Perceptions, Knowledge, and Attitudes of Communal Farmers Toward Tick-Borne Diseases: Review of South African Case Studies

Abstract

Tick-borne diseases (TBDs) pose a significant threat to livestock productivity and rural livelihoods in South Africa, particularly among resource-poor communal farmers. This narrative review synthesises findings from case studies on communal farmers’ knowledge, attitudes, and practices (KAPs) toward TBDs and their control. The analysis reveals that while many farmers can identify TBDs and their symptoms, significant gaps exist in understanding acaricide resistance and effective tick management. Socioeconomic factors, including age, gender, education, and access to veterinary services, strongly influence knowledge and practices. Indigenous ethnoveterinary practices are commonly used alongside conventional methods, although their efficacy remains understudied. The review emphasises the importance of integrated pest management, participatory approaches, and targeted awareness campaigns. A One Health framework is recommended to enhance surveillance, collaboration, and sustainable TBD control. Empowering farmers through training and inclusive communication strategies is crucial for mitigating the impacts of TBDs on communal farming systems.

1. Introduction

Ticks and tick-borne diseases (TBDs) pose a significant threat to livestock production worldwide [1]. They are responsible for substantial economic losses in cattle production in most African countries, where most cattle owners are the resource-poor communal farmers [2]. The abundance of ticks and tick-borne pathogens is determined by biotic and abiotic factors such as host presence, rainfall, humidity and temperature [3,4]. The most prevalent tick-borne pathogens in Africa, particularly in Zambia, include Babesia bovis, Babesia bigemina, Anaplasma spp., Ehrlichia ruminantium, Theileria parva, Theileria mutans, and Theileria taurotragi [5]. Furthermore, tick-borne pathogens prevalent in South African provinces include Babesia bovis, Babesia bigemina, Anaplasma spp., and Theileria spp., as shown in

Table 1. Key tick-borne pathogens, their associated diseases, primary tick vectors, and geographic distribution in South Africa.

Pathogen	Disease	Vector	Commonly Affected Region	References
Babesia bovis	Africa redwater	Rhipicephalus decoloratus	North-West, Limpopo, KwaZulu-Natal, Mpumalanga, Gauteng	[8]
B. bigemina	Babesiosis	R. decoloratus	North-West, Limpopo, KwaZulu-Natal, Mpumalanga, Gauteng	[8]
Anaplasma spp.	Anaplasmosis	R. decoloratus, R. microplus and R. evertsi evertsi	North-West, Limpopo, KwaZulu-Natal, Mpumalanga, Gauteng	[9]
Ehrlichia ruminantium	Heartwater	Amblyomma hebraeum	KwaZulu-Natal, the west of the Eastern Cape province (ECP), Gauteng, Mpumalanga, and the east of the North-West province	[10]
Theileria spp.	Theileriosis	A. hebraeum and R. microplus	North-West, Limpopo, KwaZulu-Natal, Mpumalanga, Gauteng	[9]

. These pathogens cause major TBDs, including babesiosis, anaplasmosis, heartwater, and theileriosis, which cause significant losses in cattle production by reducing productivity and fertility and leading to mortality [6]. Animals infected with Babesia parasites often manifest haemolytic anaemia, but signs may vary depending on the agent and host factors, such as age and breed type [7].

The use of communal livestock farming as a tool to reduce unemployment and increase food security has the highest prospects of success in South Africa, particularly in the Northern Cape, Eastern Cape and Limpopo provinces [11]. However, the poorly resourced communal farmers who keep their livestock on natural pastures to meet a range of needs are more vulnerable to the negative impacts of TBDs [12]. Communal farmers face constraints in accessing veterinary services and information regarding the prevention and treatment of TBDs [13]. They primarily rely on conventional medicine to address the limitations of tick-borne pathogens, given the costs associated with accessing veterinary drugs and services [14]. Currently, TBDs are controlled by spraying, pouring, and dipping animals with acaricides to eliminate tick vectors [15,16]. The South African government’s initiatives are also in place to supply acaricides to communal farmers and provide dip tanks to communities. Nevertheless, in most African countries, this initiative continues to endanger emerging rural farmers, as the untimely and excessive application of chemical acaricides has led to tick pathogens developing resistance [17,18]. This has highlighted the need for increased monitoring, appropriate use of acaricides, improved farmer support services, and a better understanding of farmers’ perceptions of emerging acaricide resistance [16].

To effectively control TBDs, it is crucial to understand farmers’ perceptions of the TBDs. Participatory epidemiological surveys can achieve this by engaging farmers in solving veterinary-related problems [19]. Some study findings have shown that in rural areas, older farmers are more knowledgeable about animal diseases and better management practices, despite having a lower level of education [20]. The majority of farmers have 15 years or more of farming experience and are older than 40 years [21]. Men have greater knowledge about ticks and TBDs as they have had more opportunities to attend government meetings and training programs. In contrast, women were often less favoured, as they were perceived as being suited for household responsibilities [22].

The currently held concept of TBDs control has to be revised and should consider the indigenous knowledge of livestock keepers [23]. Literature search on the involvement of farmers in studying the epidemiology of diseases in South Africa emphasised the need to investigate and consolidate findings on TBDs affecting livestock, particularly cattle [24], understanding the distribution of tick pathogens [25], and raising public awareness, particularly among smallholder farmers in specific geographical areas [26]. Therefore, this review summarises publications on the perceptions, knowledge and attitudes of communal farmers toward TBDs in South Africa, and the implications for disease prevention and control. Furthermore, it identifies and documents gaps in current knowledge and perceptions regarding TBD prevention techniques.

2. Tick-Borne Diseases Affecting Communal Livestock Systems

2.1. Overview of Major TBDs Affecting Livestock

The predominant TBDs in South Africa include heartwater (caused by E. ruminantium), which is transmitted by A. hebraeum, bovine babesiosis (caused by B. bigemina and B. bovis), and anaplasmosis (resulting from A. marginale), both of which are transmitted by R. decoloratus and R. microplus [27,28]. Since vegetation type can influence tick species distribution by affecting host variety or by creating distinct microclimatic conditions that may impact tick species survival [29], it also affects TBDs. Controlling the vector ticks is the most effective method that communal farmers use to manage TBDs. Communal farmers possess knowledge about TBDs, as many can identify tick diseases by their names or recognise their clinical and post-mortem symptoms in their indigenous languages [2]. Despite the known economic and health risks posed by TBDs in communal farming systems, as shown in

Table 2. Association of common tick species and disease risks with major vegetation types in South Africa.

Vegetation Type	Tick Species	Common Hosts	Disease Risk	References
Sweetveld	R. appendiculatus	Cattle	East Coast Fever	[31]
	Hyalomma rufipes	Cattle, sheep, goats, horses, large herbivores, birds, and scrub hares	Bovine babesiosis and bovine anaplasmosis	[32,33]
	A. hebraeum	Cattle, sheep, goats, large wild ruminants (e.g., giraffes, buffalo, eland), warthogs, and rhinoceroses	Heartwater	[32]
Sourveld	R. microplus	Domestic cattle, goats, eland and grey rhebok	Babesiosis
	R. decoloratus	Cattle, impalas, eland, nyalas, bushbuck, kudu, horses, and zebras	African babesiosis, anaplasmosis

below, there is a limited empirical dataset on the relationship between vegetation type, farmer knowledge, and the prevalence of TBDs in South Africa [30].

