New Clues to What Makes Lyme Disease Tick

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


The tick-borne bacteria responsible for Lyme disease, Borrelia burgdorfi is a wily invader. It causes an array of vague symptoms, or sometimes none at all, making diagnosis difficult. Yet if left untreated, the disease can lead to serious inflammation of the nervous system, heart and joints. The newly approved Lyme vaccine protects 75 to 80 percent of people exposed to infected ticks, but recent research suggests that the effects may not last over the long term, and some doubts have been raised over its safety. So with an eye toward developing better vaccines, researchers at the University of North Carolina and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention decided to further probe the biology of B. burgdorfi transmission. Their findings, published yesterday in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, reveal that the microbe is even sneakier than scientists thought.

"Previous studies showed there were certain surface proteins that were expressed in the tick gut and others that were expressed in the host, and that a switch occurred en route from the tick to the host," team member Aravinda M. de Silva notes. "This paper shows us that things are a lot more complicated." On closer examination of the surface protein expression, the researchers made a key observation: during feeding, the tick actually transmits a highly variable population of B. burgdorfi into the host. In contrast, when the tick isn't feeding, the population is fairly homogeneous. What this means, says de Silva, is that "the bacteria essentially adapts during the transmission process to maximize the chance of infecting the host." Intriguingly, the fact that the tick spits so many different "flavors" of B. burgdorfi into the host seems to explain an observation made several years ago, de Silva muses: lyme bacteria delivered by ticks evade the host's immune response more successfully than do cultured bacteria injected into animals.

The team suggests that future efforts to develop better vaccines could focus either on antigens produced within the tick before the bacteria population diversifies or on surface proteins common to all of the otherwise variable bacteria.

Kate Wong is an award-winning science writer and senior editor for features at Scientific American, where she has focused on evolution, ecology, anthropology, archaeology, paleontology and animal behavior. She is fascinated by human origins, which she has covered for nearly 30 years. Recently she has become obsessed with birds. Her reporting has taken her to caves in France and Croatia that Neandertals once called home to the shores of Kenya’s Lake Turkana in search of the oldest stone tools in the world, as well as to Madagascar on an expedition to unearth ancient mammals and dinosaurs, the icy waters of Antarctica, where humpback whales feast on krill, and a “Big Day” race around the state of Connecticut to find as many bird species as possible in 24 hours. Wong is co-author, with Donald Johanson, of Lucy’s Legacy: The Quest for Human Origins. She holds a bachelor of science degree in biological anthropology and zoology from the University of Michigan. Follow her on Bluesky @katewong.bsky.social

More by Kate Wong

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe