Susceptibility of Rhipicephalus (Boophilus) microplus to fluazuron (2.5 mg/kg) and a combination of novaluron (2.0 mg/kg) + eprinomectin (0.36 mg/kg) in field studies in Brazil
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2016 |
Outros Autores: | , , , , , , , , , , |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | eng |
Título da fonte: | Repositório Institucional da UNESP |
Texto Completo: | http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.prevetmed.2016.10.019 http://hdl.handle.net/11449/173805 |
Resumo: | The present study aimed to determine the susceptibility of 32 R. (B.) microplus populations from Southeast, Midwest and South regions of Brazil, to fluazuron (2.5 mg/kg), administered topically (pour-on). Additionally, five populations (Southeast and Midwest regions) of the southern cattle tick were evaluated using in vivo field studies, regarding their susceptibility to a new combination of novaluron (2.0 mg/kg) + eprinomectin (0.36 mg/kg), administered subcutaneously, compared with two positive controls (fluazuron 2.5 mg/kg and eprinomectin 0.5 mg/kg), both administered topically (pour-on). Selected bovines were allocated to treatment groups on day 0, and block formation was based on arithmetic means of female ticks (4.5–8.0 mm long) counted on three consecutive days (−3, −2 and −1). To evaluate therapeutic and residual efficacies of these formulations, tick counts (females ranging from 4.5 to 8.0 mm long) were performed on days 3, 7 and 14 post-treatment, continuing on a weekly basis until the end of each experiment. Results obtained throughout this study, utilizing field efficacy trials, allowed us to conclude that four R. (B.) microplus populations (including two in the Southeast and two in the Midwest regions) could be diagnosed as resistant, or with low susceptibility, to fluazuron (2.5 mg/kg). Such fact was detected in farms where owners applied products containing this active component on cattle for at least five years, with treatment intervals of 30–55 days during the rainy season. Nonetheless, in vitro studies should be performed in order to reinforce in vivo results obtained on the present study. Regarding efficacy indexes obtained by the association of eprinomectin and the novel molecule novaluron against R. (B.) microplus, none of the trials managed to obtain efficacies superior to 48%. Such results, allied to data obtained by different researchers and previously published in literature, reinforce the perception that maybe these formulations containing novaluron, in the administered dosages and treatment routes, may not be effective tools for controlling R. (B.) microplus. However, future studies must be conducted in order to support such hypothesis. Additionally, all five R. (B.) microplus populations were diagnosed as resistant, or with low susceptibility, to eprinomectin (0.5 mg/kg) as well. Even though fluazuron, administered topically (pour on), is still an excellent active principle to be used against R. (B.) microplus, resistance management strategies should be quickly implemented in order to keep selection pressure in Brazil at a minimum level for this compound. |
id |
UNSP_c1bedaf52b58163532146a6a6d36a8d3 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:repositorio.unesp.br:11449/173805 |
network_acronym_str |
UNSP |
network_name_str |
Repositório Institucional da UNESP |
repository_id_str |
2946 |
spelling |
Susceptibility of Rhipicephalus (Boophilus) microplus to fluazuron (2.5 mg/kg) and a combination of novaluron (2.0 mg/kg) + eprinomectin (0.36 mg/kg) in field studies in BrazilBenzoylphenyl ureaCattleMacrocyclic lactoneResistanceTicksThe present study aimed to determine the susceptibility of 32 R. (B.) microplus populations from Southeast, Midwest and South regions of Brazil, to fluazuron (2.5 mg/kg), administered topically (pour-on). Additionally, five populations (Southeast and Midwest regions) of the southern cattle tick were evaluated using in vivo field studies, regarding their susceptibility to a new combination of novaluron (2.0 mg/kg) + eprinomectin (0.36 mg/kg), administered subcutaneously, compared with two positive controls (fluazuron 2.5 mg/kg and eprinomectin 0.5 mg/kg), both administered topically (pour-on). Selected bovines were allocated to treatment groups on day 0, and block formation was based on arithmetic means of female ticks (4.5–8.0 mm long) counted on three consecutive days (−3, −2 and −1). To evaluate therapeutic and residual efficacies of these formulations, tick counts (females ranging from 4.5 to 8.0 mm long) were performed on days 3, 7 and 14 post-treatment, continuing on a weekly basis until the end of each experiment. Results obtained throughout this study, utilizing field efficacy trials, allowed us to conclude that four R. (B.) microplus populations (including two in the Southeast and two in the Midwest regions) could be diagnosed as resistant, or with low susceptibility, to fluazuron (2.5 mg/kg). Such fact was