higher taxonomic level.

a Data based on adult life stage only.

Ten flea species, representing 6 genera, were recorded on M. namaquensis (Table 2). Overall, Xenopsylla brasiliensis was the most abundant and prevalent species (0.89 ± 0.13, 28.24%, respectively) followed by Chiastopsylla godfreyi (0.53 ± 0.17, 10.65%) (Table 3). Xenopsylla brasiliensis was recorded at 7 localities (Table 4) and was present on ≥10% of the rodents at each locality (Table 5). Chiastopsylla godfreyi and Dinopsyllus ellobius were more restricted in their distribution (4 localities) and less prevalent compared to X. brasiliensis (Tables 4 and 5). Female-biased flea infestations were only recorded for 3 species (Chiastopsylla octavii, Ctenocephalides felis and Epirimia aganippes) (Table 3), while male-biased sex ratios were recorded for C. godfreyi and X. brasiliensis at several localities (Supplementary Table 1).

Table 4. Mean abundance (±s.e.) and occurrence per locality of individual ectoparasite taxa recovered from Micaelamys namaquensis (n = 216) across South Africa during 2017–2018

a Data based on adult life stage only.

Table 5. Per locality prevalence (%) of individual ectoparasite taxa recovered from Micaelamys namaquensis (n = 216) across South Africa during 2017–2018

a Data based on adult life stage only.

Two louse species, H. cf. patersoni and P. praomydis, were recorded (Table 2). The following data are based on adult stages only. The overall mean abundance and prevalence of H. cf. patersoni were lower (2.94 ± 0.46, 43.06%) than P. praomydis (7.48 ± 1.11, 47.69%) (Table 3). Hoplopleura cf. patersoni was present at 10 localities and P. praomydis at 9, while the 2 species co-occurred at 7 of the 12 localities (Table 4). Apart from an outlier (Alldays 2), P. praomydis was collected at the central and western localities, while H. cf. patersoni was recovered at the central and north-eastern localities (Fig. 2). Polyplax praomydis was more abundant and prevalent than H. cf. patersoni at 5 of the 6 central localities where they co-occurred (Tables 4 and 5). In both species the sex ratio was variable between localities (Supplementary Table 2).

Fig. 2. Occurrence records (n = 14) for Hoplopleura cf. patersoni and Polyplax praomydis recorded from Micaelamys namaquensis in South Africa (data from the present study; Fagir et al., Reference Fagir, Ueckermann, Horak, Bennett and Lutermann2014; Bothma et al., Reference Bothma, Matthee and Matthee2020, Reference Bothma, Matthee and Matthee2021).

A total of 11 mesostigmatid mite species was collected from M. namaquensis (Table 2). Androlaelaps rhabdomysi was the most abundant and prevalent species (1.22 ± 0.28, 25.46%) followed by Laelaps fritzumpti (0.80 ± 0.14, 24.07%) (Table 3). Androlaelaps rhabdomysi was recorded at 9 localities and L. fritzumpti at 8 (Table 4). Androlaelaps rhabdomysi was present across South Africa, while L. fritzumpti occurred in the central and north-eastern localities (Fig. 3). Female-biased infestations were recorded for 10 mite species (Table 3) and this pattern was common across localities (Supplementary Table 3).

Fig. 3. Occurrence record (n = 14) for Androlaelaps rhabdomysi and Laealaps fritzumpti recorded from Micaelamys namaquensis and Rhabdomys pumilio (data from the present study; Matthee and Ueckermann, Reference Matthee and Ueckermann2008; Fagir et al., Reference Fagir, Ueckermann, Horak, Bennett and Lutermann2014; S. Matthee, unpublished data).

A total of 14 chigger species was recorded from M. namaquensis (Table 2). The chiggers represent 10 known species, 2 new undescribed species (Kayella sp. and Schoutedenichia sp.) and 2 potentially new species that require additional examination (Hyracarus sp. and Hyracarus aff. namibiensis). New localities were recorded for 5 chigger species. Only 2 species occurred at multiple localities: H. aff. namibiensis was present at 4 localities, followed by Schoutedenichia morosi at 3 localities (Table 5). The per-locality species richness varied among localities with 5 species recorded at Steynsburg followed by 3 at Alldays 2 (Table 5). The per-locality prevalence of chiggers varied between 7.69% (Alldays 2) and 77.78% (Bethulie). Chiggers were recorded from 6 parasitopes on the host (body, ear, genital area, head, leg and tail base) of which the ear was one of the preferred parasitopes at both Bloemfontein (71.43%) and Kimberley (72.73%) (Table 6). In addition, the tail base was also one of the preferred parasitopes (71.43 and 27.27%, respectively) (Table 6).

Table 6. Summary of parasitope preference, presented as prevalence (%), for chiggers recovered from Micaelamys namaquensis (n = 41) at 2 localities in South Africa during June 2018

Ticks were represented by larvae (74.95%) and nymphs (24.66%), while adult stages were only recorded for Ixodes bakeri-like ticks. Five tick genera of which 12 species and 8 species groups (including unknown species) were recovered on M. namaquensis (Table 2). The most abundant and prevalent ticks belonged to 2 species groups Rhipicephalus simus/follis (0.70 ± 0.23, 11.11%) and Haemaphysalis spinulosa group (0.58 ± 0.20, 15.74%) (Table 3). While the most abundant tick species was Rhipicephalus neumanni (0.24 ± 0.14) and Haemaphysalis elliptica was the most prevalent (5.56%), Rhipicephalus follis was the most widespread (occurred at 4 localities), while the remaining tick species were recorded at fewer localities (1–3 localities) (Tables 4 and 5). A single individual of Nuttalliella cf. namaqua was recorded at 1 locality (Loeriesfontein).

Discussion

The study recorded a large diversity of ectoparasites that include 57 ectoparasite taxa (49 species and 8 species groups). This includes several new locality and host records for ectoparasite taxa and reveals the existence of undescribed species. This finding supports the prediction that the current ectoparasite profile of M. namaquensis is underestimated. The large diversity is possibly attributed to the opportunistic behaviour of M. namaquensis (Macdonald et al., Reference Macdonald, Mathews, Berdoy, Singleton, Hinds, Leirsand and Zhang1999; Soliman et al., Reference Soliman, Marzouk, Main and Montasser2001). A similar pattern was recorded for Rhabdomys pumilio (4-striped mouse), another opportunistic rodent species in South Africa (Matthee et al., Reference Matthee, Horak, Beaucournu, Durden, Ueckermann and McGeoch2007, Reference Matthee, Horak, van der Mescht, Ueckermann and Radloff2010; Froeschke et al., Reference Froeschke, van der Mescht, McGeoch and Matthee2013; Barnard et al., Reference Barnard, Krasnov, Goff and Matthee2015; van der Mescht and Matthee, Reference van der Mescht and Matthee2017). In particular, >30 ectoparasite taxa (representing fleas, lice, mesostigmatid and trombiculid mites and ticks) are associated with R. pumilio in the southern and western parts of South Africa (Matthee et al., Reference Matthee, Horak, Beaucournu, Durden, Ueckermann and McGeoch2007, Reference Matthee, Horak, van der Mescht, Ueckermann and Radloff2010; Froeschke et al., Reference Froeschke, van der Mescht, McGeoch and Matthee2013; Barnard et al., Reference Barnard, Krasnov, Goff and Matthee2015; van der Mescht and Matthee, Reference van der Mescht and Matthee2017). Fagir et al. (Reference Fagir, Ueckermann, Horak, Bennett and Lutermann2014) recorded at least 22 ectoparasite taxa on M. namaquensis at a single locality in the Savanna biome in South Africa. The latter study was based on 313 M. namaquensis individuals trapped seasonally over 12 months.