2.1.1. Babesiosis

Epidemiology

Bovine babesiosis is recognised as the second most common hemo-protozoan parasitic disease, with a broad geographic distribution of tick vectors and targeted changes in the tick niche [34,35,36]. Globally, bovine babesiosis is caused by six parasitic protozoan species, namely, B. bigemina, B. bovis, B. divergens, B. major, B. occultans and B. argentina, with B. bigemina being the most common and B. bovis being the most pathogenic [37]. B. bovis and B. bigemina are distributed in Asia, Africa, Australia, Central and South America and Southern Europe [38,39]. R. annulatus and R. microplus are the significant vectors of these pathogens, whereas R. decoloratus only spreads B. bigemina [40]. As shown in Figure 1, the tick vectors are the definitive host, and they acquire and transmit these pathogens during blood meals.

Babesiosis primarily affects cattle, goats, sheep, horses, dogs, cats, and humans [42]. Peak levels of tick populations can also influence seasonal variation in the occurrence of clinical babesiosis [43]. Babesia species biologically spread through vectors via transovarian and transstadial transmission [44]. Both B. bigemina and B. bovis can be spread by the Rhipicephalus ticks; with nymphs and adults spreading B. bigemina, whereas only tick larvae spread B. bovis [12]. Additionally, infected needles and syringes, blood transfusions, and surgical instruments can mechanically spread it [45]. The clinical signs of babesiosis include emaciation, ataxia, loss of appetite, weight loss, progressive hemolytic anaemia, jaundice, heart and respiratory rate issues, and decreased milk yield [12].

Farmer Awareness

Farmers in a study by Sungirai, Moyo [46] were able to describe the clinical and post-mortem signs associated with TBDs, such as babesiosis, caused by ticks in Zimbabwe. Also, a strong correlation was found between high prevalence and awareness of diseases [47]. However, in the study, farmers incorrectly identified mastitis, joint ill and foot rot as TBDs. Despite these anomalies, farmers seemed to be aware of the major TBDs affecting livestock in the area. This corroborates the findings of [48,49], who observed an increase in farmers’ knowledge of livestock diseases. Research by Nyangiwe and Matthee [50] highlighted that farmers regarded babesiosis as the most common TBD within and between vegetation types in the ECP.

Control and Prevention

Prevention of babesiosis and precise diagnosis are the keys to controlling this disease [51]. Babesiosis prevention and control can be maintained through immunisation, chemoprophylaxis, and vaccination [52]. However, the rapid emergence of tick acaricidal resistance and the threat of acaricide residues in the food chain make the use of acaricides as a tick control technique challenging, and thus also make the prevention of bovine babesiosis challenging [42].

2.1.2. Anaplasmosis

Epidemiology

Anaplasmosis is one of the most significant tick-borne diseases of ruminants globally, as it accounts for high morbidity and mortality in cattle herds, which results in substantial financial losses for the livestock sectors in tropical and subtropical regions [53]. Anaplasmosis is primarily caused by the causative agent, A. marginale, in cattle, which infects erythrocytes and causes erythrophagocytosis and anaemia [54]. A. marginale is primarily harmful to cattle, but also to other ruminants among domestic livestock [55]. The main vectors of this disease are ticks, which act as reservoirs. The pathogen reproduces in several of its tissues, but mainly in the midgut and salivary glands, the latter being crucial for transmission back to cattle [56]. The two primary methods of transmission for A. marginale are the mechanical pathway and the biological pathway, which primarily involve ticks [57]. Mechanical transmission occurs through the reuse of needles, dehorners, ear taggers, castrating knives or other surgical instruments that have been exposed to the pathogen [58]. The pathogen is also transferred by blood-contaminated mouthparts of biting flies [59]. Biological transmission to ticks can occur during a blood meal, whereby the pathogen infects the tick’s gut cells and completes a portion of its life cycle [60].

The geographical range of this disease is determined by the density and distribution of tick vectors and reservoir hosts, and it is also influenced by global warming [61]. Therefore, the high prevalence of anaplasmosis may be attributed to the Mediterranean climate of inland regions, which favours the good establishment of both blue ticks (Boophilid species of Rhipicephalus) and red-legged ticks (R. evertsi evertsi) [62,63,64]. Due to hormonal disturbances, milk production, draught power and breeding systems that comprise the immune system, female animals are more likely than males to contract anaplasmosis [65]. The symptoms of anaplasmosis include fever, anorexia, decreased milk production, pale mucous membranes, increased heart and respiratory rates and muscle weakness [66].

Farmer Awareness

Anaplasmosis was reported to have a high prevalence by participating farmers in a study conducted by Yawa, Nyangiwe [63] in the ECP. Similarly, a survey by Sungirai, Moyo [46] also reported that farmers ranked anaplasmosis higher than babesiosis as the most fatal TBD. These findings highlight the need for targeted awareness programmes in developing countries, including South Africa, to mitigate the effects of anaplasmosis on livestock productivity in communal areas.

Control and Prevention

Bovine anaplasmosis control strategies vary by region and include immunisation, vector control, and antibiotic administration [67]. Currently, there is limited information on the communal farmers’ knowledge of the tick acaricide resistance in South African provinces. However, research conducted in other countries also revealed that farmers did not know tick resistance to acaricides used to prevent the disease [46,68], with only the farmers with adequate farming training being aware of acaricide resistance by ticks, and perceiving ticks and TBDs as a threat to their livestock [14].

2.1.3. Heartwater

Epidemiology

Heartwater is one of the leading causes of death in imported and improved cattle in Africa, south of the Sahara [69]. It is caused by E. ruminantium and spread by several tick species of the Amblyomma genus, which is also linked to nervous, intestinal and pulmonary disorders [70]. E. ruminantium is one of the most economically important livestock disease pathogens in southern Africa [71,72]. It is confined to the northeastern parts of South Africa, starting in the North West province and continuing through the province of Limpopo, the northeastern parts of Mpumalanga, KwaZulu-Natal’s coastal region, and the ECP.

The main way that the disease is introduced into an area is by the introduction of infected ticks or carrier animals [69]. Ticks, the biological vectors of heartwater, become infected by feeding on an infected vertebrate host during the febrile reaction and spread the disease transstadially [9]. Heartwater can be found in nearly all the sub-Saharan African countries where Amblyomma ticks are present [73]. Variations in host vulnerability, agent pathogenicity, and infectious dosage determine the four distinct clinical manifestations of heartwater [74]. In Africa, peracute disease typically affects non-indigenous sheep, cattle and goats. It is characterised by a brief period of fever, severe respiratory distress, hyperesthesia, severe diarrhoea in some cattle breeds, and abrupt death [75]. Acute disease is the most prevalent type of heartwater in domesticated ruminants, typically resulting in death within a week. The first sign of the disease is pyrexia, which can reach 41 °C within 1–2 days after onset and is followed by inappetence, listlessness and diarrhoea [56]. There is currently limited scientific evidence to support the influence of the current climatic conditions, or other epidemiological factors that may be influencing the prevalence of heartwater in South Africa [76].

Farmer Awareness

Most communal farmers in South Africa are aware of the high mortality rates among livestock due to heartwater disease [77]. Although control methods of ticks are easily accessible, some farmers still fail to reach out to the state veterinarians for assistance [78]. In Zimbabwe, the prevalence of A. hebraeum ticks was very high, being found in almost all the dip tanks [2]. Because of the predilection sites of Amblyomma ticks, most farmers attributed mastitis to ticks. These studies show the need for extension services in communal areas to support farmers in implementing effective tick control methods and encourage farmers to seek assistance from local state veterinarians.

