Assessing the effectiveness of prophylactic treatment strategies for sheep scab.


Journal

Veterinary parasitology
ISSN: 1873-2550
Titre abrégé: Vet Parasitol
Pays: Netherlands
ID NLM: 7602745

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
Dec 2022
Historique:
received: 12 07 2022
revised: 14 10 2022
accepted: 17 10 2022
pubmed: 30 10 2022
medline: 6 12 2022
entrez: 29 10 2022
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Ovine psoroptic mange (sheep scab) is a condition caused by a hypersensitivity response to the ectoparasitic mite, Psoroptes ovis. It is an animal welfare concern and causes extensive economic losses to the sheep industry worldwide. More effective scab management is required to limit increases in infection prevalence, particularly given growing concerns over acaricide resistance. Here, a stochastic metapopulation model is used to explore the effectiveness of a range of prophylactic acaricide treatment strategies in comparison to no intervention. Over a simulated one-year period, movement control, based on the prophylactic treatment of animals being moved in sales, followed by farm biosecurity of bought in animals, was shown to be the most effective at reducing scab risk and more cost-effective than no intervention. Localised targeting of prophylaxis in areas of high scab prevalence was more effective than using prophylaxis at random, however, this localised effect declined post-treatment because of the import of infected animals. The analysis highlights the role of the movement of infected animals in maintaining high levels of scab infection and the importance of reducing this route of transmission to allow localised management to be effective.

Identifiants

pubmed: 36308896
pii: S0304-4017(22)00176-5
doi: 10.1016/j.vetpar.2022.109822
pii:
doi:

Substances chimiques

Acaricides 0
Allergens 0

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

109822

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

Conflict of interest The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.

Auteurs

Emily Joanne Nixon (EJ)

Department of Mathematical Sciences, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK; School of Biological Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol BS8 1TQ, UK. Electronic address: emily.nixon@liverpool.ac.uk.

Ellen Brooks-Pollock (E)

School of Population Health Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK; NIHR Health Protection Research Unit in Behavioural Science and Evaluation at University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.

Richard Wall (R)

School of Biological Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol BS8 1TQ, UK.

Articles similaires

Robotic Surgical Procedures Animals Humans Telemedicine Models, Animal

Odour generalisation and detection dog training.

Lyn Caldicott, Thomas W Pike, Helen E Zulch et al.
1.00
Animals Odorants Dogs Generalization, Psychological Smell
Animals TOR Serine-Threonine Kinases Colorectal Neoplasms Colitis Mice
Animals Tail Swine Behavior, Animal Animal Husbandry

Classifications MeSH