In the present study, fleas were present on almost 50% of the rodents. Xenopsylla brasiliensis and C. godfreyi were the most prevalent and abundant flea species, supporting the findings of Fagir et al. (Reference Fagir, Ueckermann, Horak, Bennett and Lutermann2014). Both flea species were characterized by male-biased infestation at most (C. godfreyi), or all localities (X. brasiliensis). The sex-ratio pattern recorded for X. brasiliensis is supported by de Meillon et al. (Reference de Meillon, Davis and Hardy1961) and Fagir et al. (Reference Fagir, Ueckermann, Horak, Bennett and Lutermann2014). However, the pattern recorded for C. godfreyi is not supported by previous records (de Meillon et al., Reference de Meillon, Davis and Hardy1961; Fagir et al., Reference Fagir, Ueckermann, Horak, Bennett and Lutermann2014) and warrants further research. According to previous records (Segerman, Reference Segerman1995; Fagir et al., Reference Fagir, Ueckermann, Horak, Bennett and Lutermann2014; van der Mescht and Matthee, Reference van der Mescht and Matthee2017), C. godfreyi, E. aganippes and Listropsylla aricinae should have a close association with M. namaquensis. However, the low occurrence of L. aricinae may be due to an incomplete overlap between the current sampling localities and the flea's preferred geographic distribution (spanning the drier western part of South Africa from the Cape to Namibia) (Segerman, Reference Segerman1995). Four generalist (i.e. broader host preferences) flea species (D. ellobius, Listropsylla agrippinae, Listropsylla dorippae and X. brasiliensis) were abundant on M. namaquensis in the present study. These fleas are known vectors of plague (causative agent Yersinia pestis). Dinopsyllus ellobius has been identified as one of the most significant plague vectors in South Africa (Ingram, Reference Ingram1927; de Meillon et al., Reference de Meillon, Davis and Hardy1961) and both Dinopsyllus lypusus (also recorded in the study) and L. dorippae are important and efficient vectors for plague in Africa (Heisch et al., Reference Heisch, Grainger and D'Souza1953; Kilonzo and Mhina, Reference Kilonzo and Mhina1982, Reference Kilonzo and Mhina1983; Makundi et al., Reference Makundi, Kilonzo, Massawe, Singleton, Hinds, Krebs and Spratt2003). Ctenocephalides felis is a reservoir and vector of Rickettsia felis, which can be transmitted to both humans and animals, including domestic cats (Harasen and Randall, Reference Harasen and Randall1986; Greene and Breitschwerdt, Reference Greene, Breitschwerdt and Greene2006; Tsai et al., Reference Tsai, Lu, Huang, Wang, Wang, Huang, Wu and Shu2009) and this flea can transmit Bartonella spp. (Bouhsira et al., Reference Bouhsira, Ferrandez, Liu and Franc2013). Transmission of Bartonella is mainly through the feces of infected fleas (Foil et al., Reference Foil, Andress, Freeland and Roy1998; Finkelstein et al., Reference Finkelstein, Brown, O'Reilly and Wedincamp2002; Gutiérrez et al., Reference Gutiérrez, Krasnov, Morick, Gottlieb, Khokhlova and Harrus2015).

The 2 louse species recorded on M. namaquensis, H. cf. patersoni and P. praomydis, are both known from M. namaquensis and the closely related Aethomys chrysophilus (red rock rat) (Durden and Musser, Reference Durden and Musser1994; Braack et al., Reference Braack, Horak, Jordaan, Segerman and Louw1996; Fagir et al., Reference Fagir, Ueckermann, Horak, Bennett and Lutermann2014). These host associations are based on morphological characters, although a recent molecular study provides strong evidence that H. cf. patersoni on M. namaquensis is genetically distinct from the same morphotype on A. chrysophilus (Bothma et al., Reference Bothma, Matthee and Matthee2020). It is quite possible that the same holds true for P. praomydis, but this remains to be tested (Bothma et al., Reference Bothma, Matthee and Matthee2020). Cryptic species have been detected in several ectoparasite taxa (Poulin and Keeney, Reference Poulin and Keeney2008; Malenke et al., Reference Malenke, Johnson and Clayton2009), including the louse Polyplax arvicanthis on the widely distributed Rhabdomys genus in South Africa (du Toit et al., Reference du Toit, Matthee and Matthee2013). The presence of cryptic species among parasites may be a common occurrence as their small body size and morphological stages can cause some difficulty in distinguishing between species based on morphology (Perkins et al., Reference Perkins, Martinsen and Falk2011). Overall, lice were the most prevalent taxon and showed the highest mean abundance of all the ectoparasite taxa in the present study. Both louse species showed greater prevalence and mean abundance on M. namaquensis in the present study (43.06%, 2.94 ± 0.46 and 47.69%, 7.48 ± 1.11, respectively) compared to Fagir et al. (Reference Fagir, Ueckermann, Horak, Bennett and Lutermann2014) (16.2%, 0.89 ± 0.27 and 2.1%, 0.10 ± 0.04). These differences may be due to variation (in study design and parasite removal methods) between the 2 studies. As mentioned, the study by Fagir et al. (Reference Fagir, Ueckermann, Horak, Bennett and Lutermann2014) was conducted seasonally at 1 locality and in addition rodents were visually inspected. In contrast, whole-body examinations were conducted under a stereomicroscope in the present study. Female-biased sex ratios were not a general pattern for either of the 2 louse species. It is possible that louse sex ratios vary seasonally and in association with individual louse infestations on the host. The latter has been recorded for anoplurid lice on humans (Rozsa, Reference Rozsa1997) and chewing lice on birds (Rozsa et al., Reference Rozsa, Rekasi and Reiczigel1996; Pap et al., Reference Pap, Adam, Vágási, Benko and Vincze2013). Based on the findings in the present study, the geographic range of the 2 louse species only partially overlaps: H. cf. patersoni occurred in the central and eastern summer rainfall regions of the country, while P. praomydis was more widely distributed across South Africa, which suggests that the latter species is more tolerant of diverse climatic conditions (present in summer and winter rainfall regions).

Mites (in the order Mesostigmata) were recorded on half of all rodents. In all, 3 species, namely A. rhabdomysi, L. fritzumpti and Laelaps aff. grenieri were the most common mite species. The high prevalence of A. rhabdomysi (25.46%) is supported by Fagir et al. (Reference Fagir, Ueckermann, Horak, Bennett and Lutermann2014), who recorded a 20.4% prevalence for A. rhabdomysi on M. namaquensis. Only 2 mite species (A. rhabdomysi and Androlaelaps zuluensis) were shared with Fagir et al. (Reference Fagir, Ueckermann, Horak, Bennett and Lutermann2014). In general, the overall dominance of A. rhabdomysi, L. fritzumpti and L. aff. grenieri, in the present study, was also recorded at the individual localities where they occurred. Androlaelaps rhabdomysi occurred at most of the sampling localities. However, based on the per-locality-infestation levels, it does appear that the species prefers the central localities such as Kimberley, Kuruman, Steynsburg and Bethulie. Previous studies on R. pumilio also recorded this species in the western and southern regions of South Africa, which suggests that the mite species has a country-wide distribution (Matthee and Ueckermann, Reference Matthee and Ueckermann2008; S. Matthee, unpublished data). In the present study, L. fritzumpti was absent from the southern and south-western winter rainfall localities and more common in the summer rainfall central and north-eastern localities. There is also no record of this species on 2 other rodent species [Otomys irroratus (Southern African vlei rat) and R. pumilio] at various localities in the Western Cape Province (Matthee et al., Reference Matthee, Horak, Beaucournu, Durden, Ueckermann and McGeoch2007, Reference Matthee, Horak, van der Mescht, Ueckermann and Radloff2010). Host records for L. fritzumpti include a range of host species such as Aethomys spp., Elephantulus rupestris (western rock sengi), Gerbillurus paeba (hairy-footed gerbil) and R. pumilio (Herrin and Tipton, Reference Herrin and Tipton1976). The third most prevalent mite, L. aff. grenieri, was present at 5 localities, of which 4 were located centrally and 1 in the north-eastern region of South Africa. Laelaps grenieri (Taufflieb and Mouchet, Reference Taufflieb and Mouchet1956) has been recorded from a multitude of small mammal hosts, primarily Lemniscomys spp. in north-western Africa [Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC); Zumpt, Reference Zumpt1961]. The great geographical distance between the present study and the DRC, as well as morphological inconsistencies between the 2 species, suggests that our mite is different from, but shares resemblances with L. grenieri from the DRC. Female-biased infestations were common for the most abundant mite species (A. rhabdomysi, L. fritzumpti and L. aff. grenieri) and are in agreement with previous studies on South African rodents [M. namaquensis (Fagir et al., Reference Fagir, Ueckermann, Horak, Bennett and Lutermann2014) and R. pumilio (Matthee et al., Reference Matthee, Horak, Beaucournu, Durden, Ueckermann and McGeoch2007)]. The pattern of female bias is a widespread phenomenon among parasitic mites and may be attributed to the parthenogenetic reproductive systems of mites (Norton et al., Reference Norton, Kethley, Johnston, O'Connor, Wrensch and Ebbert1993; Sonenshine, Reference Sonenshine and Sonenshine1993; Matthee et al., Reference Matthee, Horak, Beaucournu, Durden, Ueckermann and McGeoch2007). In addition, female laelapid mites require more frequent blood meals (for oogenesis) and also use hosts to disperse. This is in contrast to males that feed less and remain in the nest (Radovsky, Reference Radovsky and Kim1985, Reference Radovsky and Houck1994). The remaining 8 mesostigmatid mite species appeared to be less common on M. namaquensis and have more localized distributions (present at 1–3 localities). Interestingly, 3 species (A. zuluensis, Laelaps muricola and Laelaps vansomereni) were previously recorded on M. namaquensis (Zumpt, Reference Zumpt1961; Engelbrecht et al., Reference Engelbrecht, Matthee, Ueckermann and Matthee2014). The low occurrence of at least 2 of the remaining species may be due to a preference for other rodent species and/or geographic areas. For example, Androlaelaps dasymys was present on M. namaquensis at 1 locality (Hammanskraal), but this mite has been recorded on R. pumilio and O. irroratus in the southern (Stellenbosch, Somerset West, Malmesbury, Grabouw and Swellendam), western (Vanrynsdorp) and north-western (Springbok and Groblershoop) parts of South Africa (Matthee et al., Reference Matthee, Horak, Beaucournu, Durden, Ueckermann and McGeoch2007, Reference Matthee, Horak, van der Mescht, Ueckermann and Radloff2010; S. Matthee, unpublished data). It is evident from this study that current information with regard to host and geographic range of mesostigmatid mites on rodents is lacking for South Africa.