Control and Prevention

Diagnosis of heartwater may be verified once colonies of E. ruminantium are shown in brain smears. However, oxytetracycline in particular is the most effective and commonly used tetracycline for the specific treatment of the disease [79]. Currently, vaccinations involve infecting a live strain of E. ruminantium and treating with antibiotics when a fever develops [80]. Despite its significance, there is little knowledge in South Africa about knowledge, attitudes and practices (KAPs) on heartwater among small household farmers [81]. Heartwater in small ruminants is a widespread problem that negatively affects sheep and goat productivity and well-being. According to [82], farmers experience a higher incidence of E. ruminantium in their sheep. It is essential to note that sheep in the Vhembe and Mopani regions of the Limpopo Province may be more susceptible to heartwater than goats. Therefore, understanding the distribution of E. ruminantium and the origin of their introduction in many regions is crucial for the implementation of new, practical control methods against heartwater [82].

2.1.4. Theileriosis

Epidemiology

Theileriosis is also a tick-borne protozoal disease in ruminants caused by hemo-protozoan parasites of the genus Theileria [83]. Ixodid ticks spread the agents of this disease and have complex life cycles in both vertebrate and invertebrate hosts [84]. There are several species of Theileria spp. that infect cattle; however, the two most pathogenic and economically significant are T. parva and T. annulata [85]. T. parva causes East Coast fever (ECF), which is characterised by swelling of superficial lymph nodes and a persistent fever [83], and continues to be the most common TBD in cattle in sub-Saharan Africa [84]. Economically important Theileria species that infect cattle and small ruminants are spread by ixodid ticks of the genera Rhipicephalus, Amblyomma, Hyalomma and Haemaphysalis [86]. T. annulata infection (tropical theileriosis) is characterised by high fever, weakness, weight loss, anorexia, swollen lymph nodes, and anaemia [87]. In tropical theileriosis, mild to severe anaemia is observed; however, the pathology of the schizont stage is typically the leading cause of death, in contrast to T. parva, which only slightly lowers the number of circulating erythrocytes [88]. Theileria sporozoites are spread to animals in the saliva of feeding ticks. [83]. Hence, the disease has a significant economic impact on a global scale, by causing mortality, reduced milk yield, weight losses, abortions, control and preventative costs [89].

Farmer Awareness

Farmers who recognised the symptoms of theileriosis, such as salivation and teary eyes, had a higher chance of correctly performing the 5-5-4 cattle dipping method in Zimbabwe [46]. According to, farmers who can recognise clinical disease signs are more knowledgeable about the condition than those who cannot. In tropical and subtropical regions, it is very challenging to estimate the real cost of TBDs, such as piroplasmoses, which are the primary cause of theileriosis [90]. According to a study by Kerario, Simuunza [23], theileriosis is also a problem for calves. This finding is consistent with those of Chenyambuga, Waiswa [91], who reported that the majority of farmers perceived theileriosis as a significant disease in calves. As it primarily affected calves, cattle owners attached little importance to this disease. Knowledge gaps among farmers regarding TBDs, such as theileriosis, may have contributed to the increase in livestock mortality in communal areas [92]. Socio-economic factors, such as education level, influence the knowledge of theileriosis among communal farmers, and the veterinarian’s communication approach influences these factors.

Control and Prevention

The spread of theileriosis is typically attributed to the lack of acaricides and medications [36]. Prevention is the best way to control the lethal infection because of the high prevalence of carrier state infection, and the high cost of theilericidal drugs and treatment [5]. The primary methods of preventing and controlling this disease are vaccination, chemotherapeutic drugs, tick vector control, and the introduction of tick-resistant cow breeds [93]. Nevertheless, each of these approaches has limitations of its own, and might not be cost-effective [94]. Cattle dipping is the primary control strategy in Zimbabwe, which is carried out weekly and fortnightly in summer and winter, respectively [95].

2.2. Control Challenges

Tick infestations are economically detrimental, with losses from TBDs in cattle alone estimated to amount to hundreds of millions of dollars annually [95]. Vaccines and effective management strategies, such as the application of acaricides, as shown in Figure 2, are crucial for maintaining livestock productivity and health [96]. Furthermore, to achieve sustainable tick control, integrated pest management (IPM) approaches that combine multiple strategies are necessary, due to the development of growing resistance in ticks to chemical treatments [96]. Communal farmers face tick and TBD-related issues, such as a shortage of dipping material because government dipping subsidies are not maintained throughout the year, leading to animals with heavy tick loads, especially during the hot, rainy season [50]. The significance of TBDs in the ECP is evident by the fact that the province has over a thousand communal dip tanks with plunge dipping associated costs amounting to R 98,000 (approximately 5878.01 USD) in the communal sector of the ECP [50]. The most tick-related diseases prevalent in the province are anaplasmosis, babesiosis, and heartwater, which are spread by R. decoloratus and R. microplus, with hand spraying by the use of a knapsack being the most commonly used method by farmers, apart from the regular dipping carried out by the Department of Veterinary Services (DVSs) [27,97,98,99]. Tick-borne pathogens have a significant impact on livestock productivity, food security and household income in communal areas [24]. Figure 2 illustrates the impact of tick-borne pathogens and the measures used by Makwarela, Seoraj-Pillai [96] to prevent the transmission of TBDs.

In the study of [50], South African farmers perceived that the subsidised component, Triatix 500 TR (Amitraz, Afrivet), was weak and, as a result, ineffective at killing ticks. These findings are consistent with those of [100], who noted that respondents in the northeastern part of the ECP region complained about weak dip wash. Similar findings were reported in the eastern Free State province, where, despite using commercial acaricides, 80% of farmers experienced significant challenges and tick-related issues in their livestock [101]. The majority of communities use conventional tick management methods. According to [80], the most common method of tick management is to mix soot with chillies. The material is finely ground, mixed with water, shaken well, and then applied to the animal’s body with a broom or fine-leafed tree branch. Although the efficacy of this method has not been scientifically proven, farmers claim that it is effective. The use of traditional methods in controlling ticks is frequently practised by resource-poor communal farmers [14]. Basic farmer training is deemed necessary, as it significantly impacts the ability to identify diseases and utilise other tick control methods [2]. The majority of farmers, especially the younger ones, lack training and are unaware of the effects of TBD and other tick control methods, making the extension system for livestock production in communal areas extremely weak [48]. Therefore, to bridge the gap, farmers need to rotate acaricides to prevent tick resistance and participate in local government-sponsored training.

3. Knowledge, Attitudes and Practices (KAPs): A Framework for Analysis

The success of tick control initiatives relies on gaining a thorough understanding of farmers’ knowledge of ticks and TBDs, their perceptions of the efficacy of proposed control measures, and the sociocultural setting in which such programs are to be implemented [94]. Such information is typically collected using the most widely used KAP survey [102], despite criticism of KAP surveys that their data is extrapolated to a larger population for planning purposes. In the ticks and TBD field, these surveys have contributed to the establishment of successful intervention strategies [46,61,103]. The technique establishes the baseline for future evaluation and analysis of the impact of knowledge, attitudes, and practices on the modification of TBD-related problems. It proposes an intervention approach that considers the distinct local circumstances and the cultural factors influencing them, and designs activities suitable for the particular community concerned [104].

The KAP data are crucial for formulating effective strategies to manage acaricidal tick resistance and improve livestock health, as well as the income of marginal animal owners in South Africa. To provide evidence-based tick control strategies, a few KAP studies have been conducted in South Africa to gather baseline data on farmers’ KAP regarding ticks and TBDs in livestock. KAP data is currently limited, with a few studies documenting findings across the provinces, as shown in Figure 3. To address the TBD problem in the targeted area, a KAP-based research was conducted in the KwaZulu-Natal province to identify the limitations and constraints experienced by communal livestock farmers, as well as to evaluate farmers’ knowledge of zoonotic diseases [105]. Ticks and TBDs remain a significant problem in rural KZN, despite the dipping program in the study area, which is managed by the provincial government and the local livestock association [106]. The effectiveness of acaricides could be attributed to the emergence of tick resistance or farmers’ inadequate application of these chemicals in dip tanks, deviating from the recommended manufacturer guidelines [107]. Therefore, it will be crucial to understand whether farmers share the government’s perception of TBDs, as well as to investigate their level of participation in tick control programs [46].

