Enzootic stability of tick fever in Holstein calves grazing in a tropical region, subjected to strategic cattle tick control with fluralaner.
Rhipicephalus microplus
Anaplasmosis
Babesiosis
Isoxazoline
Journal
Parasites & vectors
ISSN: 1756-3305
Titre abrégé: Parasit Vectors
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101462774
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
10 Mar 2024
10 Mar 2024
Historique:
received:
21
02
2024
accepted:
22
02
2024
medline:
10
3
2024
pubmed:
10
3
2024
entrez:
9
3
2024
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
In 2022, fluralaner was launched on the market for use in the control of the cattle tick Rhipicephalus microplus after showing 100% efficacy in registration trials against the causative agents of cattle tick fever (TFAs). The aim of the present study was to determine whether a strategic control regimen against R. microplus using fluralaner (FLU) in Holstein calves grazing in a tropical region would alter the enzootic stability status of cattle tick fever, triggering outbreaks in these animals up to 22 months age. In this study, a group of calves treated with FLU was compared with a control group treated with the regimen currently being used on the farm, which consisted of the fipronil + fluazuron formulation (FIFLUA). In the first experiment, the efficacy of the FIFLUA pour-on formulation was evaluated in a field study. In the second experiment, which lasted 550 days, two experimental groups (n = 30/group) of Holstein calves naturally infested with R. microplus were analyzed. Calves aged 4 to 10 months received either a specific treatment regimen with FLU (experimental group) or FIFLUA (control group). During this period, tick counts, animal weight measurement, feces collection (to determine eggs and oocysts per gram of feces), tick fever monitoring, blood smears (to ascertain enzootic stability of the herd), PCR testing for TFAs and serology (indirect enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay [iELISA]) were performed. All calves were evaluated for signs of tick fever between ages 11 and 22 months. FIFLUA showed an acaricidal efficacy of > 90% from post-treatment days 14 to 35. Regarding treatments against the TFAs, the average number of treatments was similar between groups, but animals treated with FLU had a smaller reduction in packed cell volume on some of the evaluation dates of the second and third treatment against TFAs. In calves aged 10 months in the FLU group, B. bovis was not detected by PCR (0/15 samples), 40% of the samples had antibody titers and 33% (10/30) of the samples had positive blood smears. Regarding B. bigemina, > 86% of the samples in both groups tested positive for B. bigemina DNA and antibodies; there was no difference in the antibody titers between the groups. There were no clinical cases of cattle tick fever in calves aged 11 to 22 months. In comparison with the control treatment, the strategic control regimen against R. microplus with FLU that was implemented in the present study did not negatively affect the enzootic stability status of A. marginale and B. bigemina in the herd up to 22 months of age. The enzootic stability status of B. bovis was not reached by either group. These results likely represent a characteristic of the local tick population, so further studies should be performed.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
In 2022, fluralaner was launched on the market for use in the control of the cattle tick Rhipicephalus microplus after showing 100% efficacy in registration trials against the causative agents of cattle tick fever (TFAs). The aim of the present study was to determine whether a strategic control regimen against R. microplus using fluralaner (FLU) in Holstein calves grazing in a tropical region would alter the enzootic stability status of cattle tick fever, triggering outbreaks in these animals up to 22 months age.
METHODS
METHODS
In this study, a group of calves treated with FLU was compared with a control group treated with the regimen currently being used on the farm, which consisted of the fipronil + fluazuron formulation (FIFLUA). In the first experiment, the efficacy of the FIFLUA pour-on formulation was evaluated in a field study. In the second experiment, which lasted 550 days, two experimental groups (n = 30/group) of Holstein calves naturally infested with R. microplus were analyzed. Calves aged 4 to 10 months received either a specific treatment regimen with FLU (experimental group) or FIFLUA (control group). During this period, tick counts, animal weight measurement, feces collection (to determine eggs and oocysts per gram of feces), tick fever monitoring, blood smears (to ascertain enzootic stability of the herd), PCR testing for TFAs and serology (indirect enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay [iELISA]) were performed. All calves were evaluated for signs of tick fever between ages 11 and 22 months.
