As the geographic distributions of medically important ticks and tick-borne pathogens continue to expand in the United States, the burden of tick-borne diseases continues to increase along with a growing risk of coinfections. Coinfection with multiple tick-borne pathogens may amplify severity of disease and complicate diagnosis and treatment. By testing 13,400 Ixodes ticks from 17 US states spanning five geographical regions for etiological agents of Lyme disease (Borrelia burgdorferi sensu stricto [s.s.] and Borrelia mayonii), Borrelia miyamotoi disease (Borrelia miyamotoi), anaplasmosis (Anaplasma phagocytophilum), and babesiosis (Babesia microti) we show that B. burgdorferi s.s. was the most prevalent and widespread pathogen. Borrelia miyamotoi, A. phagocytophilum, and B. microti were widespread but less prevalent than B. burgdorferi s.s. Coinfections with B. burgdorferi s.s. and A. phagocytophilum or B. microti were most common in the Northeast and occurred at rates higher than expected based on rates of single infections in that region.

In the United States, tick-borne diseases are increasing in incidence and cases are reported over an expanding geographical area. Avoiding tick bites is a key strategy in tick-borne disease prevention, and this requires current and accurate information on where humans are at risk for exposure to ticks. Based on a review of published literature and records in the U.S. National Tick Collection and National Ecological Observatory Network databases, we compiled an updated county-level map showing the reported distribution of the American dog tick, Dermacentor variabilis (Say). We show that this vector of the bacterial agents causing Rocky Mountain spotted fever and tularemia is widely distributed, with records derived from 45 states across the contiguous United States. However, within these states, county-level records of established tick populations are limited. Relative to the range of suitable habitat for this tick, our data imply that D. variabilis is currently underreported in the peer-reviewed literature, highlighting a need for improved surveillance and documentation of existing tick records.