Ten years later: Evaluation of the effectiveness of 12.5% amitraz against a field population of Rhipicephalus (Boophilus) microplus using field studies, artificial infestation (Stall tests) and adult immersion tests

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Maciel, Willian Giquelin [UNESP]
Data de Publicação: 2015
Outros Autores: Lopes, Welber Daniel Zanetti [UNESP], Cruz, Breno Cayeiro [UNESP], Gomes, Lucas Vinicius Costa [UNESP], Teixeira, Weslen Fabrício Pires [UNESP], Buzzulini, Carolina [UNESP], Bichuette, Murilo Abud [UNESP], Campos, Gabriel Pimentel [UNESP], Felippelli, Gustavo [UNESP], Soares, Vando Edésio [UNESP], de Oliveira, Gilson Pereira [UNESP], da Costa, Alvimar José [UNESP]
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Repositório Institucional da UNESP
Texto Completo: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.vetpar.2015.10.024
http://hdl.handle.net/11449/172603
Resumo: Using field trials, artificial infestations (Stall tests) and in vitro adult immersion tests, the present study evaluated the acaricidal efficacy of 12.5% amitraz administered via whole body spraying against a Rhipicephalus (Boophilus) microplus population that did not have any contact with chemical products belonging to this acaricide family for 10 years (approximately 40 generations). Two natural infestation trials, two artificial infestation trials (Stall tests) and two adult immersion tests were performed in two different stages in 2005 and 2015. Between 2002 and 2015, the bovine herd of this property was formed by approximately 450 animals from the Simmental breed that were divided into nine paddocks formed by Cynodon dactylon (L.) Pers. For the natural infestation experiments in 2005 and 2015, we selected nearly 70 animals naturally infested with ticks from the same herd that belonged to the São Paulo farm located in São José do Rio Pardo, São Paulo, Brazil. Field studies were performed in the same paddock (9). To evaluate anti-R. (B.) microplus activity in the artificially infested cattle (Stall tests) and adult immersion tests, two experiments of each methodology were performed at CPPAR (the Center of Research in Animal Health located on the FCAV/UNESP campus in Jaboticabal, São Paulo, Brazil) in 2005 and 2015. R. (B.) microplus used in the artificial infestation, and adult immersion test experiments were obtained from paddocks 1-9 in 2005 and 2015 from the commercial farm where the field studies were performed. Based on the obtained results, it was possible to conclude that amitraz use in rotation with pyrethroids every 28 days for three consecutive years (2002-2004) previous to the beginning of the first trial (2005) was sufficient to generate a R. (B.) microplus strain resistant to amitraz. Moreover, using field trials, artificial infestations (Stall tests) and adult immersion tests, we verified that 40 generations of the tick species with no contact to the aforementioned compound (amitraz) were not sufficient to revert or modify the efficacy/resistance of amitraz for this analyzed R. (B.) microplus strain. The reversion of amitraz efficacy values in R. (B.) microplus may only occur when resistance of the field strain is incipient. Alternatively, the differences in the results may be due to differences in the Rhipicephalus spp. species between current study locations. Therefore, future studies must be performed to prove this hypothesis.
id UNSP_99bf730a541a8b80c7dac237422b8e0f
oai_identifier_str oai:repositorio.unesp.br:11449/172603
network_acronym_str UNSP
network_name_str Repositório Institucional da UNESP
repository_id_str 2946
spelling Ten years later: Evaluation of the effectiveness of 12.5% amitraz against a field population of Rhipicephalus (Boophilus) microplus using field studies, artificial infestation (Stall tests) and adult immersion testsArtificial infestationsNatural infestationResistanceSpray formulationsStall testUsing field trials, artificial infestations (Stall tests) and in vitro adult immersion tests, the present study evaluated the acaricidal efficacy of 12.5% amitraz administered via whole body spraying against a Rhipicephalus (Boophilus) microplus population that did not have any contact with chemical products belonging to this acaricide family for 10 years (approximately 40 generations). Two natural infestation trials, two artificial infestation trials (Stall tests) and two adult immersion tests were performed in two different stages in 2005 and 2015. Between 2002 and 2015, the bovine herd of this property was formed by approximately 450 animals from the Simmental breed that were divided into nine paddocks formed by Cynodon dactylon (L.) Pers. For the natural infestation experiments in 2005 and 2015, we selected nearly 70 animals naturally infested with ticks from the same herd that belonged to the São Paulo farm located in São José do Rio Pardo, São Paulo, Brazil. Field studies were performed in the same paddock (9). To evaluate anti-R. (B.) microplus activity in the artificially infested cattle (Stall tests) and adult immersion tests, two