detected in farms where owners applied products containing this active component on cattle for at least five years, with treatment intervals of 30–55 days during the rainy season. Nonetheless, in vitro studies should be performed in order to reinforce in vivo results obtained on the present study. Regarding efficacy indexes obtained by the association of eprinomectin and the novel molecule novaluron against R. (B.) microplus, none of the trials managed to obtain efficacies superior to 48%. Such results, allied to data obtained by different researchers and previously published in literature, reinforce the perception that maybe these formulations containing novaluron, in the administered dosages and treatment routes, may not be effective tools for controlling R. (B.) microplus. However, future studies must be conducted in order to support such hypothesis. Additionally, all five R. (B.) microplus populations were diagnosed as resistant, or with low susceptibility, to eprinomectin (0.5 mg/kg) as well. Even though fluazuron, administered topically (pour on), is still an excellent active principle to be used against R. (B.) microplus, resistance management strategies should be quickly implemented in order to keep selection pressure in Brazil at a minimum level for this compound.CPPAR − Animal Health Research Center Faculdade de Ciências Agrárias e Veterinárias UNESP Jaboticabal Campus, Access Route Prof. Paulo Donato Castellane, JaboticabalInstituto de Patologia Tropical e Saúde Pública Universidade Federal de Goiás (IPTSP/EVZ/UFG)Universidade Federal do Mato Grosso do Sul (UFMS)Universidade Estadual de Maringá Umuarama Regional CampusUniversidade Federal de Goiás, Regional de JataíCPPAR − Animal Health Research Center Faculdade de Ciências Agrárias e Veterinárias UNESP Jaboticabal Campus, Access Route Prof. Paulo Donato Castellane, JaboticabalUniversidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp)Universidade Federal de Goiás (UFG)Universidade Federal de Mato Grosso do Sul (UFMS)Universidade Estadual de Maringá (UEM)Maciel, Willian Giquelin [UNESP]Lopes, Welber Daniel Zanetti [UNESP]Gomes, Lucas Vinicius Costa [UNESP]Cruz, Breno Cayeiro [UNESP]Felippelli, Gustavo [UNESP]Santos, Isabella Barbosa Dos [UNESP]Borges, Fernando de AlmeidaGonçalves, Walter AntonioScarpa, Alexandre BragaNicaretta, João EduardoBastos, Thiago Souza Azeredoda Costa, Alvimar José [UNESP]2018-12-11T17:07:50Z2018-12-11T17:07:50Z2016-12-01info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/article74-86application/pdfhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.prevetmed.2016.10.019Preventive Veterinary Medicine, v. 135, p. 74-86.0167-5877http://hdl.handle.net/11449/17380510.1016/j.prevetmed.2016.10.0192-s2.0-849957524522-s2.0-84995752452.pdfScopusreponame:Repositório Institucional da UNESPinstname:Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)instacron:UNESPengPreventive Veterinary Medicine1,144info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess2024-04-12T13:07:00Zoai:repositorio.unesp.br:11449/173805Repositório InstitucionalPUBhttp://repositorio.unesp.br/oai/requestopendoar:29462024-08-05T19:46:51.227120Repositório Institucional da UNESP - Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)false |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Susceptibility of Rhipicephalus (Boophilus) microplus to fluazuron (2.5 mg/kg) and a combination of novaluron (2.0 mg/kg) + eprinomectin (0.36 mg/kg) in field studies in Brazil |
title |
Susceptibility of Rhipicephalus (Boophilus) microplus to fluazuron (2.5 mg/kg) and a combination of novaluron (2.0 mg/kg) + eprinomectin (0.36 mg/kg) in field studies in Brazil |
spellingShingle |
Susceptibility of Rhipicephalus (Boophilus) microplus to fluazuron (2.5 mg/kg) and a combination of novaluron (2.0 mg/kg) + eprinomectin (0.36 mg/kg) in field studies in Brazil Maciel, Willian Giquelin [UNESP] Benzoylphenyl urea Cattle Macrocyclic lactone Resistance Ticks |
title_short |
Susceptibility of Rhipicephalus (Boophilus) microplus to fluazuron (2.5 mg/kg) and a combination of novaluron (2.0 mg/kg) + eprinomectin (0.36 mg/kg) in field studies in Brazil |
title_full |
Susceptibility of Rhipicephalus (Boophilus) microplus to fluazuron (2.5 mg/kg) and a combination of novaluron (2.0 mg/kg) + eprinomectin (0.36 mg/kg) in field studies in Brazil |
title_fullStr |
Susceptibility of Rhipicephalus (Boophilus) microplus to fluazuron (2.5 mg/kg) and a combination of novaluron (2.0 mg/kg) + eprinomectin (0.36 mg/kg) in field studies in Brazil |
title_full_unstemmed |
Susceptibility of Rhipicephalus (Boophilus) microplus to fluazuron (2.5 mg/kg) and a combination of novaluron (2.0 mg/kg) + eprinomectin (0.36 mg/kg) in field studies in Brazil |
title_sort |
Susceptibility of Rhipicephalus (Boophilus) microplus to fluazuron (2.5 mg/kg) and a combination of novaluron (2.0 mg/kg) + eprinomectin (0.36 mg/kg) in field studies in Brazil |
author |
Maciel, Willian Giquelin [UNESP] |