Dipping is one of the central state interventions in communal livestock production systems in the ECP. The discontinuation of government tick control is expected to lead to a significant increase in TBD-related livestock mortalities, unless owners begin purchasing acaricides themselves [50]. This would require farmers to be provided with information and training on selection, dosage and correct use of the different acaricides available on the market [20]. This will require a change in farmers’ perceptions and practices, which can be fostered during dipping days and through group discussions, as these occasions are suitable for sharing information and providing training to livestock owners [29]. Ref. [47] assessed the KAP of communal cattle farmers regarding ticks and TBDs and found that vegetation types influenced the prevalence of TBDs in the ECP. The majority of farmers in the study used alternative tick control methods in addition to the government dip. Old motor engine oil and Jeyes fluid, a household disinfectant, were among the products mentioned as beneficial against ticks, with babesiosis, anaplasmosis, and heartwater being the most frequently reported diseases [14]. Farmers also identified acaricide resistance, inadequate dipping infrastructure, and uncontrolled cattle movement as significant challenges in tick control, leading to the adoption of alternative methods, such as using motor oil and household disinfectants [50]. Therefore, more KAP studies should be conducted to identify the TBDs affecting farmers in South African provinces and to document the traditional methods farmers employ to reduce tick and TBD loads.

Table 3. Overview of KAP studies across South African provinces.

Location	Farmer Type	Sample Size	Key KAPs	Source
KwaZulu-Natal	Communal farmers	504	Moderate knowledge of TBDs, acaricide usage	[20]
Eastern Cape	Communal cattle farmers	40	Knowledge of ticks, acaricide usage, and use of EVM	[63]
Mpumalanga	Communal farmers	180	Knowledge of TBDs, vaccine importance, acaricide and EVM usage	[108]
Limpopo	Communal farmers	121	Knowledge of heartwater, vaccine importance, acaricide, EVM, and engine oil usage	[112]

shows KAP-related studies conducted across South African provinces, emphasising the existing knowledge gap regarding farmers’ KAP in many provinces, as fewer studies have been conducted there.

3.1. Synthesis of Farmers’ KAP Studies Toward Tick-Borne Diseases

Several factors, as shown in Figure 4, including age, gender roles, education level, access to extension services, and the impact of traditional knowledge and beliefs, influence the awareness and response of communal farmers to TBDs [113]. Compared to younger farmers, older farmers have more knowledge in managing and preventing zoonotic diseases, despite their lower educational background [21]. Most participants in KAP studies in communal areas were older [109,114]. This was associated with young people moving to urban areas for better opportunities, thus, increasing the proportion of elderly communal farmers in these areas [115,116]. This is also in line with the study by Monkwe, Gxasheka [114], who noted that elderly farmers have more time to farm than young people who are either studying for other professions or employed in cities.

Improper tick control methods remain a significant concern due to illiteracy, with most communal farmers having only primary-level education [63]. Similarly, Chenyambuga, Waiswa [91] and Mdungela, Bahta [115] also reported increased tick populations and incidences of acaricide resistance among farmers who fail to correctly read the dosage instructions, which is associated with low education level. These findings, however, contrast with those of Sungirai, Moyo [46], and Madder [117], who observed that the majority of farmers in Zimbabwe had a secondary education level. The study also reported that farmers older than 40 years who received basic farmer training were knowledgeable about animal diseases. The low degree of awareness and knowledge about animal diseases among respondents with higher education could be the result of the youth’s lack of interest in livestock farming [20]. The findings of a recent study assessing the risks of zoonotic diseases among livestock farmers from smallholder communities in Ethiopia revealed that respondents who had never attended school were three times more likely to answer zoonosis-related questions than those who had participated in school [113]. In contrast, a recent study by Sadiq, Song-Lin [118] found that dairy cattle farmers in Malaysia with higher education had a better understanding of zoonoses. Lack of awareness regarding the transmission of zoonotic diseases in livestock and wildlife among communal farmers in KZN, South Africa, and Ethiopia, respectively, was also reported [105,118].

The majority of farmers in communal areas have significant experience in livestock production, with many having over 10 years of experience in cattle farming. This is because older people participate more in agriculture than younger people. This is consistent with the findings of [52], which showed that farmers’ years of farming experience exceeded 15 years. Similarly, Rinchen, Tenzin [119] also reported that the majority of farmers had more than 21 years of experience in raising cattle. This implies that most farmers in communal areas have experience in livestock farming. In contrast, Soltan-Alinejad, Rezaei [120] reported that farmers had up to 10 years of livestock farming experience. A recent study conducted in Iran assessed the KAP of small ruminant farmers and identified a correlation between experience and knowledge of several infectious diseases [120]. This is consistent with a study of Chakale, Asong [13], who found that farmers who had indicated that TBDs were a problem in their area were able to either identify the disease or explain its symptoms in their indigenous language. A strong correlation was also found between high disease prevalence and awareness; however, farmers incorrectly identified mastitis and joint ill [121]. The study of Rajput, Sajid [122] revealed the need for introductory farmer training courses, as it was shown that this training significantly enhanced their ability to identify diseases and utilise alternative tick control methods.

The study findings also showed that men own more livestock than women, which may be related to their role in cattle management activities, such as daily herding of cattle to grazing areas [114]. Furthermore, research by Katiyatiya, Muchenje [21] supported the finding that men own a large share of livestock, which they attributed to management challenges. A key factor could be that men are more likely than women to attend government-initiated meetings and training programs, which gives them a greater understanding of ticks and TBDs [20]. Similarly, Tesfaye and Abate [22] observed that men are more knowledgeable than women, which might be attributed to the fact that men receive more opportunities to attend government-initiated meetings and community-based training programs, as some cultures forbid women from attending public meetings and favour men instead, who are viewed as the family’s representatives. The extension system for livestock production in communal areas proved to be inadequate over time [48]. With fewer studies highlighting the role of extension officers in communal areas. Due to a lack of extension programs that educate farmers about zoonoses and the limited availability of veterinary and health workers in rural communities, Ref. [20] highlighted the need for training farmers on locally relevant aspects of disease transmission.

3.2. Potential Roles of Indigenous Knowledge and Traditional Practices in Improving Tick Control in Different Provinces

3.2.1. Indigenous Knowledge

Rhipicephalus species are one of the major concerns affecting livestock in the tropics and subtropics, as they spread pathogens that cause TBDs such as heartwater [123]. The primary methods for controlling ticks and TBDs are the application of synthetic acaricides by hand spraying, spray racing, and plunge dipping [124]. Tick resistance to the majority of these pesticide compounds has been shown as a result of excessive use of synthetic acaricides [75,125]. Although synthetic acaricides are expensive and readily available, farmers are turning to ethnoveterinary medicine (EVM) as an affordable alternative to western veterinary treatments [13], to find alternate methods of control and approaches involving natural products to deal with livestock diseases [126]. In the ECP, farmers frequently use medicinal plants like Euclea undulata, Protea, Grewia occidentalis, and Aloe maculata to treat heartwater, Aloe ferox, Vernonia mespilifolia, Rhoicissus tomentosa, and Strychnos henningsii to treat babesiosis, with Dietes leaves combined with commercial vinegar used to treat anaplasmosis in livestock [126], as shown in

Table 4. Conventional acaricide application methods and indigenous ethnoveterinary plants used for tick control by farmers in selected South African provinces.

