Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-l7hp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T12:17:42.688Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

The seasonal and diurnal activities of individual sheep ticks (Ixodes ricinus L.)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 April 2009

A. D. Lees
Affiliation:
Agricultural Research Council Unit of Insect Physiology, Zoological Department, University of Cambridge and Department of Agriculture, King's College, Newcastle upon Tyne.
A. Milne
Affiliation:
Agricultural Research Council Unit of Insect Physiology, Zoological Department, University of Cambridge and Department of Agriculture, King's College, Newcastle upon Tyne.

Extract

1. Activity in Ixodes ricinus was studied by laying down newly emerged ticks in natural clumps of vegetation from which all hosts (with the possible exception of ‘mice’) were excluded. After a period of quiescence the ticks climbed to the ‘active’ position at the vegetation tips. Activity was assessed either by simple observation (in adults which were marked individually) or by ‘brushing’ the vegetation with the hands (nymphs and larvae). 52 % of the adults and 44 % of the nymphs were recovered.

2. The seasonal activity behaviour was followed in three series of ticks set out during May, July and October 1945. The results were used in interpreting the time relations of seasonal activity in ‘wild’ populations. The timing of the activity cycle appears to be largely determined by the availability of unfed ticks rather than by the prevailing meteorological conditions.

3. The diurnal pattern of behaviour in active ticks was closely examined during a 24 hr. period. Many remained at the tips without moving. The others began or ended a phase of activity by night or by day; but among these, the proportion ending a phase at night was significantly greater. This is the main reason for the previously reported diurnal fluctuation of activity in a tick population.

4. Two hundred and seven adult ticks spent, on an average, a total of 9 days at the vegetation tips (individual limits 1 and 54 days). This activity was spread over an ‘active period’ (interval between first and last appearances) averaging 30 days. Very active ticks rarely remained continuously at the tips. The mean number of visits to the tips was 4 (limits 1 and 19), each lasting for an average of 2·5 days. Where long spells of activity alternate with short periods of quiescence, the behaviour is probably regulated by the humidity reaction, the quiescent phase providing an opportunity for restoring the depleted water balance.

5. Newly moulted adult ticks possess reserves of fat adequate for many months of quiescence. During activity these reserves are exhausted in a few weeks or even days. Duration of survival mainly depended on whether the onset of activity was immediate or delayed. Some adults remained quiescent for 1 year before becoming active for the first time.

6. Several types of orientations were observed in the field. In attaining the position at the tips favourable for encountering a host, the gravity response (upward-turning near the tip) is of major importance. The tick avoids wind and direct sunlight by sheltering behind its supporting stem. In sensing the approach of a ‘host’ (the observer's finger) the perception of eddies of warm air is particularly significant. The response (questing, then orientation) is elicited much less readily if the stimulus is applied from the leeward.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1951

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Arthur, D. R. (1948). Bull. Ent. Res. 39, 321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campbell, J. A. (1950). 14th Nat. Vet. Congr. (1949).Google Scholar
Edwards, E. E. & Arthur, D. R. (1947). Parasitology, 38, 72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lees, A. D. (1946). Parasitology, 37, 1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lees, A. D. (1948). J. Exp. Biol. 25, 145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lees, A. D. (1950). Unpublished work.Google Scholar
MacLeod, J. (1939). Bull. Ent. Res. 30, 103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mellanby, K. (1939). Proc. Roy. Soc. B, 127, 473.Google Scholar
Milne, A. (1943). Ann. Appl. Biol. 30, 240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Milne, A. (1945 a). Parasitology, 36, 142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Milne, A. (1945 b). Parasitology, 36, 153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Milne, A. (1946). Parasitology, 37, 75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Milne, A. (1947 a). Parasitology, 38, 27.Google Scholar
Milne, A. (1947 b). Parasitology, 38, 34.Google Scholar
Milne, A. (1948). Ann. Appl. Biol. 35, 369.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Milne, A. (1949). Parasitology, 39, 173.Google Scholar
Milne, A. (1950 a). Parasitology, 40, 14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Milne, A. (1950 b). Parasitology, 40, 35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Philip, C. B. (1937). U.S. Publ. Hlth Reps. 52, 16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, C. N., Cole, M. M. & Gouck, H. K. (1946). Tech. Bull. no. 905, U.S. Dep. Agric. Washington.Google Scholar