Chiggers were present on almost half (41.20%) of all rodents. Fourteen species were recorded of which 2 are new undescribed species and 2 are potentially new species. The discovery of new chigger species on rodents in South Africa is mainly due to past limited research interest in the taxonomic group and the lack of local taxonomic expertise (Barnard et al., Reference Barnard, Krasnov, Goff and Matthee2015; Stekolnikov and Matthee, Reference Stekolnikov and Matthee2019). Gahrliepia nana, Microtrombicula mastomyia and S. morosi have previously been recorded on rodents [e.g. Aethomys ineptus (Tete veld rat) and Saccostomus campestris (South African pouched mouse)] in the north-eastern Savanna biome in South Africa (Zumpt, Reference Zumpt1961; Matthee et al., Reference Matthee, Stekolnikov, van der Mescht, Froeschke and Morand2020). Herpetacarus gerrhosauri and Hyracarus longipilosus are known species that are recorded here for the first time after their description on 2 lizard species Gerrhosaurus flavigularis (yellow-throated plated lizard) and Pseudocordylus subviridis (Drakensberg crag lizard) from Mullers Pass and Witzieshoek Naturelle Reserve, Free State, South Africa for the former and Procavia capensis (rock hyrax) from Cedara, KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa for the latter by Lawrence (Reference Lawrence1949). Hypotrombidium meleagride presents the first record outside the type locality, which is Malmesbury in the Western Cape, South Africa (Vercammen-Grandjean and Langston, Reference Vercammen-Grandjean and Langston1976). Microtrombicula squirreli and Schoutedenichia paraxeri are recorded in South Africa for the first time as these species were previously recorded from the DRC (Zumpt, Reference Zumpt1961; Stekolnikov, Reference Stekolnikov2018). The present study provides the first record of the genus Kayella in South Africa. The genus was previously recorded in localities spanning Europe, Asia and North America (Nielsen et al., Reference Nielsen, Robbins and Rueda2021). Lastly, Tateracarus foliosetosus and Tateracarus kimberleyensis are the second and third species of the previously monotypic genus Tateracarus, with the type species Tateracarus quadrisetosus, recorded on Gerbilliscus leucogaster (bushveld gerbil) in Namibia (Stekolnikov, Reference Stekolnikov2018; Stekolnikov and Matthee, Reference Stekolnikov and Matthee2022). In the present study, most chigger species were recorded at a single locality. However, 2 species (H. aff. namibiensis and S. morosi) were recorded at multiple localities. Chiggers are regarded as habitat specialists (Shatrov and Kudryashova, Reference Shatrov, Kudryashova, Morand, Krasnov and Poulin2006) though some species have wider tolerance ranges and can occur in multiple habitat types (Mohr, Reference Mohr1947; Traub and Wisseman, Reference Traub and Wisseman1974; Matthee et al., Reference Matthee, Stekolnikov, van der Mescht, Froeschke and Morand2020). Based on the chigger data from 2 localities in the Savanna biome, the ears were the preferred parasitope on M. namaquensis. This parasitope has previously been recorded for chiggers, as a group, on M. namaquensis in the south-eastern Savanna biome, South Africa (Fagir et al., Reference Fagir, Ueckermann, Horak, Bennett and Lutermann2014; D. Fagir, personal communication). Microtrombicula mastomyia displayed a similar preference for rodent ears in a recent study conducted in the north-eastern Savanna biome in South Africa (Matthee et al., Reference Matthee, Stekolnikov, van der Mescht, Froeschke and Morand2020). The thickness of the host skin may be an important factor as the cheliceral blades that are used for attachment are minute (e.g. 24 and 35 μm for Schoutedenichia horaki and Ascoschoengastia ueckermanni, respectively, from South Africa) (Matthee et al., Reference Matthee, Stekolnikov, van der Mescht, Froeschke and Morand2020). A preference for thin-skinned areas has also been recorded for chiggers on lizards (Arnold, Reference Arnold1982; Goldberg and Holshuh, Reference Goldberg and Holshuh1992; Klukowski, Reference Klukowski2004). In addition, the ear parasitope provides protection against removal by oral grooming (Goff, Reference Goff1979; Barnard et al., Reference Barnard, Krasnov, Goff and Matthee2015). Similar to previous studies, the tail base was also one of the preferred parasitopes in the present study (Barnard et al., Reference Barnard, Krasnov, Goff and Matthee2015; Matthee et al., Reference Matthee, Stekolnikov, van der Mescht, Froeschke and Morand2020).

