Ticks in the wrong boxes: assessing error in blanket-drag studies due to occasional sampling.

Background The risk posed by ticks as vectors of disease is typically assessed by blanket-drag sampling of host-seeking individuals. Comparisons of peak abundance between plots -- either in order to establish their relative risk or to identify environmental correlates -- are often carried out by sampling on one or two occasions during the period of assumed peak tick activity. Methods This paper simulates this practice by 're-sampling' from model datasets derived from an empirical field study. Re-sample dates for each plot are guided by either the previous year's peak at the plot, or the previous year's peak at a similar, nearby plot. Results from single, double and three-weekly sampling regimes are compared. Results Sampling on single dates within a two-month window of assumed peak activity has the potential to introduce profound errors; sampling on two dates (double sampling) offers greater precision, but three-weekly sampling is the least biased. Conclusions The common practice of sampling for the abundance of host-seeking ticks on single dates in each plot-year should be strenuously avoided; it is recommended that field acarologists employ regular sampling throughout the year at intervals no greater than three weeks, for a variety of epidemiological studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]