author_facet |
Maciel, Willian Giquelin [UNESP] Lopes, Welber Daniel Zanetti [UNESP] Gomes, Lucas Vinicius Costa [UNESP] Cruz, Breno Cayeiro [UNESP] Felippelli, Gustavo [UNESP] Santos, Isabella Barbosa Dos [UNESP] Borges, Fernando de Almeida Gonçalves, Walter Antonio Scarpa, Alexandre Braga Nicaretta, João Eduardo Bastos, Thiago Souza Azeredo da Costa, Alvimar José [UNESP] |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Lopes, Welber Daniel Zanetti [UNESP] Gomes, Lucas Vinicius Costa [UNESP] Cruz, Breno Cayeiro [UNESP] Felippelli, Gustavo [UNESP] Santos, Isabella Barbosa Dos [UNESP] Borges, Fernando de Almeida Gonçalves, Walter Antonio Scarpa, Alexandre Braga Nicaretta, João Eduardo Bastos, Thiago Souza Azeredo 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) Universidade Federal de Mato Grosso do Sul (UFMS) Universidade Estadual de Maringá (UEM) |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Maciel, Willian Giquelin [UNESP] Lopes, Welber Daniel Zanetti [UNESP] Gomes, Lucas Vinicius Costa [UNESP] Cruz, Breno Cayeiro [UNESP] Felippelli, Gustavo [UNESP] Santos, Isabella Barbosa Dos [UNESP] Borges, Fernando de Almeida Gonçalves, Walter Antonio Scarpa, Alexandre Braga Nicaretta, João Eduardo Bastos, Thiago Souza Azeredo da Costa, Alvimar José [UNESP] |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Benzoylphenyl urea Cattle Macrocyclic lactone Resistance Ticks |
topic |
Benzoylphenyl urea Cattle Macrocyclic lactone Resistance Ticks |
description |
The present study aimed to determine the susceptibility of 32 R. (B.) microplus populations from Southeast, Midwest and South regions of Brazil, to fluazuron (2.5 mg/kg), administered topically (pour-on). Additionally, five populations (Southeast and Midwest regions) of the southern cattle tick were evaluated using in vivo field studies, regarding their susceptibility to a new combination of novaluron (2.0 mg/kg) + eprinomectin (0.36 mg/kg), administered subcutaneously, compared with two positive controls (fluazuron 2.5 mg/kg and eprinomectin 0.5 mg/kg), both administered topically (pour-on). Selected bovines were allocated to treatment groups on day 0, and block formation was based on arithmetic means of female ticks (4.5–8.0 mm long) counted on three consecutive days (−3, −2 and −1). To evaluate therapeutic and residual efficacies of these formulations, tick counts (females ranging from 4.5 to 8.0 mm long) were performed on days 3, 7 and 14 post-treatment, continuing on a weekly basis until the end of each experiment. Results obtained throughout this study, utilizing field efficacy trials, allowed us to conclude that four R. (B.) microplus populations (including two in the Southeast and two in the Midwest regions) could be diagnosed as resistant, or with low susceptibility, to fluazuron (2.5 mg/kg). Such fact was detected in farms where owners applied products containing this active component on cattle for at least five years, with treatment intervals of 30–55 days during the rainy season. Nonetheless, in vitro studies should be performed in order to reinforce in vivo results obtained on the present study. Regarding efficacy indexes obtained by the association of eprinomectin and the novel molecule novaluron against R. (B.) microplus, none of the trials managed to obtain efficacies superior to 48%. Such results, allied to data obtained by different researchers and previously published in literature, reinforce the perception that maybe these formulations containing novaluron, in the administered dosages and treatment routes, may not be effective tools for controlling R. (B.) microplus. However, future studies must be conducted in order to support such hypothesis. Additionally, all five R. (B.) microplus populations were diagnosed as resistant, or with low susceptibility, to eprinomectin (0.5 mg/kg) as well. Even though fluazuron, administered topically (pour on), is still an excellent active principle to be used against R. (B.) microplus, resistance management strategies should be quickly implemented in order to keep selection pressure in Brazil at a minimum level for this compound. |
publishDate |
2016 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2016-12-01 2018-12-11T17:07:50Z 2018-12-11T17:07:50Z |
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.prevetmed.2016.10.019 Preventive Veterinary Medicine, v. 135, p. 74-86. 0167-5877 http://hdl.handle.net/11449/173805 10.1016/j.prevetmed.2016.10.019 2-s2.0-84995752452 2-s2.0-84995752452.pdf |
url |
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.prevetmed.2016.10.019 http://hdl.handle.net/11449/173805 |
identifier_str_mv |
Preventive Veterinary Medicine, v. 135, p. 74-86. 0167-5877 10.1016/j.prevetmed.2016.10.019 2-s2.0-84995752452 2-s2.0-84995752452.pdf |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
Preventive Veterinary Medicine 1,144 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
74-86 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_ |
1808129118073520128 |