Ticks were present on half of all rodents and were represented by 20 taxa of which 12 were identified to species and 8 to species groups (including unknown species). In general, immature life stages (larvae and nymphs) were recorded on M. namaquensis (Petney et al., Reference Petney, Horak, Howell and Meyer2004; Durden, Reference Durden, Morand, Krasnov and Poulin2006; Matthee et al., Reference Matthee, Horak, Beaucournu, Durden, Ueckermann and McGeoch2007, Reference Matthee, Horak, van der Mescht, Ueckermann and Radloff2010; Horak et al., Reference Horak, Heyne, Williams, Gallivan, Spickett, Bezuidenhout and Estrada-Peña2018). The morphological characters of larvae and nymphs are such that they can easily be identified to genus level, but these characters are often not sufficiently diagnostic to make a specific diagnosis (Walker et al., Reference Walker, Keirans and Horak2000). As a result, several of the larvae and nymphs were assigned to species groups. The genera, Rhipicephalus and Haemaphysalis represented most of the tick taxa (species and species groups). The higher species richness recorded for Rhipicephalus is supported by Fagir et al. (Reference Fagir, Ueckermann, Horak, Bennett and Lutermann2014), where 6 of the 8 tick taxa were conspecifics within the Rhipicephalus genus. It is not possible to make inferences on species groups as they consist of multiple species that may vary in host preference and distribution. In the present study, R. neumanni was the most abundant species, but only present at 1 locality (60% prevalence at Kuruman). The Kuruman region is xeric (<340 mm per annum), which is in agreement with the species' observed preference for xeric regions in South Africa (Horak et al., Reference Horak, Heyne, Williams, Gallivan, Spickett, Bezuidenhout and Estrada-Peña2018). Micaelamys namaquensis is a new host record for R. neumanni that was previously reported on A. chrysophilus (1 larva) and Mastomys sp. (1 nymph) in Namibia (Horak et al., Reference Horak, Heyne, Williams, Gallivan, Spickett, Bezuidenhout and Estrada-Peña2018). In the present study, Rhipicephalus lunulatus was recorded at a single locality (Marken) and on <40% of the rodents. This tick species has been recorded previously on Elephantulus myurus (eastern rock sengi), A. chrysophilus and M. namaquensis in South Africa, but in low abundance (1–3 individuals per host species) (Horak et al., Reference Horak, Heyne, Williams, Gallivan, Spickett, Bezuidenhout and Estrada-Peña2018). Rhipicephalus follis was recorded at 4 localities of which 3 fall within the Grassland biome and the fourth (Hammanskraal) in the Savanna. The latter locality presents a new host and biome record for R. follis (Horak et al., Reference Horak, Heyne, Williams, Gallivan, Spickett, Bezuidenhout and Estrada-Peña2018). The low prevalence and abundance of Rhipicephalus distinctus in the present study (only recorded at Bethulie) is puzzling as this tick seems to have a preference for hosts that prefer rocky habitats such as P. capensis, E. myurus, Elephantulus edwardii (Cape rock elephant-shrew) and M. namaquensis (Horak et al., Reference Horak, Heyne, Williams, Gallivan, Spickett, Bezuidenhout and Estrada-Peña2018). Furthermore, R. distinctus was the most prevalent (67.1%) and abundant tick on M. namaquensis in the study by Fagir et al. (Reference Fagir, Ueckermann, Horak, Bennett and Lutermann2014). Several of the localities sampled during winter (June and July) are close to previous sampling records for the species (Horak et al., Reference Horak, Heyne, Williams, Gallivan, Spickett, Bezuidenhout and Estrada-Peña2018). It is possible that season played a role, as the larval stage appears to be more common during spring and summer (Horak et al., Reference Horak, Heyne, Williams, Gallivan, Spickett, Bezuidenhout and Estrada-Peña2018). Rhipicephalus exophthalmos was recorded at 2 localities (Postmasburg and Steynsburg), with 30% of the rodents at Postmasburg infested. Postmasburg is a new locality record for R. exophthalmos, which occurs throughout Namibia and has a patchy distribution in the south-western and southern parts of South Africa (Horak et al., Reference Horak, Heyne, Williams, Gallivan, Spickett, Bezuidenhout and Estrada-Peña2018). In addition, M. namaquensis is a new host recorded as the immature stages seem to have a preference for Macroscelides proboscideus (round-eared elephant-shrew), E. edwardii and Lepus saxatilis (scrub hare) (Horak et al., Reference Horak, Fourie, Novellie and Williams1991; Fourie et al., Reference Fourie, Horak and Woodall2005). Rhipicephalus warburtoni was abundant at 3 localities (Alldays 1, Hammanskraal and Steynsburg) that fall within the known distribution range of the species in South Africa. This tick is commonly associated with rocky outcrops and hosts that frequent these habitats. Rhipicephalus warburtoni has previously been recorded on M. namaquensis (Fagir et al., Reference Fagir, Ueckermann, Horak, Bennett and Lutermann2014), although it seems to prefer hares and E. myurus as hosts (Fourie et al., Reference Fourie, Horak and Woodall2005; Harrison et al., Reference Harrison, Robb, Bennet and Horak2012; Fagir et al., Reference Fagir, Horak, Ueckermann, Bennett and Lutermann2015). Hyalomma truncatum has a country-wide distribution and displays low host-specificity, with adults being generalists while immature stages are present on a range of small and medium-sized mammals such as Lepus capensis (Cape hares), L. saxatilis and murid rodents (Horak et al., Reference Horak, Fourie, Novellie and Williams1991, Reference Horak, Spickett, Braack and Penzhorn1993, Reference Horak, Spickett, Braack, Penzhorn, Bagnall and Uys1995, Reference Horak, Heyne, Williams, Gallivan, Spickett, Bezuidenhout and Estrada-Peña2018; Matthee et al., Reference Matthee, Horak, Beaucournu, Durden, Ueckermann and McGeoch2007). Studies on R. pumilio have recorded H. truncatum mainly from drier areas (e.g. Oudtshoorn) (S. Matthee, unpublished data). A similar pattern was recorded in the present study, with the species only recorded from localities with a mean annual rainfall <349 mm (Kuruman, Kimberley and Loeriesfontein). Haemaphysalis elliptica has been recorded throughout South Africa's Savanna, Grassland, Thicket, Fynbos and Succulent Karoo biomes (Horak et al., Reference Horak, Heyne, Williams, Gallivan, Spickett, Bezuidenhout and Estrada-Peña2018). Adult life stages prefer carnivores while the immature stages seem to prefer rodent hosts, particularly R. pumilio and M. namquensis but are also present on other small mammals (Fourie et al., Reference Fourie, Horak and van den Heever1992; Petney et al., Reference Petney, Horak, Howell and Meyer2004; Matthee et al., Reference Matthee, Horak, Beaucournu, Durden, Ueckermann and McGeoch2007). Nuttalliella cf. namaqua was represented by a single individual (larva) recorded from a single rodent at Loeriesfontein in the Northern Cape. It is possible that this tick is N. namaqua, a monotypic species within the family Nuttalliellidae. This is based on the fact that M. namaquensis is regarded as a preferred host for N. namaqua and the latter species has been recorded in regions close and with similar climatic conditions to Loeriesfontein (Mans et al., Reference Mans, de Klerk, Pienaar and Latif2011; Horak et al., Reference Horak, Lutermann, Medger, Apanaskevich and Matthee2012; Apanaskevich, Reference Apanaskevich2021). In addition to the immature stages, 2 adult female I. bakeri-like ticks were collected. Although species in the genus Ixodes usually displays a strong on-host female bias (Horak et al., Reference Horak, Heyne, Williams, Gallivan, Spickett, Bezuidenhout and Estrada-Peña2018), very few adult ticks were collected to confirm this in the present study. Several of the tick species that were recorded in the study are known vectors for disease-causing pathogens or are directly responsible for causing disease. In particular, H. elliptica is a vector of Babesia rossi, the causative agent for canine babesiosis in South Africa (Matjila et al., Reference Matjila, Penzhorn, Bekker, Nijhof and Jongejan2004, Reference Matjila, Leisewitz, Jongejan and Penzhorn2008). Hyalomma truncatum is known to transmit Babesia caballi to horses (de Waal, Reference de Waal1990), and females of certain strains of H. truncatum may secrete toxins in their saliva, which may cause sweating sickness in cattle, with greater risk for calves (Neitz, Reference Neitz1956). Hyalomma truncatum is also a vector of Crimean-Congo haemorrhagic fever virus to humans (Hoogstraal, Reference Hoogstraal1979; Swanepoel et al., Reference Swanepoel, Shepherd, Leman, McGillivray, Erasmus, Searle and Gill1987). In Zimbabwe, R. lunulatus has been associated with tick paralysis in calves and lambs. The adults of R. neumanni occur between the claws of sheep and may cause lameness and the formation of abscesses (Walker, Reference Walker1990). Lastly, R. warburtoni has been reported as causing paralysis in new-born Angora goats (Horak et al., Reference Horak, Heyne, Williams, Gallivan, Spickett, Bezuidenhout and Estrada-Peña2018).

The current study in addition to published literature highlights the rich diversity of ectoparasite taxa that are associated with the opportunistic and regionally widespread M. namaquensis (Table 7). Several of the tick and flea species are of medical and/or veterinary importance and it is therefore important to monitor the population sizes of M. namaquensis in anthropogenic habitats. Further, the study makes novel contributions in terms of new locality and host records for several ectoparasite and undescribed chigger species. Data on the chigger diversity and mite and louse geographic distribution provide valuable baseline information for future studies on rodent ectoparasites.

Table 7. Summary of ectoparasite taxa associated with Micaelamys namaquensis (previously Aethomys namaquensis) to date

a Species of veterinary and medical importance.

Supplementary material

The supplementary material for this article can be found at https://doi.org/10.1017/S0031182022000750.