experiments of each methodology were performed at CPPAR (the Center of Research in Animal Health located on the FCAV/UNESP campus in Jaboticabal, São Paulo, Brazil) in 2005 and 2015. R. (B.) microplus used in the artificial infestation, and adult immersion test experiments were obtained from paddocks 1-9 in 2005 and 2015 from the commercial farm where the field studies were performed. Based on the obtained results, it was possible to conclude that amitraz use in rotation with pyrethroids every 28 days for three consecutive years (2002-2004) previous to the beginning of the first trial (2005) was sufficient to generate a R. (B.) microplus strain resistant to amitraz. Moreover, using field trials, artificial infestations (Stall tests) and adult immersion tests, we verified that 40 generations of the tick species with no contact to the aforementioned compound (amitraz) were not sufficient to revert or modify the efficacy/resistance of amitraz for this analyzed R. (B.) microplus strain. The reversion of amitraz efficacy values in R. (B.) microplus may only occur when resistance of the field strain is incipient. Alternatively, the differences in the results may be due to differences in the Rhipicephalus spp. species between current study locations. Therefore, future studies must be performed to prove this hypothesis.CPPAR-Animal Health Research Center Faculdade de Ciências Agrárias e Veterinárias UNESP Campus de Jaboticabal, Via de Acesso Prof. Paulo Donatto Castellane, s/nInstituto de Patologia Tropical e Saúde Pública Universidade Federal de GoiásCPPAR-Animal Health Research Center Faculdade de Ciências Agrárias e Veterinárias UNESP Campus de Jaboticabal, Via de Acesso Prof. Paulo Donatto Castellane, s/nUniversidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp)Universidade Federal de Goiás (UFG)Maciel, Willian Giquelin [UNESP]Lopes, Welber Daniel Zanetti [UNESP]Cruz, Breno Cayeiro [UNESP]Gomes, Lucas Vinicius Costa [UNESP]Teixeira, Weslen Fabrício Pires [UNESP]Buzzulini, Carolina [UNESP]Bichuette, Murilo Abud [UNESP]Campos, Gabriel Pimentel [UNESP]Felippelli, Gustavo [UNESP]Soares, Vando Edésio [UNESP]de Oliveira, Gilson Pereira [UNESP]da Costa, Alvimar José [UNESP]2018-12-11T17:01:19Z2018-12-11T17:01:19Z2015-12-15info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/article233-241application/pdfhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.vetpar.2015.10.024Veterinary Parasitology, v. 214, n. 3-4, p. 233-241, 2015.1873-25500304-4017http://hdl.handle.net/11449/17260310.1016/j.vetpar.2015.10.0242-s2.0-849593545762-s2.0-84959354576.pdfScopusreponame:Repositório Institucional da UNESPinstname:Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)instacron:UNESPengVeterinary Parasitology1,275info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess2024-04-12T13:07:01Zoai:repositorio.unesp.br:11449/172603Repositório InstitucionalPUBhttp://repositorio.unesp.br/oai/requestopendoar:29462024-04-12T13:07:01Repositório Institucional da UNESP - Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Ten years later: Evaluation of the effectiveness of 12.5% amitraz against a field population of Rhipicephalus (Boophilus) microplus using field studies, artificial infestation (Stall tests) and adult immersion tests
title Ten years later: Evaluation of the effectiveness of 12.5% amitraz against a field population of Rhipicephalus (Boophilus) microplus using field studies, artificial infestation (Stall tests) and adult immersion tests
spellingShingle Ten years later: Evaluation of the effectiveness of 12.5% amitraz against a field population of Rhipicephalus (Boophilus) microplus using field studies, artificial infestation (Stall tests) and adult immersion tests
Maciel, Willian Giquelin [UNESP]
Artificial infestations
Natural infestation
Resistance
Spray formulations
Stall test
title_short Ten years later: Evaluation of the effectiveness of 12.5% amitraz against a field population of Rhipicephalus (Boophilus) microplus using field studies, artificial infestation (Stall tests) and adult immersion tests
title_full Ten years later: Evaluation of the effectiveness of 12.5% amitraz against a field population of Rhipicephalus (Boophilus) microplus using field studies, artificial infestation (Stall tests) and adult immersion tests
title_fullStr Ten years later: Evaluation of the effectiveness of 12.5% amitraz against a field population of Rhipicephalus (Boophilus) microplus using field studies, artificial infestation (Stall tests) and adult immersion tests
title_full_unstemmed Ten years later: Evaluation of the effectiveness of 12.5% amitraz against a field population of Rhipicephalus (Boophilus) microplus using field studies, artificial infestation (Stall tests) and adult immersion tests
title_sort Ten years later: Evaluation of the effectiveness of 12.5% amitraz against a field population of Rhipicephalus (Boophilus) microplus using field studies, artificial infestation (Stall tests) and adult immersion tests
author Maciel, Willian Giquelin [UNESP]
author_facet Maciel, Willian Giquelin [UNESP]