Methods	Province	Material Used
Conventional acaricides	Limpopo	Injection
	Mpumalanga	Dipping, spraying, and pour-on
	KwaZulu-Natal	Dipping, pour-on
	Free State	Dipping, spraying, and manual removal
Indigenous knowledge	Eastern Cape	Euclea undulata, Protea, Grewia occidentalis, Aloe maculate, Grewia occidentalis, A. ferox
	North West	Gomphocarpus fruticosus (L.), Opuntia ficus-indica (L.), Portulaca oleracea L.

. A study conducted in the North West province discovered that farmers in that region also rely on plants, namely, Gomphocarpus fruticosus (L.) and Opuntia ficus-indica (L.). Mill., Schkuhria pinnata (Lam.) Kuntzeex Thell., Portulaca oleracea L., and Solanum lichtensteinii Willd. to treat TBDs [13].

Farmers in these provinces commonly used the leaves, followed by the roots, bark, stem, and the whole plant [13]. This supports the findings of [71,126,127], which showed that the leaves were the most utilised part of the plant. Decoction, grinding, infusion, maceration, poulticing, and burning are the most commonly used preparation methods, respectively [13]. The preparation method differs from those of other countries, such as Karamoja in Uganda [128], the Mana Angetu district of southeastern Ethiopia [129], and Yalo Woreda in the Afar Regional State, Ethiopia, where the most common methods were crushing and pounding. Older farmers utilised indigenous knowledge (IK) more frequently than individuals of all other ages, as knowledge on the use of medicinal plants in the communities was traditionally limited to them [130]. This is also because younger farmers are more likely to adopt innovations, while older farmers rely more on traditional methods to control ticks [111]. Although farmers use these plants to treat their livestock, validation using standardised procedures for the evaluation of their efficacy, safety, quality, and dosage regimens is still necessary to develop a secure drug [126]. Fewer studies from different provinces have documented the use of medicinal plants to treat TBDs; this gap is due to a lack of studies documenting plants that farmers use as alternatives to control ticks.

3.2.2. Conventional Acaricides

Studies in Limpopo [109], Free State [14], KwaZulu-Natal [111], and Mpumalanga [108] identified dipping, spraying, pour-on, injection, and manual removal of ticks as tick control methods. In line with the findings by van den Heever, Lombard [131], who reported that cattle farmers mainly apply acaricides about 24 times a year, or twice a month, the pour-on approach was the most economically viable method for goats in Mpumalanga, while the plunge dipping method was the most cost-effective for cattle and sheep [131]. The use of acaricide chemicals is also the most widely practised measure for controlling ticks in Botswana [132]. This contrasts with reports from [133] in South Africa and [64] in Zimbabwe, in which researchers reported that most resource-poor farmers also seek alternative methods to manage ticks, such as using engine oil, Jeyes fluid, paraffin, chickens, and manual removal, due to the high cost of acaricides. Goats are, however, less prioritised, yet in natural rangelands, cattle and goats coexist, and specific tick species (R. microplus), though prevalent in cattle, complete their life cycle on goats [133]. Since there are no dipping systems for goats, Ref. [111] emphasised the necessity to determine the level of IK usage among goat keepers. The study’s findings indicated that farmers who received formal livestock training used little IK since extension services promote the use of commercial acaricides. Extension officers, non-governmental organisations, and policymakers need to involve IK custodians in goat development programmes, as goats serve as reservoirs for various tick species and are rarely dipped [111]. The widespread use of IK among older farmers may reflect poverty, the high cost of acaricides, and young people’s avoidance of IK [134]. Since goats are infrequently dipped, they serve as reservoirs for many tick species; hence, extension agents, non-governmental organisations, and legislators must include IK caretakers in goat development programs [111].

These results are consistent with a study by Gaorekwe, Ledwaba [109]. This highlighted the need for the Department of Agriculture (DoA) to enhance communal farmers’ knowledge and practices by developing and implementing actionable policies to strengthen surveillance, control, and reduce the impact of ticks and TBDs in rural communities. These policies should include teaching farmers the value of rotational grazing to help break the tick life cycle and lower the risk of disease transmission, as well as using vaccines to reduce the incidence and severity of infections. This finding aligns with that by Guerrero, Lovis [135], which demonstrated that vaccines are the most effective method for preventing diseases. However, farmers view vaccines as costly and not readily available in rural areas. Although most farmers are familiar with certain TBDs, such as heartwater and babesiosis, they lacked knowledge about the control of these diseases [111]. Communal livestock farmers rely on experiential learning and their fellow farmers as their primary source of information about ticks and TBDs [136]. Frequently, the information may be incorrect, unreliable, or outdated. Due to limited resources, TBD awareness campaigns in communal areas are inadequate [137]. This may be due to a lack of interest in attending DoA-organized events; therefore, it is necessary to encourage farmers’ attendance at these events to enhance their knowledge, attitudes, and practices regarding TBDs [109].

4. Socioeconomic Impacts of TBDs on Rural Livelihoods

Livestock contribute significantly to the livelihoods of the majority of the rural populace [138]. In underdeveloped countries, smallholder farming is a vital sector that provides financial flexibility to many households, yet it is severely impacted by TBDs that threaten livelihoods and food security [139]. The burden of TBDs significantly reduces agricultural productivity in sub-Saharan Africa, and resource-constrained farmers struggle to maintain operations due to the high costs of vaccinations and treatments [29]. Despite the growing concern, there is still limited research on TBDs in sub-Saharan Africa, as the socioeconomic factors make it challenging to control ticks in these regions effectively [24]. In addition to their direct impacts, TBDs have equally high indirect costs [96]. The annual global costs of TBDs, as shown in

Table 5. Estimated economic impact of TBDs by country.

Country	Disease Burden	Estimated Loss (USD) Annually	Year of Valuation	Source
Tanzania	Reduced growth rate, milk production and consumption, fertility and value of hides and mortality.	USD 364 million	2006	[1]
Ethiopia	Mortality, loss of draught power and reduced household income.	USD 25 million	2005	[141]
South Africa	Reduced household income, value of hides, milk and meat production and consumption, and high mortality.	USD 92.7 million	2023	[50]
Zambia	Reduced fertility, high mortality, and increased costs associated with vaccines.	USD 5.0 million	2018	[142]

, and treatment are estimated to exceed USD 15 billion [139]. The annual estimated loss due to TBDs is also equally high in African countries [140]. Heartwater disease is estimated to cause a total annual loss of USD 1.059 million in South Africa [131].

There are two types of livestock farming sectors in South Africa: commercial and subsistence farming systems. The latter, which communal rural farmers commonly practise, accounts for about 40% of agricultural income [11]. Ticks negatively impact cattle production both directly (via severe infestations and skin damage) and indirectly (through the transmission of tick-borne pathogens), which can affect growth rates and health of herds [26]. Livestock production in these areas is seriously threatened by the high prevalence of diseases caused by the limited use of drugs by communal farmers to treat their animals [74,75].