Data availability

All data generated or analysed during this study are included in this published article. The datasets used and/or analysed are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

Acknowledgements

We thank the various landowners and conservation bodies that allowed sampling on their properties or in the reserves under their management. JC Bothma, Conrad and Johann Matthee, Nico Avenant, Lourens Swanepoel and Dylan Smith assisted in the field and contributed samples. Several research assistants and Luther van der Mescht supported the laboratory work. Lance Durden provided guidance with regard to the Hoplopleura patersoniHoplopleura aethomydis lice query.

Author contributions

S. M. conceived the study and supervised L. S. L. S. conducted the laboratory work and wrote the draft chapters of the manuscript. A. A. S. and I. G. H. assisted with the identification of chiggers and ticks, respectively. E. A. U. identified the mites. All authors contributed to the final version of the manuscript.

Financial support

This research project was supported by Stellenbosch University, The National Research Foundation (NRF)-Incentive Funding (grant number 85718 to S. M.) and a NRF-FBIP bursary (grant number 128323 to L. S.). Any opinion, finding and conclusion or recommendation expressed in this material is that of the author(s) and the NRF does not accept any liability in this regard. The identification of chiggers was supported by the Ministry of Science and Higher Education of the Russian Federation (grant number 122031100263-1 to A. A. S).

Conflict of interest

None.

Ethical standards

The ectoparasite material used in the study was obtained from a previous study conducted on the molecular ecology of sucking lice (Anoplura) associated with the Aethomys/Micaelamys rodent complex (Bothma et al., Reference Bothma, Matthee and Matthee2020, Reference Bothma, Matthee and Matthee2021). The project was approved by Stellenbosch Animal Ethics (SU-ACU-2018-4555) and permits obtained (Limpopo, ZA/LP/90994; North-West, NW 7705; Eastern Cape, CRO 150/17CR and CRO 11/17CR; Northern Cape, FAUNA 0942/2017 and FAUNA 0949/2017).

