Comparison of acarological risk metrics derived from active and passive surveillance and their concordance with tick-borne disease incidence

Tick-borne diseases continue to threaten human health across the United States. Both active and passive tick surveillance can complement human case surveillance, providing spatio-temporal information on when and where humans are at risk for encounters with ticks and tick-borne pathogens. However, little work has been done to assess the concordance of the acarological risk metrics from each surveillance method. We used data on Ixodes scapularis and its associated human pathogens from Connecticut (2019–2021) collected through active collections (drag sampling) or passive submissions from the public to compare county estimates of tick and pathogen presence, infection prevalence, and tick abundance by life stage. Between the surveillance strategies, we found complete agreement in estimates of tick and pathogen presence, high concordance in infection prevalence estimates for Anaplasma phagocytophilum, Borrelia burgdorferi sensu stricto, and Babesia microti, but no consistent relationships between actively and passively derived estimates of tick abundance or abundance of infected ticks by life stage. We also compared nymphal metrics (i.e., pathogen prevalence in nymphs, nymphal abundance, and abundance of infected nymphs) with reported incidence of Lyme disease, anaplasmosis, and babesiosis, but did not find any consistent relationships with any of these metrics. The small spatial and temporal scale for which we had consistently collected active and passive data limited our ability to find significant relationships. Findings are likely to differ if examined across a broader spatial or temporal coverage with greater variation in acarological and epidemiological outcomes. Our results indicate similar outcomes between some actively and passively derived tick surveillance metrics (tick and pathogen presence, pathogen prevalence), but comparisons were variable for abundance estimates.