RESULTS
RESULTS
FIFLUA showed an acaricidal efficacy of > 90% from post-treatment days 14 to 35. Regarding treatments against the TFAs, the average number of treatments was similar between groups, but animals treated with FLU had a smaller reduction in packed cell volume on some of the evaluation dates of the second and third treatment against TFAs. In calves aged 10 months in the FLU group, B. bovis was not detected by PCR (0/15 samples), 40% of the samples had antibody titers and 33% (10/30) of the samples had positive blood smears. Regarding B. bigemina, > 86% of the samples in both groups tested positive for B. bigemina DNA and antibodies; there was no difference in the antibody titers between the groups. There were no clinical cases of cattle tick fever in calves aged 11 to 22 months.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
In comparison with the control treatment, the strategic control regimen against R. microplus with FLU that was implemented in the present study did not negatively affect the enzootic stability status of A. marginale and B. bigemina in the herd up to 22 months of age. The enzootic stability status of B. bovis was not reached by either group. These results likely represent a characteristic of the local tick population, so further studies should be performed.
Identifiants
pubmed: 38461304
doi: 10.1186/s13071-024-06212-w
pii: 10.1186/s13071-024-06212-w
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
120Informations de copyright
© 2024. The Author(s).
Références
Machado RZ, da Silva JB, André MR, Gonçalves LR, Matos CA, Obregón D. Outbreak of anaplasmosis associated with the presence of different Anaplasma marginale strains in dairy cattle in the states of São Paulo and Goiás. Rev Bras Parasitol Vet. 2015;24:438–46.
pubmed: 26648009
Heller LM, Zapa DMB, Couto LFM, de Aquino Gontijo LM, Nicaretta JE, de Morais IML, et al. Techniques for monitoring dairy calves against the tick fever agents: a comparative analysis. Vet Res Commun. 2022;46:879–902.
pubmed: 35362860
Nicaretta JE, de Melo Junior RD, Naves RB, de Morais IML, Salvador VF, Leal LLLL, et al. Selective versus strategic control against Rhipicephalus microplus in cattle: a comparative analysis of efficacy, animal health, productivity, cost, and resistance management. Vet Parasitol. 2023;321:109999.
pubmed: 37556962
Nicaretta JE, Zapa DMB, Couto LFM, Heller LM, Cavalcante AS de A, Cruvinel LB, et al. Rhipicephalus microplus seasonal dynamic in a Cerrado biome, Brazil: An update data considering the global warming. Vet Parasitol. 2021;296:109506.
Gomes LVC, Lopes WDZ, Teixeira WFP, Maciel WG, Cruz BC, Felippelli G, et al. Population dynamics and evaluation of the partial selective treatment of crossbreed steers naturally infested with Rhipicephalus (Boophilus) microplus in a herd from the state of Minas Gerais in Brazil. Vet Parasitol. 2016;220:72–6.
pubmed: 26995724
Rodriguez-Vivas RI, Jonsson NN, Bhushan C. Strategies for the control of Rhipicephalus microplus ticks in a world of conventional acaricide and macrocyclic lactone resistance. Parasitol Res. 2018;117:3–29.
pubmed: 29152691
Gonzaga BCF, de Moraes NR, Gomes GW, Coutinho AL, Vale FL, Sousa LJMP, et al. Combination of synthetic acaricides with (E)-cinnamaldehyde to control Rhipicephalus microplus. Exp Appl Acarol. 2022;88:191–207.
Lopes WDZ, Chiummo RM, Vettorato LF, de Castro Rodrigues D, Sonada RB. The effectiveness of a fixed-dose combination pour-on formulation of 1.25% fipronil and 2.5% fluazuron against economically important ectoparasites and associated pharmacokinetics in cattle. Parasitol Int. 2017;66:627–34.
Gomes LVC, Lopes WDZ, Cruz BC, Teixeira WF, Felippelli G, Maciel WG, et al. Acaricidal effects of fluazuron (2.5 mg/kg) and a combination of fluazuron (1.6 mg/kg) + ivermectin (0.63 mg/kg), administered at different routes, against Rhipicephalus (Boophilus) microplus parasitizing cattle. Exp Parasitol. 2015;153:22–8.