Lopes, Welber Daniel Zanetti [UNESP]
Cruz, Breno Cayeiro [UNESP]
Gomes, Lucas Vinicius Costa [UNESP]
Teixeira, Weslen Fabrício Pires [UNESP]
Buzzulini, Carolina [UNESP]
Bichuette, Murilo Abud [UNESP]
Campos, Gabriel Pimentel [UNESP]
Felippelli, Gustavo [UNESP]
Soares, Vando Edésio [UNESP]
de Oliveira, Gilson Pereira [UNESP]
da Costa, Alvimar José [UNESP]
author_role author
author2 Lopes, Welber Daniel Zanetti [UNESP]
Cruz, Breno Cayeiro [UNESP]
Gomes, Lucas Vinicius Costa [UNESP]
Teixeira, Weslen Fabrício Pires [UNESP]
Buzzulini, Carolina [UNESP]
Bichuette, Murilo Abud [UNESP]
Campos, Gabriel Pimentel [UNESP]
Felippelli, Gustavo [UNESP]
Soares, Vando Edésio [UNESP]
de Oliveira, Gilson Pereira [UNESP]
da Costa, Alvimar José [UNESP]
author2_role author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
author
dc.contributor.none.fl_str_mv Universidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp)
Universidade Federal de Goiás (UFG)
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Maciel, Willian Giquelin [UNESP]
Lopes, Welber Daniel Zanetti [UNESP]
Cruz, Breno Cayeiro [UNESP]
Gomes, Lucas Vinicius Costa [UNESP]
Teixeira, Weslen Fabrício Pires [UNESP]
Buzzulini, Carolina [UNESP]
Bichuette, Murilo Abud [UNESP]
Campos, Gabriel Pimentel [UNESP]
Felippelli, Gustavo [UNESP]
Soares, Vando Edésio [UNESP]
de Oliveira, Gilson Pereira [UNESP]
da Costa, Alvimar José [UNESP]
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Artificial infestations
Natural infestation
Resistance
Spray formulations
Stall test
topic Artificial infestations
Natural infestation
Resistance
Spray formulations
Stall test
description Using field trials, artificial infestations (Stall tests) and in vitro adult immersion tests, the present study evaluated the acaricidal efficacy of 12.5% amitraz administered via whole body spraying against a Rhipicephalus (Boophilus) microplus population that did not have any contact with chemical products belonging to this acaricide family for 10 years (approximately 40 generations). Two natural infestation trials, two artificial infestation trials (Stall tests) and two adult immersion tests were performed in two different stages in 2005 and 2015. Between 2002 and 2015, the bovine herd of this property was formed by approximately 450 animals from the Simmental breed that were divided into nine paddocks formed by Cynodon dactylon (L.) Pers. For the natural infestation experiments in 2005 and 2015, we selected nearly 70 animals naturally infested with ticks from the same herd that belonged to the São Paulo farm located in São José do Rio Pardo, São Paulo, Brazil. Field studies were performed in the same paddock (9). To evaluate anti-R. (B.) microplus activity in the artificially infested cattle (Stall tests) and adult immersion tests, two experiments of each methodology were performed at CPPAR (the Center of Research in Animal Health located on the FCAV/UNESP campus in Jaboticabal, São Paulo, Brazil) in 2005 and 2015. R. (B.) microplus used in the artificial infestation, and adult immersion test experiments were obtained from paddocks 1-9 in 2005 and 2015 from the commercial farm where the field studies were performed. Based on the obtained results, it was possible to conclude that amitraz use in rotation with pyrethroids every 28 days for three consecutive years (2002-2004) previous to the beginning of the first trial (2005) was sufficient to generate a R. (B.) microplus strain resistant to amitraz. Moreover, using field trials, artificial infestations (Stall tests) and adult immersion tests, we verified that 40 generations of the tick species with no contact to the aforementioned compound (amitraz) were not sufficient to revert or modify the efficacy/resistance of amitraz for this analyzed R. (B.) microplus strain. The reversion of amitraz efficacy values in R. (B.) microplus may only occur when resistance of the field strain is incipient. Alternatively, the differences in the results may be due to differences in the Rhipicephalus spp. species between current study locations. Therefore, future studies must be performed to prove this hypothesis.
publishDate 2015
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2015-12-15
2018-12-11T17:01:19Z
2018-12-11T17:01:19Z
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.2015.10.024
Veterinary Parasitology, v. 214, n. 3-4, p. 233-241, 2015.
1873-2550
0304-4017
http://hdl.handle.net/11449/172603
10.1016/j.vetpar.2015.10.024
2-s2.0-84959354576
2-s2.0-84959354576.pdf
url http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.vetpar.2015.10.024
http://hdl.handle.net/11449/172603
identifier_str_mv Veterinary Parasitology, v. 214, n. 3-4, p. 233-241, 2015.
1873-2550
0304-4017
10.1016/j.vetpar.2015.10.024
2-s2.0-84959354576
2-s2.0-84959354576.pdf
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv Veterinary Parasitology
1,275
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv 233-241
application/pdf
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Scopus
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_ 1799965604883464192