References

Ansell, WFH (1960) Mammals of Northern Rhodesia: A Revised Check List with Keys, Notes on Distribution, Range Maps, and Summaries of Breeding and Ecological Data. Lusaka, Zambia: The Government Printer.Google Scholar
Apanaskevich, D (2021) New larval host records and locality data for Nuttalliella namaqua Bedford, 1931 (Acari: Nuttalliellidae). Systematic and Applied Acarology 26, 317319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Apps, P (2012) Smither's Mammals of Southern Africa: A Field Guide, 2nd Edn. Cape Town, South Africa: Penguin Random House South Africa.Google Scholar
Archer, EK, Bennett, NC, Ueckermann, EA and Lutermann, H (2014) Ectoparasite burdens of the common mole-rat (Cryptomys hottentotus hottentotus) from the cape provinces of South Africa. Journal of Parasitology 100, 7984.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arnold, EN (1982) Mite pockets of lizards, a possible means of reducing damage by ectoparasites. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 29, 121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barnard, K, Krasnov, BR, Goff, L and Matthee, S (2015) Infracommunity dynamics of chiggers (Trombiculidae) parasitic on a rodent. Parasitology 142, 16051611.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bothma, JC, Matthee, S and Matthee, CA (2020) The evolutionary history of parasitic sucking lice and their rodent hosts: a case of evolutionary co-divergences. Zoologica Scripta 49, 7285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bothma, JC, Matthee, S and Matthee, CA (2021) Comparative phylogeography between parasitic sucking lice and their host the Namaqua rock mouse, Micaelamys namaquensis (Rodentia: Muridae). Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society 192, 10171028.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bouhsira, E, Ferrandez, Y, Liu, MF and Franc, M (2013) Ctenocephalides felis an in vitro potential vector for five Bartonella species. Comparative Immunology, Microbiology and Infectious Diseases 36, 105111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Braack, LEO, Horak, IG, Jordaan, LC, Segerman, J and Louw, JP (1996) The comparative host status of red veld rats (Aethomys chrysophilus) and bushveld gerbils (Tatera leucogaster) for epifaunal arthropods in the southern Kruger National Park, South Africa. Onderstepoort Journal of Veterinary Research 63, 149158.Google ScholarPubMed
Brettschneider, H, Bennett, NC, Chimimba, CT and Bastos, ADS (2012) Bartonellae of the Namaqua rock mouse, Micaelamys namaquensis (Rodentia: Muridae) from South Africa. Veterinary Microbiology 157, 132136.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bush, AO, Lafferty, KD, Lotz, JM and Shostak, AW (1997) Parasitology meets ecology on its own terms: Margolis et al. revisited. The Journal of Parasitology 83, 575583.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chimimba, CT (2001) Infraspecific morphometric variation in Aethomys namaquensis (Rodentia: Muridae) from southern Africa. Journal of Zoology 253, 191210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Choate, TS (1972) Behavioural studies on some Rhodesian rodents. Zoologica Africana 7, 103118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
de Meillon, B, Davis, DHS and Hardy, F (1961) Plague in Southern Africa. Volume I. The Siphonaptera (Excluding Ischnopsyllidae), 1st Edn. Pretoria, South Africa: Government Printer.Google Scholar
de Waal, DT (1990) The transovarial transmission of Babesia caballi by Hyalomma truncatum. The Onderstepoort Journal of Veterinary Research 57, 99100.Google ScholarPubMed
Durden, LA (2006) Taxonomy, host associations, life cycles and vectorial importance of ticks parasitizing small mammals. In Morand, S, Krasnov, BR and Poulin, R (eds), Micromammals and Macroparasites: From Evolutionary Ecology to Management. Tokyo, Japan: Springer, pp. 91102. Available at doi:10.1007/978-4-431-36025-4_6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Durden, LA and Musser, GG (1994) The Sucking Lice (Insecta, Anoplura) of the World – A Taxonomic Checklist with Records of Mammalian Hosts and Geographical Distributions No. 218. New York, USA: Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural History.Google Scholar
du Toit, N, Matthee, S and Matthee, CA (2013) The sympatric occurrence of two genetically divergent lineages of sucking louse, Polyplax arvicanthis (Phthiraptera: Anoplura), on the four-striped mouse genus, Rhabdomys (Rodentia: Muridae). Parasitology 140, 604616.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Edwards, SJ, Kirby, MD, Crawley, LR, Rayburn, JD, Shaw, JH and Walker, ML (1974) Part 7 Index-Catalogue of Medical and Veterinary Zoology. Parasite Subject Catalogue: Hosts. Washington, USA: Animal Parasitology Institute.Google Scholar
Engelbrecht, A, Matthee, CA, Ueckermann, EA and Matthee, S (2014) Evidence of cryptic speciation in mesostigmatid mites from South Africa. Parasitology 141, 13221332.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fagir, DM, Ueckermann, EA, Horak, IG, Bennett, NC and Lutermann, H (2014) The Namaqua rock mouse (Micaelamys namaquensis) as a potential reservoir and host of arthropod vectors of diseases of medical and veterinary importance in South Africa. Parasites and Vectors 7, 111.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fagir, DM, Horak, IG, Ueckermann, EA, Bennett, NC and Lutermann, H (2015) Ectoparasite diversity in the Eastern Rock Sengis (Elephantulus myurus): the effect of seasonality and host sex. African Zoology 50, 109117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Feliu, C, Renaud, F, Catzeflis, F, Hugot, JP, Durand, P and Morand, S (1997) A comparative analysis of parasite species richness of Iberian rodents. Parasitology 115, 453466.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Finkelstein, JL, Brown, TP, O'Reilly, KL and Wedincamp, JJ (2002) Studies on the growth of Bartonella henselae in the cat flea (Siphonaptera: Pulicidae). Journal of Medical Entomology 39, 915919.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Flemming, PA and Nicolson, SW (2004) Sex differences in space use, body condition and survivorship during the breeding season in the Namaqua rock mouse, Aethomys namaquensis. African Zoology 39, 123132.Google Scholar
Foil, L, Andress, E, Freeland, RL and Roy, AF (1998) Experimental infection of domestic cats with Bartonella henselae by inoculation of Ctenocephalides felis (Siphonaptera: Pulicidae) feces. Journal of Medical Entomology 35, 625628.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fourie, LJ, Horak, IG and van den Heever, JJ (1992) The relative host status of rock elephant shrews Elephantulus myurus and Namaqua rock mice Aethomys namaquensis for economically important ticks. South African Journal of Zoology 27, 108114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fourie, LJ, Horak, IG and Woodall, PF (2005) Elephant shrews as hosts of immature ixodid ticks. Onderstepoort Journal of Veterinary Research 72, 293301.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Froeschke, G, van der Mescht, L, McGeoch, M and Matthee, S (2013) Life history strategy influences parasite responses to habitat fragmentation. International Journal for Parasitology 43, 11091118.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Goff, ML (1979) Host exploitation by chiggers (Acari: Trombiculidae) infesting Papua New Guinea land mammals. Pacific Insects 20, 321353.Google Scholar
Goff, ML (1983) A new genus and species of Apoloniinae (Acari: Trombiculidae) from South Africa with a key to the species in the subfamily. Bulletin de l'Institut royal des Sciences naturelles de Belgique, Entomologie 55, 15.Google Scholar
Goldberg, SR and Holshuh, HJ (1992) Ectoparasite-induced lesions in mite pockets of the Yarpow's spiny lizard, Sceloporus jarrovii (Phrynosomatidae). Journal of Wildlife Diseases 28, 537541.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greene, CE and Breitschwerdt, EB (2006) Rocky Mountain spotted fever, murine typhus-like disease, rickettsial pox, typhus, and Q fever. In Greene, C (ed.), Infectious Diseases of the Dog and Cat. St Louis, USA: Elsevier, pp. 232245.Google Scholar
Gutiérrez, R, Krasnov, B, Morick, D, Gottlieb, Y, Khokhlova, IS and Harrus, S (2015) Bartonella infection in rodents and their flea ectoparasites: an overview. Vector-Borne and Zoonotic Diseases 15, 2739.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Harasen, GLG and Randall, JW (1986) Canine Blastomycosis in Southern Saskatchewan. The Canadian Veterinary Journal 27, 375378.Google ScholarPubMed
Harrison, A, Bown, KJ and Horak, IG (2011) Detection of Anaplasma bovis in an undescribed tick species collected from the eastern rock sengi Elephantulus myurus. The Journal of Parasitology 97, 10121016.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harrison, A, Robb, GN, Bennet, NC and Horak, IG (2012) Differential feeding success of two paralysis-inducing ticks, Rhipicephalus warburtoni and Ixodes rubicundus on sympatric small mammal species, Elephantulus myurus and Micaelamys namaquensis. Veterinary Parasitology 188, 346354.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Heisch, RB, Grainger, WE and D'Souza, JSAM (1953) Results of a plague investigation in Kenya. Transactions of the Royal Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene 47, 530–521.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Heithaus, RE (1981) Seed predation by rodents on three ant-dispersed plants. Ecological Society of America 62, 136145.Google Scholar
Herrin, C and Tipton, V (1976) A systematic revision of the genus Laelaps s. str. (Acari: Mesostigmata) of the Ethiopian region. The Great Basin Naturalist 36, 113205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hillegass, MA, Waterman, JM and Roth, JD (2008) The influence of sex and sociality on parasite loads in an African ground squirrel. Behavioral Ecology 19, 10061011.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hoogstraal, H (1979) The epidemiology of tick-borne Crimean-Congo hemorrhagic fever in Asia, Europe, and Africa. Journal of Medical Entomology 15, 307417.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Horak, IG, Fourie, L, Novellie, PA and Williams, EJ (1991) Parasites of domestic and wild animals in South Africa. XXVI. The mosaic of ixodid tick infestations on birds and mammals in the Mountain Zebra National Park. Onderstepoort Journal of Veterinary Research 58, 125136.Google ScholarPubMed
Horak, IG, Spickett, AM, Braack, LEO and Penzhorn, BL (1993) Parasites of domestic and wild animals in South Africa. XXXII. Ixodid ticks on scrub hares in the Transvaal. Onderstepoort Journal of Veterinary Research 60, 163174.Google ScholarPubMed
Horak, IG, Spickett, AM, Braack, LE, Penzhorn, BL, Bagnall, RJ and Uys, AC (1995) Parasites of domestic and wild animals in South Africa. XXXIII. Ixodid ticks on scrub hares in the north-eastern regions of Northern and Eastern Transvaal and of KwaZulu-Natal. Onderstepoort Journal of Veterinary Research 62, 123131.Google ScholarPubMed
Horak, IG, Fourie, LJ and Braack, LEO (2005) Small mammals as hosts of immature ixodid ticks. Onderstepoort Journal of Veterinary Research 72, 255261.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Horak, IG, Lutermann, K, Medger, K, Apanaskevich, DA and Matthee, CA (2012) Natural hosts of the larvae of Nuttalliella sp. (N. namaqua) (Acari: Nuttalliellidae). Onderstepoort Journal of Veterinary Research 79, 12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Horak, IG, Heyne, H, Williams, R, Gallivan, GJ, Spickett, AM, Bezuidenhout, JD and Estrada-Peña, A (2018) The Ixodid Ticks (Acari: Ixodidae) of Southern Africa. Scotland, UK: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ingram, A (1927) Plague investigation in South Africa from an entomological aspect. South African Institute for Medical Research 20, 222256.Google Scholar
Johnson, PT (1960) The Anoplura of African Rodents and Insectivores. Washington, USA: U.S. Department of Agriculture. Available at doi:10.22004/ag.econ.170730.Google Scholar
Keirans, JE, Walker, JB, Horak, IG and Heyne, H (1993) Rhipicephalus exophthalmos sp. nov., a newtick species from southern Africa, and redescription of Rhipicephalus oculatus Neumann, 1901, with which it has hitherto been confused (Acari: Ixodida: Ixodidae). Onderstepoort Journal of Veterinary Research 60, 229246.Google Scholar
Kerley, GIH, Knight, MH and Erasmus, T (1990) Small mammal microhabitat use and diet in the southern Kalahari, South Africa. South African Journal of Wildlife Research 20, 123126.Google Scholar
Kilonzo, BS and Mhina, JIK (1982) The first outbreak of human plague in Lushoto district, north-east Tanzania. Transactions of the Royal Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene 76, 172177.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kilonzo, BS and Mhina, JIK (1983) Observations on the current status of plague endemicity in the western Usambara mountains, north-east Tanzania. East African Medical Journal 40, 365373.Google ScholarPubMed
Kleynhans, KP (1969) Descriptions of Hoplopleura aethomydis n. sp. and of the male of Polyplax solivaga (Anoplura: Hoplopleuridae). Onderstepoort Journal of Veterinary Research 36, 299302.Google Scholar
Klukowski, M (2004) Seasonal changes in abundance of host-seeking chiggers (Acari: Trombiculidae) and infestations on Fence Lizards, Sceloporus undulatus. Journal of Herpetology 38, 141144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krantz, GW and Walter, DE (2009) A Manual of Acarology, 3rd Edn. Lubbock, USA: Texas Tech University Press.Google Scholar
Lawrence, RF (1949) The larval trombiculid mites of South African vertebrates. Annals of the Natal Museum 11, 405486.Google Scholar
Lecompte, E, Fichet-Calvet, E, Daffis, S, Koulémou, K, Sylla, O, Kourouma, F, Doré, A, Soropogui, B, Aniskin, V, Allali, B, Kan, SK, Lalis, A, Koivogui, L, Günther, S, Denys, C and Ter Meulen, J (2006) Mastomys natalensis and Lassa fever, West Africa. Emerging Infectious Diseases 12, 19711974.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ledger, JA (1980) The Arthropod Parasites of Vertebrates in Africa South of the Sahara. Volume IV. Phthiraptera (Insecta). Johannesburg, South African: Institute for Medical Research.Google Scholar
Lindenfors, P, Nunn, CL, Jones, KE, Cunningham, AA, Sechrest, W and Gittleman, JL (2007) Parasite species richness in carnivores: effects of host body mass, latitude, geographical range and population density. Global Ecology and Biogeography 16, 114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lutermann, H, Carpenter-Kling, T, Ueckermann, EA, Gutjahr, G and Bennett, NC (2015) Ectoparasite burdens of the Damaraland mole-rat (Fukomys damarensis) from southern Africa. Journal of Parasitology 101, 666670.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lutermann, H, Archer, EK, Ueckermann, EA, Junker, K and Bennett, NC (2020) Surveys and literature review of parasites among African mole-rats: proposing hypotheses for the roles of geography, ecology, and host phylogenetic relatedness in parasite sharing. The Journal of Parasitology 106, 3845.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Macdonald, DW, Mathews, F and Berdoy, ML (1999) The behaviour and ecology of Rattus norvegicus: from opportunism to Kamikaze tendencies. In Singleton, GR, Hinds, LA, Leirsand, H and Zhang, Z (eds), Ecologically Based Management of Rodent Pests. ACIAR Monograph. Canberra, Australia: Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research, pp. 4980.Google Scholar