Nicaretta JE, Couto LFM, Heller LM, Ferreira LL, Cavalcante AS de A, Zapa DMB, et al. Evaluation of different strategic control protocols for Rhipicephalus microplus on cattle according to tick burden. Ticks Tick Borne Dis. 2021;12:101737.
Gomes LVC, Teixeira WFP, Maciel WG, Felippelli G, Buzzulini C, Soares VE, et al. Strategic control of cattle co-parasitized by tick, fly and gastrointestinal nematodes: Is it better to use ecto + endoparasiticide or just endectocide formulations? Vet Parasitol. 2022;301:109622.
Reck J, Klafke GM, Webster A, Dall’Agnol B, Scheffer R, Souza UA, et al. First report of fluazuron resistance in Rhipicephalus microplus: a field tick population resistant to six classes of acaricides. Vet Parasitol. 2014;201:128–36.
Lopes WDZ, Cruz BC, Teixeira WFP, Felippelli G, Maciel WG, Buzzulini C, et al. Efficacy of fipronil (1.0 mg/kg) against Rhipicephalus (Boophilus) microplus strains resistant to ivermectin (0.63 mg/kg). Prev Vet Med. 2014;115:88–93.
pubmed: 24853051
Cruz BC, Lopes WDZ, Maciel WG, Felippelli G, Fávero FC, Teixeira WFP, et al. Susceptibility of Rhipicephalus (Boophilus) microplus to ivermectin (200, 500 and 630μg/kg) in field studies in Brazil. Vet Parasitol. 2015;207:309–17.
pubmed: 25576441
Maciel WG, Lopes WDZ, Gomes LVC, Cruz BC, Felippelli G, Santos IB Dos, et al. 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. Prev Vet Med. 2016;135:74–86.
Agwunobi DO, Yu Z, Liu J. A retrospective review on ixodid tick resistance against synthetic acaricides: implications and perspectives for future resistance prevention and mitigation. Pestic Biochem Physiol. 2021;173:104776.
pubmed: 33771255
Dzemo WD, Thekisoe O, Vudriko P. Development of acaricide resistance in tick populations of cattle: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Heliyon. 2022;8:e08718.
pubmed: 35059516
pmcid: 8760414
Obaid MK, Islam N, Alouffi A, Khan AZ, da Silva Vaz I, Tanaka T, et al. Acaricides resistance in ticks: selection, diagnosis, mechanisms, and mitigation. Front Cell Infect Microbiol. 2022;1212:941831.
da Costa AJ, de Souza Martins JR, de Almeida Borges F, Vettorato LF, Barufi FB, de Oliveira Arriero Amaral H, et al. First report of the efficacy of a fluralaner-based pour-on product (Exzolt
Mahoney DF, Ross DR. Epizootiological factors in the control of bovine babesiosis. Aust Vet J. 1972;48:292–8.
pubmed: 4672119
Smith RD, Evans DE, Martins JR, Ceresér VH, Correa BL, Petraccia C, et al. Babesiosis (Babesia bovis) stability in unstable environments. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2000;916:510–20.
pubmed: 11193666
Alvares CA, Stape JL, Sentelhas PC, de Moraes Gonçalves JL, Sparovek G. Köppen’s climate classification map for Brazil. Meteorol Z. 2013;22:711–28.
Wharton RH, Utech KBW. The relation between engorgement band dropping of Boophilus microplus (Canestrini) (Ixodidae) to the assessment of tick numbers on cattle. Aust J Entomol. 1970;9:171–82.
Gordon HWH. A new technique for counting nematode eggs in sheep faeces. J Counc Sci Ind Res Aust. 1939;12:50–2.
Ueno H, Golçalves PC. Manual para diagnóstico das helmintoses de ruminantes. 4 ed. Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA), Tokyo; 1998.
Weiss DJ, Wardrop KJ. Schalm’s Veterinary Hematology. 6th ed. Wiley, Hoboken; 2011.
