Rhipicephalus sanguineus (Latreille, 1806)

Petney, Trevor N., Boulanger, Nathalie, Saijuntha, Weerachai, Chitimia-Dobler, Lidia, Pfeffer, Martin, Eamudomkarn, Chatanun, Andrews, Ross H., Ahamad, Mariana, Putthasorn, Noppadon, Muders, Senta V., Petney, David A. & Robbins, Richard G., 2019, Ticks (Argasidae, Ixodidae) and tick-borne diseases of continental Southeast Asia, Zootaxa 4558 (1), pp. 1-89: 35-36

publication ID

http://doi.org/ 10.11646/zootaxa.4558.1.1

publication LSID




persistent identifier


treatment provided by


scientific name

Rhipicephalus sanguineus (Latreille, 1806)


Rhipicephalus sanguineus (Latreille, 1806)  

The name “ R. sanguineus   ” is used for a group of species occurring worldwide on dogs ( Nava et al. 2015; Hekimoğlu et al. 2016). Confusion as to which taxon represents R. sanguineus sensu   stricto has recently been clarified with the designation of a neotype from France, the location of the specimens used for the original description (Nava et al. 2018).

This group is being investigated by a number of institutions, and current information suggests that at least two main taxa are present: a temperate and a tropical one. Evidence from China indicates that the species found there is probably closely related to, but different from, that found in North America ( Liu et al. 2013). Ticks classified as R. sanguineus   from China were found to fall into either clade III, which includes R. guilhoni   sequences, or clade IV, with R. turanicus   sequences, in the R. sanguineus   group as defined by Hekimoğlu et al. (2016). Currently, very little information is available on the genetic characterization of the Southeast Asia taxon (or taxa). Specimens from Thailand (labelled from both Bangkok and Phuket, and from a laboratory colony) fall into the tropical form, also found in Taiwan, Brazil, Mozambique and Cuba by molecular analysis using 12S and 16S rDNA sequences (Sanchez et al. 2016). Hekimoğlu et al. (2016) found that the tropical strain from South America showed a strong molecular similarity to R. camicasi   from Africa. This species is clearly different from the temperate R. sanguineus   , and the diseases transmitted by the two species may differ. Therefore, evidence for the transmission of tick-borne diseases should be accepted only for data from continental Southeast Asia.

Rhipicephalus sanguineus   sensu lato is the most common tick on domestic dogs in continental Southeast Asia ( Petney and Keirans 1996b). It is known from Cambodia ( Inpankaew et al. 2016), Lao PDR ( Wilson 1970; Kernif et al. 2012), peninsular Malaysia ( Watanabe et al. 2015; Koh et al. 2016), Myanmar ( Bhattacharjee 1939; Petney and Keirans 1996), Thailand ( Tanskul et al. 1983) and Vietnam ( Grokhovskaya and Hoe 1968; Kolonin 1992). Where dogs are common, R. sanguineus   populations can reach high densities ( Grokhovskaya and Hoe 1968). Control can be obtained by reducing populations of stray dogs ( Theis and Franti 1971).

All life history stages, as well as the genetic characterization, are described in Nava et al. (2018).