Mahmood, T, Niazi, F and Nadeem, MS (2013) Diet composition of Asiatic jackal (Canis aureus) in Margallah Hills National Park, Islamabad, Pakistan. Journal of Animal and Plant Sciences 23, 444456.Google Scholar
Makundi, RS, Kilonzo, BS and Massawe, AW (2003) Interaction between rodent species in agro-forestry habitats in the western Usambara mountains, northeast Tanzania, and its potential for plague transmission to humans. In Singleton, GR, Hinds, LA, Krebs, CJ and Spratt, DM (eds), Rats, Mice and People: Rodent Biology and Management. Canberra, Australia: Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research, pp. 2024.Google Scholar
Malan, K (2015) Taxonomy and Ecology of Parasitic Chigger Mites (Acari: Trombiculidae) on Small Mammals in South Africa (MSc thesis). Stellenbosch University, Stellenbosch, South Africa.Google Scholar
Malenke, JR, Johnson, KP and Clayton, DH (2009) Host specialization differentiates cryptic species of feather-feeding lice. Evolution 63, 14271438.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mans, BJ, de Klerk, D, Pienaar, R and Latif, AA (2011) Nuttalliella namaqua: a living fossil and closest relative to the ancestral tick lineage: implications for the evolution of blood-feeding in ticks. PLoS ONE 6, Article e23675.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Matjila, PT, Penzhorn, BL, Bekker, CPJ, Nijhof, AM and Jongejan, F (2004) Confirmation of occurrence of Babesia canis vogeli in domestic dogs in South Africa. Veterinary Parasitology 122, 119125.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Matjila, PT, Leisewitz, AL, Jongejan, F and Penzhorn, BL (2008) Molecular detection of tick-borne protozoal and ehrlichial infections in domestic dogs in South Africa. Veterinary Parasitology 155, 152157.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Matthee, S and Ueckermann, EA (2008) Ectoparasites of rodents in Southern Africa: a new species of Androlaelaps Berlese, 1903 (Acari: Parasitiformes: Laelapidae) from Rhabdomys pumilio (Sparrman) (Rodentia: Muridae). Systematic Parasitology 70, 185190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Matthee, S, Horak, IG, Beaucournu, JC, Durden, LA, Ueckermann, EA and McGeoch, MA (2007) Epifaunistic arthropod parasites of the four-striped’ mouse, Rhabdomys pumilio, in the Western Cape Province, South Africa. Journal of Parasitology 93, 4759.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Matthee, S, Horak, IG, van der Mescht, L, Ueckermann, EA and Radloff, FGT (2010) Ectoparasite diversity on rodents at de Hoop Nature Reserve, Western Cape Province. African Zoology 45, 213224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Matthee, S, Stekolnikov, AA, van der Mescht, L, Froeschke, G and Morand, S (2020) The diversity and distribution of chigger mites associated with rodents in the South African savanna. Parasitology 147, 10381047.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mayamba, A, Byamungu, RM, Leirs, H, Moses, I, Makundi, RH, Kimaro, DN, Massawe, AW, Kifumba, D, Nakiyemba, A, Mdangi, ME, Isabirye, BE and Mulungu, LS (2021) Population and breeding patterns of the pest rodent: Mastomys natalensis in a maize dominated agroecosystem in Lake Victoria Crescent zone, Eastern Uganda. African Zoology 56, 7684.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mohr, CO (1947) Notes on chiggers, rats and habitats on new Guinea and Luzon. Ecology 28, 194199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Monadjem, A (1997) Stomach contents of 19 species of small mammals from Swaziland. South African Journal of Zoology 32, 2326.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Monadjem, A, Taylor, PJ, Denys, C and Cotterill, FPD (2015) Rodents of Sub-Saharan Africa: A Biogeographic and Taxonomic Synthesis, 1st Edn. Berline, Germany: De Gruyter. Available at doi:10.1515/9783110301915.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Muteka, SP, Chimimba, CT and Bennett, NC (2006) Reproductive seasonality in the Tete veld rat (Aethomys ineptus) (Rodentia: Muridae) from southern Africa. Journal of Zoology 270, 314322.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Neitz, WO (1956) A consolidation of our knowledge of the transmission of tick-borne disease. Onderstepoort Journal of Veterinary Research 27, 115163.Google Scholar
Nielsen, DH, Robbins, RG and Rueda, LM (2021) Annotated world checklist of the Trombiculidae and Leeuwenhoekiidae (1758–2021) (Acari: Trombiculoidea), with notes on nomenclature, taxonomy, and distribution. Zootaxa 4967, 1243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Norton, RA, Kethley, JB, Johnston, DE and O'Connor, BM (1993) Phylogenetic perspectives on genetic systems and reproductive modes of mites. In Wrensch, DL and Ebbert, MA (eds), Evolution and Diversity of Sex Ratio in Insects and Mites. New York, USA: Chapman & Hall, pp. 899.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pap, PL, Adam, C, Vágási, CI, Benko, Z and Vincze, O (2013) Sex ratio and sexual dimorphism of three lice species with contrasting prevalence parasitizing the house sparrow. Journal of Parasitology 99, 2430.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Patrick, MJ and Wilson, WD (1995) Parasites of the Abert's squirrel (Sciurus aberti) and red squirrel (Tamiasciurus hudsonicus) of New Mexico. The Journal of Parasitology 81, 321324.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Perkins, SL, Martinsen, ES and Falk, BG (2011) Do molecules matter more than morphology? Promises and pitfalls in parasites. Parasitology 138, 16641674.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Petney, TN, Horak, IG, Howell, DJ and Meyer, S (2004) Striped mice, Rhabdomys pumilio, and other murid rodents as hosts for immature ixodid ticks in the Eastern Cape Province. Onderstepoort Journal of Veterinary Research 71, 313318.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Poulin, R and Keeney, DB (2008) Host specificity under molecular and experimental scrutiny. Trends in Parasitology 24, 2428.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Preston, CR (1990) Distribution of raptors foraging in relation to prey biomass and habitat structure. The Condor 92, 107112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Radovsky, FJ (1985) Evolution of mammalian mesostigmate mites. In Kim, KC (ed.), Coevolution of Parasitic Arthropods and Mammals. New York, USA: Wiley, pp. 441504.Google Scholar
Radovsky, FJ (1994) The evolution of parasitism and the distribution of some dermanyssoid mites (Mesostigmata) on vertebrate hosts. In Houck, A (ed.), Mites: Ecological and Evolutionary Analyses of Life-History Patterns. New York, USA: Chapman & Hall, pp. 186217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roberts, A (1951) The Mammals of South Africa. Johannesburg, South Africa: Trustees of the Mammals of South Africa Book Fund.Google Scholar
Romeo, C, Pisanu, B, Ferrari, N, Basset, F, Tillon, L, Wauters, LA, Martinoli, A, Saino, N and Chapuis, JL (2013) Macroparasite community of the Eurasian red squirrel (Sciurus vulgaris): poor species richness and diversity. Parasitology Research 112, 35273536.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rozsa, L (1997) Patterns in the abundance of avian lice (Phthiraptera: Amblycera, Ischnocera). Journal of Avian Biology 28, 249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rozsa, L, Rekasi, J and Reiczigel, J (1996) Relationship of host coloniality to the population ecology of avian lice (Insecta: Phthiraptera). The Journal of Animal Ecology 65, 242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Russo, IRM, Chimimba, CT and Bloomer, P (2010) Bioregion heterogeneity correlates with extensive mitochondrial DNA diversity in the Namaqua rock mouse, Micaelamys namaquensis (Rodentia: Muridae) from southern Africa – evidence for a species complex. BMC Evolutionary Biology 10, 307.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Segerman, J (1995) Siphonaptera of Southern Africa: Handbook for the Identification of Fleas. Johannesburg, South Africa: Publications of the South African Institute for Medical Research.Google Scholar
Shatrov, AB and Kudryashova, NI (2006) Taxonomy, life cycles and the origin of parasitism in trombiculid mites. In Morand, S, Krasnov, BR and Poulin, R (eds), Micromammals and Macroparasites: From Evolutionary Ecology to Management. Japan: Springer, pp. 119140. doi:10.1007/978-4-431-36025-4_8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shepherd, AJ and Narro, SP (1983) The genus Ornithonyssus Sambon 1928 in the Ethiopian region: description of a new species and a redescription of O. voseinnesi (Zumpt and Till. 1953) (Acarina. Mesostigmata). Acarologia 24, 347353.Google Scholar
Shvydka, S, Sarabeev, V, Estruch, VD and Cadarso-Suárez, C (2018) Optimum sample size to estimate mean parasite abundance in fish parasite surveys. Helminthologia 55, 5259.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Skinner, JD and Chimimba, CT (2005) The Mammals of the Southern African Sub-region, 3rd Edn. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Available at doi:10.1017/cbo9781107340992.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Soliman, S, Marzouk, AS, Main, AJ and Montasser, AA (2001) Effect of sex, size, and age of commensal rat hosts on the infestation parameters of their ectoparasites in a rural area of Egypt. Journal of Parasitology 87, 13081316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sonenshine, DE (1993) Part IV. Ecology, behavior, and host–parasite interactions. In Sonenshine, DE (ed.), Biology of Ticks, vol. 2. New York, USA: Oxford University, p. 465.Google Scholar
Starik, N, Mbango, OK, Bengsch, S, Göttert, T and Zeller, U (2020) Landscape transformation influences responses of terrestrial small mammals to land use intensity in north-central Namibia. Diversity 12, 119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stekolnikov, AA (2018) Taxonomy and distribution of African chiggers (Acariformes, Trombiculidae). European Journal of Taxonomy 395, 1233.Google Scholar
Stekolnikov, AA and Matthee, S (2019) Six new and one little known species of chigger mites (Acariformes: Trombiculidae) from South Africa. Systematic and Applied Acarology 24, 435466.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stekolnikov, AA and Matthee, S (2022) Two new species of the chigger mite genus Tateracarus (Acariformes: Trombiculidae). International Journal of Acarology 48, 256265.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stockwell, DRB and Peterson, AT (2002) Effects of sample size on accuracy of species distribution models. Ecological Modelling 148, 113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Swanepoel, R, Shepherd, AJ, Leman, PA, McGillivray, GM, Erasmus, MJ, Searle, LA and Gill, DE (1987) Epidemiologic and clinical features of Crimean-Congo hemorrhagic fever in southern Africa. American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene 36, 120132.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Taufflieb, R (1954) Some new species of Laelaps (Ararina: Laelaptidae) from the middle Congo (French Equatorial Africa). Annales de Parasitologie Humaine et Comparée 29, 436446.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taufflieb, R (1964) Notes sur les Laelaps du Congo Leopoldville d'apres les collections du museede Tervuren. Revue de Zoologie et de Botanique Africaines 69, 377383.Google Scholar
Taufflieb, R and Mouchet, J (1956) Deux nouvelles especes de Laelaps (Acarina: Laelaptidae). Annales de Parasitologie Humaine et Comparée 31, 302307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Theiler, G (1962) The Ixodoidea parasites of vertebrates in Africa south of the Sahara (Ethiopian region). Project S. 9958. Report to the Director of Veterinary Services.Google Scholar
Till, WM (1963) Ethiopian mites of the genus Androlaelaps Berlese s. lat. (Acari: Mesostigmata). Bulletin of the Natural History Museum. Zoology 10, 1104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Traub, R and Wisseman, CL (1974) The ecology of chigger-borne rickettsiosis (scrub typhus). Journal of Medical Entomology 11, 237303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tsai, KH, Lu, HY, Huang, JH, Wang, PJ, Wang, HC, Huang, CG, Wu, WJ and Shu, PY (2009) Rickettsia felis in cat fleas in Taiwan. Vector-Borne and Zoonotic Diseases 9, 561563.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
van der Mescht, L and Matthee, S (2017) Host range and distribution of small mammal fleas in South Africa, with a focus on species of medical and veterinary importance. Medical and Veterinary Entomology 31, 402413.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Vercammen-Grandjean, PH and Langston, R (1976) The Chigger Mites of the World (Acarina: Trombiculidae et Leeuwenhoekiidae). Vol. III. Leptotrombidium Complex. San Francisco, CA, USA: George Williams Hooper Foundation, University of California.Google Scholar
Walker, JB (1990) Two new species of ticks from southern Africa whose adults parasitize the feet of ungulates: Rhipicephalus lounsburyi n. sp. and Rhipicephalus neumanni n. sp. (Ixoidoidea, Ixodidae). Onderstepoort Journal of Veterinary Research 57, 5775.Google Scholar
Walker, JB, Keirans, JE and Horak, I (2000) The Genus Rhipicephalus (Acari, Ixodidae): A Guide to the Brown Ticks of the World. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilson, KNBO, Dobson, AP, Merler, S, Poglayen, G, Randolph, SE, Read, AF and Skorping, A (2001) Chapter 2: heterogeneities in macroparasite infections: patterns and processes. In Hudson, PJ, Rizzoli, A, Grenfell, BT, Heesterbeek, H and Dobson, AP (eds), The Ecology of Wildlife Diseases. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, pp. 644.Google Scholar
Withers, PC, Louw, GN and Henschel, J (1980) Energetics and water relations of Namib desert rodents. South African Journal of Zoology 15, 131137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Woodall, PF and Mackie, RI (1987) Caecal size and function in the rock elephant shrew Elephantulus myurus (insectivora, macroscelididae) and the Namaqua rock mouse Aethomys namaquensis (Rodentia, Muridae). Comparative Biochemistry and Physiology – Part A: Physiology 87, 311314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zumpt, F (1950) Descriptions of two new Laelaps species from South Africa with a key to the Ethiopian species of this genus (Acarina: Laelaptidae). The South African Journal of Medical Sciences 15, 7782.Google Scholar
Zumpt, F (1961) The arthropod parasites of vertebrates in Africa south of the Sahara (Ethiopian region). Vol. I (Chelicerata). Annals and Magazine of Natural History 4, 384.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Figure 0