Gomes K, Santos MGC, Franco DF, Pires RB, Silva MG, Neves MF, et al. Avaliação do hematócrito e da proteína plasmática em sangues hemodiluidos. Eletron R Med Vet. 2007;7.
Instituto Interamericano de Cooperación Para la Agricultura (IICA). Técnicas para el Diagnóstico de babesiosis y Anaplasmosis Bovina. Confederación Unitaria de Trabajadores (Serie Salud Animal). Publicacion Cientifica n. 8; 1984. http://repiica.iica.int/docs/B1335e/B1335e.pdf .
Coetzee JF, Apley MD, Kocan KM. Comparison of the efficacy of enrofloxacin, imidocarb, and oxytetracycline for clearance of persistent Anaplasma marginale infections in cattle. Vet Ther. 2006;7:347–60.
pubmed: 17216590
Torioni de Echaide S, Knowles DP, McGuire TC, Palmer GH, Suarez CE, McElwain TF. Detection of cattle naturally infected with anaplasma marginale in a region of endemicity by nested pcr and a competitive enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay using recombinant major surface protein 5. J Clin Microbiol. 1998;36:777–82.
de Echaide ST, Knowles DP, McGuire TC, palmer GH, suarez ce, mcelwain tf. detection of cattle naturally infected with anaplasma marginale in a region of endemicity by nested pcr and a competitive enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay using recombinant major surface protein 5. J Clin Microbiol. 2001;39:1207–1207.
pmcid: 87910
Parodi P, Corbellini LG, Leotti VB, Rivero R, Miraballes C, Riet-Correa F, et al. Validation of a multiplex PCR assay to detect Babesia spp. and Anaplasma marginale in cattle in Uruguay in the absence of a gold standard test. J Vet Diagn Invest. 2021;33:73–9.
de la Fournière S, Paoletta MS, Guillemi EC, Sarmiento NF, Donati PA, Wilkowsky SE, et al. Development of highly sensitive one step-PCR tests for improved detection of B. bigemina and B. bovis. Vet Parasitol. 2021;296:109493.
Kocher TD, Thomas WK, Meyer A, Edwards SV, Pääbo S, Villablanca FX, et al. Dynamics of mitochondrial DNA evolution in animals: amplification and sequencing with conserved primers. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 1989;86:6196–200.
pubmed: 2762322
pmcid: 297804
Machado RZ, Montassier HJ, Pinto AA, Lemos EG, Machado MRF, Valadão IFF, et al. An enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) for the detection of antibodies against Babesia bovis in cattle. Vet Parasitol. 1997;71:17–26.
pubmed: 9231985
SAS Institute. SAS user´s guide. Cary, SAS Institute Inc; 2016.
Gonçalves RC, da Silva AA, Ferreira DOL, Chiacchio SB, Lopes RS, Borges AS, et al. Tristeza Parasitária em bovinos na região de Botucatu–SP: estudo retrospectivo de 1986–2007. Semin Cienc Agrar. 2011;32:307.
Amorim LS, Wenceslau AA, Carvalho FS, Carneiro PLS, Albuquerque GR. Bovine babesiosis and anaplasmosis complex: diagnosis and evaluation of the risk factors from Bahia, Brazil. Rev Br Parasitol Vet. 2014;23:328–36.
Bahia M, Silva J de S, Gontijo IS, Cordeiro MD, Santos PN dos, Silva CB da, et al. Characterization of cattle tick fever in calves from the northwestern region of Minas Gerais, Brazil. Rev Br Parasitol Vet. 2020;29:e017119.
Kessler RH. Considerações sobre a transmissão de Anaplasma marginale. Pesquisa Vet Br. 2001;21:177–9.
