Comparative study of hatching estimation methods of Rhipicephalus (Boophilus) microplus eggs
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2018 |
Outros Autores: | , , , |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | eng |
Título da fonte: | Repositório Institucional da UNESP |
Texto Completo: | http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.vetpar.2018.10.015 http://hdl.handle.net/11449/184168 |
Resumo: | Reproductive parameters of Rhipicephalus (Boophilus) microplus are often evaluated. They are good indicators of resistance to commercial acaricides and of plant extracts' efficacy. The objective of this study was to compare the techniques: visual estimation and quantification by sampling used in the Adult Immersion Test (AIT) to calculate the hatching rate of eggs. Engorged females collected from cattle were subjected to the AIT with plant extracts and kept in an incubator for oviposition. The egg hatching was evaluated in 210 syringes by visual estimation (%). Then, eggs and larvae were counted into samples of 100 individuals, in three repetitions by stereo microscope. Significant differences were found between the two tests (p <= 0.05). The egg hatching average of visual estimation was higher than the quantification by sampling, 56.8-48.0, respectively (correlation = 0.85). We found that the visual assessment leads to a higher estimate of larvae in relation to eggs, because the infertile eggs can be concealed in the center of the syringe. In quantification by sampling, no statistical differences (p = 0.99) were observed in the pairwise counts between the three samples (48.1 +/- 26.6%, 47.8 +/- 26.9%, 48.1 +/- 26.5%) (correlation of repetitions = 0.96). This suggests that counting one sample is sufficient and the result should not differ much, regardless of the evaluator. Regarding the cutoff point of tick resistance status (95%), both methods are reliable. This study contributes to improvement of the AIT and can stimulate researchers to choose more accurate techniques for the assessment of egg hatching. |
id |
UNSP_137fb4fc2f3c54116f3e29bd28199830 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:repositorio.unesp.br:11449/184168 |
network_acronym_str |
UNSP |
network_name_str |
Repositório Institucional da UNESP |
repository_id_str |
2946 |
spelling |
Comparative study of hatching estimation methods of Rhipicephalus (Boophilus) microplus eggsCattle tickMethods of larvae estimationVisual estimationQuantification by samplingAdult immersion test (AIT)Reproductive parameters of Rhipicephalus (Boophilus) microplus are often evaluated. They are good indicators of resistance to commercial acaricides and of plant extracts' efficacy. The objective of this study was to compare the techniques: visual estimation and quantification by sampling used in the Adult Immersion Test (AIT) to calculate the hatching rate of eggs. Engorged females collected from cattle were subjected to the AIT with plant extracts and kept in an incubator for oviposition. The egg hatching was evaluated in 210 syringes by visual estimation (%). Then, eggs and larvae were counted into samples of 100 individuals, in three repetitions by stereo microscope. Significant differences were found between the two tests (p <= 0.05). The egg hatching average of visual estimation was higher than the quantification by sampling, 56.8-48.0, respectively (correlation = 0.85). We found that the visual assessment leads to a higher estimate of larvae in relation to eggs, because the infertile eggs can be concealed in the center of the syringe. In quantification by sampling, no statistical differences (p = 0.99) were observed in the pairwise counts between the three samples (48.1 +/- 26.6%, 47.8 +/- 26.9%, 48.1 +/- 26.5%) (correlation of repetitions = 0.96). This suggests that counting one sample is sufficient and the result should not differ much, regardless of the evaluator. Regarding the cutoff point of tick resistance status (95%), both methods are reliable. This study contributes to improvement of the AIT and can stimulate researchers to choose more accurate techniques for the assessment of egg hatching.Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq)Empresa Brasileira de Pesquisa Agropecuaria (Embrapa)Univ Estadual Paulista, Fac Ciencias Agr & Vet, Jaboticabal, SP, BrazilCtr Univ Cent Paulista, Sao Carlos, SP, BrazilEmbrapa Pecuaria Sudeste, Rod Washington Luiz,Km 234,Caixa Postal 339, BR-13560970 Sao Carlos, SP, BrazilUniv Estadual Paulista, Fac Ciencias Agr & Vet, Jaboticabal, SP, BrazilEmpresa Brasileira de Pesquisa Agropecuaria (Embrapa): 02.13.01.001.00-00Elsevier B.V.Universidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp)Ctr Univ Cent PaulistaEmpresa Brasileira de Pesquisa Agropecuária (EMBRAPA)Figueiredo, Amanda [UNESP]Agnolon, Isabela CabecaLopes, Louyse GabrielliGiglioti, Rodrigo [UNESP]Souza Chagas, Ana Carolina de2019-10-04T11:55:34Z2019-10-04T11:55:34Z2018-12-15info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/article35-38http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.vetpar.2018.10.015Veterinary Parasitology. Amsterdam: Elsevier Science Bv, v. 264, p. 35-38, 2018.0304-4017http://hdl.handle.net/11449/18416810.1016/j.vetpar.2018.10.015WOS:000453621400005Web of Sciencereponame:Repositório Institucional da UNESPinstname:Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)instacron:UNESPengVeterinary Parasitologyinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess2021-10-22T19:03:47Zoai:repositorio.unesp.br:11449/184168Repositório InstitucionalPUBhttp://repositorio.unesp.br/oai/requestopendoar:29462021-10-22T19:03:47Repositório Institucional da UNESP - Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)false |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Comparative study of hatching estimation methods of Rhipicephalus (Boophilus) microplus eggs |