Fig. 1. Sampling localities (n = 12) and biomes where Micaelamys namaquensis (n = 216) were trapped in South Africa during 2017–2018.

Figure 1

Table 1. Locality information, sample size per locality and sampling period for Micaelamys namaquensis (n = 216) trapped in South Africa during 2017–2018

Figure 2

Table 2. Ectoparasite taxa collected from Micaelamys namaquensis (n = 216) trapped across South Africa during 2017–2018

Figure 3

Table 3. Infestation parameters for the ectoparasite taxa recorded on Micaelamys namaquensis (n = 216) in South Africa during 2017–2018

Figure 4

Table 4. Mean abundance (±s.e.) and occurrence per locality of individual ectoparasite taxa recovered from Micaelamys namaquensis (n = 216) across South Africa during 2017–2018

Figure 5

Table 5. Per locality prevalence (%) of individual ectoparasite taxa recovered from Micaelamys namaquensis (n = 216) across South Africa during 2017–2018

Figure 6

Fig. 2. Occurrence records (n = 14) for Hoplopleura cf. patersoni and Polyplax praomydis recorded from Micaelamys namaquensis in South Africa (data from the present study; Fagir et al., 2014; Bothma et al., 2020, 2021).

Figure 7

Fig. 3. Occurrence record (n = 14) for Androlaelaps rhabdomysi and Laealaps fritzumpti recorded from Micaelamys namaquensis and Rhabdomys pumilio (data from the present study; Matthee and Ueckermann, 2008; Fagir et al., 2014; S. Matthee, unpublished data).

Figure 8

Table 6. Summary of parasitope preference, presented as prevalence (%), for chiggers recovered from Micaelamys namaquensis (n = 41) at 2 localities in South Africa during June 2018

Figure 9

Table 7. Summary of ectoparasite taxa associated with Micaelamys namaquensis (previously Aethomys namaquensis) to date

Supplementary material: File

Stevens et al. supplementary material

Tables S1-S3

Download Stevens et al. supplementary material(File)
File 18.8 KB