Spatial variation in risk for tick-borne diseases in residential areas of Dutchess County, New York

Although human exposure to the ticks that transmit Lyme-disease bacteria is widely considered to occur around people's homes, most studies of variation in tick abundance and infection are undertaken outside residential areas. Consequently, the patterns of variation in risk of human exposure to tick-borne infections in these human-dominated landscapes are poorly understood. Here, we report the results of four years of sampling for tick abundance, tick infection, tick encounters, and tick-borne disease reports on residential properties nested within six neighborhoods in Dutchess County, New York, USA, an area of high incidence for Lyme and other tick-borne diseases. All properties were within neighborhoods that had been randomly assigned as placebo controls in The Tick Project; hence, none were treated to reduce tick abundance during the period of investigation, providing a unique dataset of natural variation within and between neighborhoods. We estimated the abundance of host-seeking blacklegged ticks (Ixodes scapularis) in three types of habitats on residential properties-forests, lawns, and gardens. In forest and lawn habitats, some neighborhoods had consistently higher tick abundance. Properties within neighborhoods also varied consistently between years, suggesting hot spots and cold spots occurring at a small (~ 1-hectare) spatial scale. Across neighborhoods, the abundance of nymphal ticks was explained by neither the amount of forest in that neighborhood, nor by the degree of forest fragmentation. The proportion of ticks infected with three common tick-borne pathogens did not differ significantly between neighborhoods. We observed no effect of tick abundance on human encounters with ticks, nor on either human or pet cases of tick-borne diseases. However, the number of encounters between ticks and outdoor pets in a neighborhood was negatively correlated with the abundance of questing ticks in that neighborhood. Our results reinforce the need to understand how human behavior and neglected ecological factors affect variation in human encounters with ticks and cases of tick-borne disease in residential settings.