title |
Comparative study of hatching estimation methods of Rhipicephalus (Boophilus) microplus eggs |
spellingShingle |
Comparative study of hatching estimation methods of Rhipicephalus (Boophilus) microplus eggs Figueiredo, Amanda [UNESP] Cattle tick Methods of larvae estimation Visual estimation Quantification by sampling Adult immersion test (AIT) |
title_short |
Comparative study of hatching estimation methods of Rhipicephalus (Boophilus) microplus eggs |
title_full |
Comparative study of hatching estimation methods of Rhipicephalus (Boophilus) microplus eggs |
title_fullStr |
Comparative study of hatching estimation methods of Rhipicephalus (Boophilus) microplus eggs |
title_full_unstemmed |
Comparative study of hatching estimation methods of Rhipicephalus (Boophilus) microplus eggs |
title_sort |
Comparative study of hatching estimation methods of Rhipicephalus (Boophilus) microplus eggs |
author |
Figueiredo, Amanda [UNESP] |
author_facet |
Figueiredo, Amanda [UNESP] Agnolon, Isabela Cabeca Lopes, Louyse Gabrielli Giglioti, Rodrigo [UNESP] Souza Chagas, Ana Carolina de |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Agnolon, Isabela Cabeca Lopes, Louyse Gabrielli Giglioti, Rodrigo [UNESP] Souza Chagas, Ana Carolina de |
author2_role |
author author author author |
dc.contributor.none.fl_str_mv |
Universidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp) Ctr Univ Cent Paulista Empresa Brasileira de Pesquisa Agropecuária (EMBRAPA) |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Figueiredo, Amanda [UNESP] Agnolon, Isabela Cabeca Lopes, Louyse Gabrielli Giglioti, Rodrigo [UNESP] Souza Chagas, Ana Carolina de |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Cattle tick Methods of larvae estimation Visual estimation Quantification by sampling Adult immersion test (AIT) |
topic |
Cattle tick Methods of larvae estimation Visual estimation Quantification by sampling Adult immersion test (AIT) |
description |
Reproductive parameters of Rhipicephalus (Boophilus) microplus are often evaluated. They are good indicators of resistance to commercial acaricides and of plant extracts' efficacy. The objective of this study was to compare the techniques: visual estimation and quantification by sampling used in the Adult Immersion Test (AIT) to calculate the hatching rate of eggs. Engorged females collected from cattle were subjected to the AIT with plant extracts and kept in an incubator for oviposition. The egg hatching was evaluated in 210 syringes by visual estimation (%). Then, eggs and larvae were counted into samples of 100 individuals, in three repetitions by stereo microscope. Significant differences were found between the two tests (p <= 0.05). The egg hatching average of visual estimation was higher than the quantification by sampling, 56.8-48.0, respectively (correlation = 0.85). We found that the visual assessment leads to a higher estimate of larvae in relation to eggs, because the infertile eggs can be concealed in the center of the syringe. In quantification by sampling, no statistical differences (p = 0.99) were observed in the pairwise counts between the three samples (48.1 +/- 26.6%, 47.8 +/- 26.9%, 48.1 +/- 26.5%) (correlation of repetitions = 0.96). This suggests that counting one sample is sufficient and the result should not differ much, regardless of the evaluator. Regarding the cutoff point of tick resistance status (95%), both methods are reliable. This study contributes to improvement of the AIT and can stimulate researchers to choose more accurate techniques for the assessment of egg hatching. |
publishDate |
2018 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2018-12-15 2019-10-04T11:55:34Z 2019-10-04T11:55:34Z |
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.vetpar.2018.10.015 Veterinary Parasitology. Amsterdam: Elsevier Science Bv, v. 264, p. 35-38, 2018. 0304-4017 http://hdl.handle.net/11449/184168 10.1016/j.vetpar.2018.10.015 WOS:000453621400005 |
url |
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.vetpar.2018.10.015 http://hdl.handle.net/11449/184168 |
identifier_str_mv |
Veterinary Parasitology. Amsterdam: Elsevier Science Bv, v. 264, p. 35-38, 2018. 0304-4017 10.1016/j.vetpar.2018.10.015 WOS:000453621400005 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
Veterinary Parasitology |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
35-38 |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Elsevier B.V. |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Elsevier B.V. |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
Web of Science reponame:Repositório Institucional da UNESP instname:Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP) instacron:UNESP |
instname_str |
Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP) |
instacron_str |
UNESP |
institution |
UNESP |
reponame_str |
Repositório Institucional da UNESP |
collection |
Repositório Institucional da UNESP |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Repositório Institucional da UNESP - Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
|
_version_ |
1799964832776060928 |