5. Selected Case Studies: Insights and Lessons for Tick Control in Africa

5.1. South Africa

Integrated pest management (IPM) approaches that combine chemical, biological, and managerial methods are necessary to address the complex challenges of acaricide resistance, environmental conditions, and socio-economic factors, as there is an increasing development of chemical treatments [96]. An integrated approach that involves farmers explicitly should be considered for the future, since no single strategy is sufficient to control the complex problem of ticks and TBDs in South Africa [14]. The alternative tick control methods used by farmers in the Free State province involve the employment of free-ranging chickens, application of Jeyes fluid and use of engine oil on livestock with a cloth [14]. Acaricide usage malpractices are common in rural areas, and it remains unknown whether and how livestock owners will read, understand, and implement this information, affecting the effectiveness of tick treatments [22]. However, the majority of farmers lack adequate information about acaricide usage due to the absence of trained individuals in their proximity [113].

Most communal farmers are aware of the diseases associated with tick infestations on their herds [22]. Farmers supplemented the government dipping service with their own initiatives, such as pouricides, manual removal, used engine oil, and spraying with conventional acaricides and household disinfectants like Jeyes fluid [143]. Additionally, some farmers also used plants, mainly Ptaeroxylon obliquum bark and Aloe ferox leaves. Ivermectin was the most popular acaricide, followed by amitraz and deltamethrin, with private veterinary pharmacy stores being the leading suppliers of acaricides around Lake Mburo National Park in South Western Uganda [144]. In contrast, [143] asserted that the primary source of acaricides for farmers was a government veterinary clinic in the ECP. Therefore, awareness campaigns should focus on keeping the public informed on the potential health risks associated with tick infestation and the need for staff safety when applying acaricides.

5.2. Zimbabwe

Dipping using several methods and acaricides remains the primary strategy for controlling vectors of TBDs in Zimbabwe [145]. Since the majority of Zimbabwean survey respondents could identify tick diseases by name or recognise their clinical and post-mortem symptoms, they are more likely to use control measures [46]. Ticks are currently controlled by chemical, biological, and cultural methods [146]. Additionally, physical techniques are used [18], and the use of herbal plants has been practised [147]. A reasonable proportion (22%) recommended rehabilitation of dip tanks in the area; this could help farmers who travel a longer distance to access the functional dip tanks. However, the majority of farmers did not value awareness campaigns or organising farmers into small groups to improve their buying power, as they collectively bring together their money [148]. Cissus quadrangularis L., Lippia javanica, Psydrax livida Willd, and Aloe spp. were the most used plants for treating ectoparasites like ticks, with C. quadrangularis being the highly effective plant acaricide in the districts of Muzarabani, Kadoma, and Chiredzi [149].

The most common method of preparing the plant materials involved crushing the leaves or stems, soaking them in water for varying lengths of time, and then spraying the animals [149]. Additional methods included covering the animals and birds with the ashes of specific trees, bushes, and herbs [148]. To encourage adoption, it is necessary to conduct safety, efficacy, and optimisation trials to verify farmers’ claims that the plants are safe and efficient [143]. The study by Spickett, Heyne [81] emphasised the importance of communication between veterinary professionals and farmers, as it is essential to encourage farmers to implement disease prevention, control, and eradication measures. Communal farmers have more years of cattle herding experience and an ageing farmer population, which are the two factors that negatively affect the acquisition of knowledge [145]. There is a need to prioritise young farmers in Zimbabwe to increase agricultural inputs and encourage them to participate in the livestock value chain, while managing livestock and controlling diseases [150].

5.3. Kenya

A prior study conducted in Kenya found that the majority of herd owners obtain information regarding acaricide usage from veterinarian shop employees who lack the necessary training in animal healthcare to advise farmers, leading to malpractices properly [80]. The lack of sufficient training in animal healthcare led herd owners to engage in harmful practices. Due to the high frequency of TBDs, farmers were advised to rotate the use of acaricides in cattle to reduce acaricide resistance and provide cost-effective treatment [6].

5.4. Rwanda

Tick-borne diseases pose a substantial economic challenge to livestock farming and hinder agricultural productivity in East Africa [151]. Rwanda is among regions with various tick species, including R. appendiculatus and R. decoloratus, with T. parva reported to be present. The abundance of hosts and suitable habitats in Rwanda’s rural areas, which are rich in livestock, wildlife, and vegetation, increases tick reproduction. Furthermore, there is a gap in knowledge regarding prevention strategies, and several studies have linked the increase in TBDs to a lack of awareness of ticks and the ability to prevent diseases [137]. By evaluating KAP within various populations, researchers can detect misunderstandings, cultural beliefs, and behavioural patterns that may influence disease transmission and healthcare-seeking behaviours [122].

The participants in the study by Gabriel, Wang [151] understood ticks and TBDs well, which is consistent with studies in North Africa [152]. However, many participants mistakenly believed that only one tick species feeds on humans. This belief contradicts evidence indicating that multiple species can feed on humans, highlighting a significant knowledge gap [153]. This misconception stems from limited educational outreach, underscoring the need for targeted efforts to enhance understanding of tick species and their interactions with diverse hosts [154]. Knowledge levels were influenced by age, gender, region, and attitude; older people were five times more likely to have high knowledge and three times more likely to have moderate understanding of ticks and TBDs than younger people. This can be attributed to the fact that older individuals are frequently responsible for livestock care, which exposes them to more knowledge about ticks and TBDs. Contrary to findings from Ghana [26], male participants showed significantly lower levels of expertise than female participants, and this discrepancy may be due to gender-based differences in exposure to tick-related information or participation in high-risk activities. In all five regions of Rwanda, acaricides have become the most used tick control strategy; the findings are consistent with those of similar studies conducted in Kenya [136]. Most participants expressed their intention to consult a healthcare professional as their preferred method of tick removal, which is an uncommon practice; however, comparable results were reported in a previous study [128]. A crucial awareness gap was highlighted by the fact that participants with moderate-to-high knowledge and positive attitudes were less likely to engage in preventative behaviours than those with low information levels and negative attitudes. This result is consistent with a South African study that highlights the necessity of focused educational interventions [106]. The burden of TBDs in Rwanda and beyond will eventually be reduced by enhancing public health initiatives and educational programs, which will raise awareness and strengthen preventive measures [151]. A summary of the control strategies and policy gaps for the different countries is presented in

Table 6. Summary of control strategies for ticks and TBDs and policy gaps in different countries.

Country	Control Strategy	Policy Gaps	Source
South Africa	IPM, manual removal, used engine oil, EVM	Inadequate information on acaricide usage and awareness campaigns on ticks and TBDs	[129,144]
Zimbabwe	Dipping, EVM	Lack of prioritisation of young farmers to take part in agriculture	[143,147,148,149]
Kenya	Dipping	Lack of sufficient training in acaricide usage	[47]
Rwanda	Dipping	Lack of awareness about the impact of ticks and TBDs impact	[128,136]

.

6. Molecular Insights for Farmers: Acaricide Resistance, Tick Microbiomes, and One Health Surveillance

6.1. One Health Surveillance

The epidemiological surveillance of diseases is based on the systematic collection, analysis, and dissemination of epidemiological data on infectious diseases affecting both animal and human health [155]. Ticks transmit a wide variety of pathogens that affect human and animal health, and tick biology is closely related to environmental factors and vertebrate hosts, with the improper use of ixodicides leading to environmental contamination [156]. Control of TBDs requires interdisciplinary and collaborative efforts to address such health emergencies, as well as managing the biological, political, and social components [157]. A comprehensive One Health strategy is needed to address ticks and TBDs [43,158,159]. Findings from population surveys that focus on farmers’ KAP about ticks and TBDs have been used to characterise and describe the needs of high-risk groups, including veterinary [160], medical [161], and agricultural professionals [61]. Therefore, a One Health approach is vital for ensuring effective and sustainable efforts to address control and prevention of TBDs [155]. Given the limited One Health studies on ticks and TBDs in communal areas, One Health programmes must be designed to accommodate farmers and consider relevant cultural aspects of the society, such as the local population’s perceptions of the potential risks associated with using an acaricide. Cultural determinants are relevant aspects of the system as they determine credence, behaviours, and material practices, emphasising the need to put health measures in their social context before implementation, i.e., taking a One Health approach to risk analysis and impact assessment [162]. Therefore, implementing community-driven tick surveillance programs through a One Health approach, which includes human, animal, and environmental health, will bolster disease monitoring and control efforts [151].

6.2. Molecular Insights into Tick Microbiomes and Acaricide Resistance

The ecology of the tick microbiome and its role in drug resistance in native African cattle breeds are poorly understood, despite growing concerns about the emergence of drug resistance in tick-borne pathogens [163]. In addition to the pathogens they transmit, several studies have reported that hard ticks, such as Amblyomma and Hyalomma species, harbour commensal and symbiotic microorganisms that may be important to vector competency and pathogen transmission dynamics [164,165]. Both the pathogenic and endosymbiotic bacteria coexist within the tick, with increasing evidence that the interaction between tick-borne pathogens and the tick microbiome is bidirectional [166,167]. In addition to tick species, vertebrate host species and geographical location also play a significant role in modulating the tick microbiome [163]. There is evidence that the relationship between TBDs and the tick microbiome is reciprocal, with both pathogenic and endosymbiotic bacteria coexisting within the tick [168]. The microbiomes of many tick species, especially those that are not common human disease vectors, have not yet been extensively investigated in Africa, despite accumulating evidence linking tick microbiomes, tick biology, and TBD dynamics. Few studies have reported on microbial communities in whole, intact ticks, without considering organ-specific community distributions, especially in South Africa. Due to limited research, a knowledge gap exists regarding antibiotic resistance biomarkers in many developing countries, particularly in South African communal areas.

7. Communication Barriers and Outreach Opportunities

Participatory epidemiology is a strategy that involves the active participation of stakeholders, including farmers, veterinarians, and other community members [19], which can be used to obtain farmers’ knowledge and attitudes about the TBDs [169]. The strategies for tick infestation and TBD management, such as improved animal husbandry practices, targeted use of acaricides, and vaccination programs, help identify various risk factors through interviews and surveys with farmers and other stakeholders [96,170]. The widespread use of herbal remedies and informal discussions with livestock owners and extension officers in the ECP helped identify TBDs such as heartwater, babesiosis, and anaplasmosis as the second-most important cause of morbidity and mortality among cattle in communal areas [110].

TBDs continue to be a significant problem in communal areas, despite the implementation of control strategies, underscoring the need for integrated approaches to manage them effectively [79]. To address the TBD problem in Kenya, an interdisciplinary project, Environmental Virtual Observatories for Connective Actions (EVOCA), was launched in 2015 by Wageningen University and Research, focusing on mobile phone-based information sharing for TBD. Furthermore, mobile phones have become new technological tools for engaging participants [171]. They provide participants with unprecedented access to both their own and others’ observations, promoting effective information sharing. Given the utility of mobile phones, it is imperative to investigate how this technology may be used to address the TBD problem. Innovative approaches are crucial for enhancing monitoring, delivering extension services, and enhancing information sharing, thereby effectively coordinating and strengthening partnerships among stakeholders with diverse opinions, interests, and perceptions [20]. The introduction of mobile phones and their extensive use in many developing African countries, particularly Kenya, coupled with new methods of information sharing like citizen science, could be used to address complex agricultural and environmental problems like TBDs, which continue to pose a significant threat to food security, human health, and the cultural well-being of many people who rely on livestock production [150].

Given the current lack of information and knowledge sharing, which is perceived as one of the reasons for inadequate disease management or eradication [81], it is assumed that mobile phones and related technologies can be utilised for collective action. The reasoning is that, in developing countries, formal organisations involved in addressing TBD problems are often weak and underfunded, or lack the resources needed for effective control and the provision of elaborate extension services. To ensure that citizen science functions effectively, people should report and communicate the TBD problem in the area using mobile phones [150]. Therefore, collaboration and information sharing among all stakeholders involved in tick and TBD control, including government agencies, livestock farmers, and veterinarians, can help develop more effective and well-coordinated tick control strategies.

Citizen science approaches can empower local people to bypass the need for such formal systems and promote collaborative action. Despite the presence of necessary technological infrastructure, such as high mobile phone adoption rates and a wide range of stakeholders, Ref. [170] found insufficient evidence to support the idea that the TBD problem could be solved by leveraging mobile phones and information sharing. Accordingly, this study proposes that, for citizen science to be practical and address the TBD problem, it should focus on the urgent local issues that people report and communicate about using mobile phones, such as inadequate security, conflicts between humans and wildlife, and the occurrence of notifiable diseases [150]. Few studies have evaluated the use of mobile phones to disseminate information about TBDs, particularly in Africa. This may be due to poor mobile network coverage in most rural areas of Africa, as well as the affordability of mobile phones and data costs. Insufficient government training and support in adopting mobile technology contribute to communal farmers’ reluctance to use mobiles to communicate about TBDs, as the technology is not user-friendly, and most communal farmers are older.

8. Discussion

Despite the damage caused by ticks and TBDs to livestock production, veterinary services remain scarce in many developing countries, leading farmers to use traditional methods as alternatives to synthetic acaricides to reduce tick infestation in livestock. Poor veterinary services, farmers’ inability to purchase veterinary medicines, uncontrolled translocation of animals, the wildlife–livestock interface, and burning of grazing land promote the emergence and re-emergence of tick-borne pathogens in resource-poor areas, where effects of climate change are also notable [170]. Since farmers are the ones directly affected by tick infestations and are responsible for implementing control measures, their attitudes and behaviours play a critical role in the success or failure of tick management strategies [170]. Gathering insights into farmers’ knowledge about ticks, their perceptions of the risks associated with TBDs, and the actions they take to protect their livestock is essential for developing effective, evidence-based interventions in South Africa.

The age, education, and gender of farmers influence the knowledge and practices used in animal health and management in most communal areas. Many studies have highlighted that females lack knowledge of livestock management and tick control methods, as males are often considered responsible for livestock well-being in most African cultures. The responsibilities given to males positively influenced their usage of IK to control ticks [111]. The findings of this study also revealed that the majority of livestock owners surveyed were male, consistent with the general trend of male dominance in the livestock sector in many developing countries. These results corroborate findings that reported managerial challenges, such as handling animals and carrying heavy objects, contribute to the sector’s continued dominance by males [21,61,170,171,172,173]. Similar findings were also reported in Zimbabwe [174] and Nigeria [175]. Cultural norms and social structures contribute to the unequal gender distribution in cattle farming, resulting in a greater presence of males than females [176]. Therefore, stakeholders engaged in policy development should provide policies that are accommodating to both genders, allowing females to participate in government meetings and farmer training programs, thereby promoting equality in these rural areas. This is in line with a study by Aphane [108] who recommended that the government provides training to women and implements relevant education programmes to significantly increase the number of women involved in livestock farming, thereby breaking stereotypes that prohibit women from rearing livestock.

Many studies [26,46,109,151] reported that older farmers participated in government training programs in greater numbers than youth. Ref. [114] also noted this, suggesting that elderly farmers have more time to farm than young individuals. This may also be due to a lack of programs that enable young people to learn about ticks and the impact of TBDs on the livestock industry. Through the adoption of citizen science approached in the study by Chepkwony, van Bommel [171] TBD information can be easily disseminated through mobile phones, which young people use more often to communicate than elders. The dissemination of information by mobile phones will allow both young and older farmers to receive information on ticks and TBDs prevalent in the areas near them, to put proper control measures in place, and also inform them of workshop attendance to improve awareness among all age groups, while identifying knowledge gaps regarding tick and TBD prevalence in the area. Furthermore, the DoA, in collaboration with the Department of Science, Technology and Innovation (DSTI), should have a comprehensive programme that equips extensionists with relevant skills to ensure the successful dissemination of knowledge on ticks and TBDs, thereby promoting animal health [108].

Local cultural and economic factors may influence how farmers perceive and respond to tick-related challenges. Ref. [21] found that farmers facing tick challenges in their herds use either acaricides or EVM to control ticks, while some use both methods. Tick resistance in herds can be reduced through integrated control techniques that include a variety of measures such as acaricide use, ethnoveterinary practices, and vaccinations [17]. Knowledge of farmers on acaricide resistance is generally influenced by the level of education a farmer possesses, but the use of EVM was commonly associated with farming experience, showing that age can influence knowledge about EVM [63]. The study by Aphane [108] reported that farmers interviewed felt that acaricides and vaccines were costly, and recommended that the DoA should have policies that work towards subsidising farmers when purchasing animal healthcare products such as vaccines. Most communal farmers used traditional medicinal plants to control ticks in their areas. In South Africa, farmers used medicinal plants such as E. undulata, Protea, G. occidentalis, A. maculata, A. ferox, V. mespilifolia, R. tomentosa and S. henningsii to treat babesiosis and heartwater [126]. Furthermore, G. fruticosus (L.), O. ficus-indica (L.) Mill., S. pinnata (Lam.) K. Thell., P. oleracea L., and S. lichtensteinii Willd plants were also used to treat TBDs [13]. Farmers from neighbouring countries, such as Zimbabwe, also used EVM to reduce tick infestations in their livestock. C. quadrangularis L., L. javanica, P. livida Willd, and Aloe spp. were used to control ticks [149]. Although acaricide resistance was identified as an issue in many studies, many farmers preferred using them, while others integrated the use of synthetic acaricides with EVM. Studies conducted in various South African provinces listed dipping, spraying, pour-on, injection and manual removal of ticks as the methods to control ticks in their areas [13,21,109,151]. Zimbabwe, Kenya, Rwanda, Tunisia, and India are also countries where farmers used synthetic acaricides to control ticks and prevent TBDs. Effective control of ticks will help reduce the development and spread of acaricide resistance and maintain endemic stability. Since many traditional methods have not yet been scientifically proven effective, more studies in South African provinces are needed to document additional plants that help communal farmers control ticks, thereby proving their efficacy and making them viable alternatives globally.

A One Health approach, emphasising the necessity for increased national investment in TBD surveillance and prevention, especially in areas of high risk, is essential. Ref. [163] noted that there is limited information on the tick microbiome ecology and their involvement in drug resistance in local African cattle breeds, despite the increasing concerns of drug resistance development in tick-borne pathogens. Through One Health approach, which acknowledges the interconnection of human, animal, and environmental health, and promotes the collaboration of public health officials, veterinarians, and ecological scientists to address the complex challenges posed by ticks and TBDs [58], stakeholders can develop comprehensive strategies that address broader ecological issues influencing disease transmission, in addition to tick population control, by fostering interdisciplinary relationships [175]. Regular monitoring of the prevalence of TBD in livestock populations can help identify high-risk populations and locations to target interventions, such as education campaigns or tick control measures, where they are most needed [122]. There is limited data on tick microbiomes and acaricide resistance genes in South African communal systems. Therefore, studies focusing on the comprehensive characterisation of microbial communities and the use of gene sequencing data to reduce acaricide resistance are necessary in South Africa.

9. Knowledge Gaps and Research Priorities

The study identified gaps which include the following:

Limited data on farmer knowledge of acaricide resistance, tick microbiomes, and metagenomics and antibiotic resistance biomarkers in South Africa.

Limited KAP data from the Limpopo, Mpumalanga, and North West provinces, and little to no KAP data, are evident in the Gauteng, Free State, Northern Cape, and Western Cape provinces.

Limited studies on farmers’ indigenous practices for controlling ticks and the proven efficacy of medicinal plants.

Limited KAP data linking farmers to molecular findings in South Africa.

Lack of data promoting the usage of mobile phones for sharing information on TBDs among communal farmers in South Africa.

10. Conclusions

The government needs to facilitate basic farmer training that accommodates both men and women and allows them to share their views and knowledge on ticks and TBDs. IPM strategies in communal areas should be promoted to reduce tick infestations, and training and resources should be provided to farmers and extension officers for the effective implementation of these programs. Future research should promote the use of mobile phones to share information on TBDs among farmers in South African communal areas, enabling them to access and disseminate information on prevalent diseases, best practices, and effective acaricide application methods. The government should also implement programs that accommodate youth in South African provinces to enable them to participate in targeted awareness programs that will enhance their knowledge and understanding of TBDs, their prevention, and management in communal areas. To improve understanding of tick microbiomes and acaricide resistance, studies focusing on metagenomics and antibiotic resistance biomarkers should be conducted in South Africa. To demonstrate the efficacy of the medicinal plants used by farmers as alternative tick control methods, more research should be conducted in South Africa to document these plants nationwide.

11. Methodology

A comprehensive search strategy was developed to retrieve relevant studies from multiple databases, including Scopus, Google Scholar, and ScienceDirect. The search incorporated controlled vocabulary and free-text keywords related to ticks, tick-borne diseases, knowledge, attitudes, practices, farmers and South Africa. Boolean operators (AND, OR) were used to refine search results and optimise retrieval in all databases except Google Scholar. The search was limited to articles from the last thirty years, mostly from South African provinces, and included only English-language publications to ensure relevance and accessibility. The study area included veterinary, immunology and microbiology, social science, environmental science, agricultural and biological sciences, biochemistry, genetics, and molecular biology.

The Scopus database was searched using the following search terms: (“farmer” OR “communal farmer” OR “smallholder” OR “rural farmer” OR “livestock keeper” OR “cattle owner”) AND (“perception” OR “knowledge” OR “attitude” OR “knowledge attitude practice” OR “KAP” OR “awareness” OR “belief”) AND (“tick-borne disease” OR “tick borne disease” OR “tick-borne infection” OR “tick”) AND (“South Africa” OR “South African”), resulting in n = 22 articles before filters, and total of n = 18 articles used after filters. The ScienceDirect database was searched using the following search terms: (“farmer” OR “communal farmer”) AND (“perception” OR “knowledge” OR “attitude” OR “knowledge attitude practice” OR “KAP”) AND (“tick borne disease”) AND (“South Africa”), resulting in n = 243 articles before filters, and n = 55 after filters. The Google Scholar database was searched using keywords such as “smallholder farmers”, “KAP of ticks” and “tick-borne disease”, resulting in n = 2490 articles before filtering and n = 177 articles after filtering.

The geographical scope of the study begins with case studies from South African provinces, then moves to African countries and the world to consolidate farmers’ methods for controlling ticks and TBDs. The South African studies were mainly conducted in the Eastern Cape and KwaZulu-Natal provinces, with fewer studies from Limpopo, Free State, North West, and Mpumalanga, as well as other provinces, namely, Gauteng, Northern Cape, and Western Cape. The study designs of many KAP studies were cross-sectional, with data collected using questionnaires to gain in-depth knowledge of ticks and TBDs in communal areas, while others used web-based surveys. Most studies used a quantitative research approach, more than a qualitative approach. Limitations of many studies included small sample sizes, with samples as small as 40 in areas where only a few farmers can participate.