Scoles GA, Miller JA, Foil LD. Comparison of the efficiency of biological transmission of Anaplasma marginale (Rickettsiales: Anaplasmataceae) by Dermacentor andersoni Stiles (Acari: Ixodidae) with mechanical transmission by the horse fly, Tabanus fuscicostatus Hine (Diptera: Muscidae). J Med Entomol. 2008;45:109–14.
pubmed: 18283950
Reinbold JB, Coetzee JF, Hollis LC, Nickell JS, Riegel CM, Christopher JA, et al. Comparison of iatrogenic transmission of Anaplasma marginale in Holstein steers via needle and needle-free injection techniques. Am J Vet Res. 2010;71:1178–88.
pubmed: 20919904
pmcid: 8284935
Kocan KM, de la Fuente J, Blouin EF, Coetzee JF, Ewing SA. The natural history of Anaplasma marginale. Vet Parasitol. 2010;167:95–107.
pubmed: 19811876
Bock R, Jackson L, De Vos A, Jorgensen W. Babesiosis of cattle. Parasitology. 2004;129:S247–69.
pubmed: 15938514
Alamzán C, Medrano C, Ortiz M, de la Fuente J. Genetic diversity of Anaplasma marginale strains from an outbreak of bovine anaplasmosis in an endemic area. Vet Parasitol. 2008;158:103–9.
Ruybal P, Moretta R, Perez A, Petrigh R, Zimmer P, Alcaraz E, et al. Genetic diversity of Anaplasma marginale in Argentina. Vet Parasitol. 2009;162:176–80.
pubmed: 19285808
da Silva JB, André MR, Machado RZ. Low genetic diversity of Anaplasma marginale in calves in an endemic area for bovine anaplasmosis in the state of São Paulo, Brazil. Ticks Tick Borne Dis. 2016;7:20–5.
pubmed: 26318264
Facury-Filho EJ, Carvalho AÚ de, Ferreira PM, Moura MF, Apolinário BC, Santos L de PH, et al. Effectiveness of enrofloxacin for the treatment of experimentally-induced bovine anaplasmosis. Rev Br Parasitol Vet. 2012;21:32–6.
Alberton LR, Orlandini CF, Zampieri TM, Nakamura AY, Gonçalves DD, Piau Júnior R, et al. Eficácia do dipropionato de imidocarb, da enrofloxacina e do cloridrato de oxitetraciclina no tratamento de bovinos naturalmente infectados por Anaplasma marginale. Arq Bras Med Vet Zootec. 2015;67:1056–62.
Sarli M, Novoa MB, Mazzucco MN, Morel N, Primo ME, de Echaide ST, et al. Efficacy of long-acting oxytetracycline and imidocarb dipropionate for the chemosterilization of Anaplasma marginale in experimentally infected carrier cattle in Argentina. Vet Parasitol Reg Stud Rep. 2021;23:100513.
Madruga CR, Araújo FR, Marques APC, Carvalho CME, Cusinato FQ, Crocci AJ, et al. Desenvolvimento de uma prova de imunoadsorção enzimática para detecção de anticorpos contra Babesia bovis. Pesqui Vet Bras. 2000;20:167–70.
Madruga CR, Marques APC, Araújo FR, Miguita M, Carvalho CME, Araújo FS, et al. Avaliação de um ELISA para detecção de anticorpos contra Babesia bigemina em bovinos e sua aplicação em um inquérito sorológico no Brasil. Pesqui Vet Bras. 2001;21:72–6.
Santos HQ, Linhares GF, Madruga CR. Estudo da prevalência de anticorpos anti-Babesia bovis e anti-Babesia bigemina em bovinos de leite da microrregião de Goiânia determinada pelos testes de imunofluorescência indireta e ELISA. Ciênc Anim Bras. 2001;2:133–7.
Martins KR, Garcia MV, Bonatte-Junior P, Duarte PO, Csordas BG, Higa L de OS, et al. Seasonal fluctuations of Babesia bigemina and Rhipicephalus microplus in Brangus and Nellore cattle reared in the Cerrado biome, Brazil. Parasit Vectors. 2022;15:395.
Riek R. Life cycle of Babesia argentina (Lignières, 1903) (Sporozoa: Piroplasmidea) in the tick vector Boophilus microplus (Canestrini). Aust J Agric Res. 1966;17:247.
Johnston LAY, Leatch G, Jones PN. The duration of latent infection and functional immunity in droughtmaster and hereford cattle following natural infection with Babesia argentina and Babesia bigemina. Aust Vet J. 1978;54:14–8.
pubmed: 655965
Davey RB. Effects of Babesia bovis on the ovipositional success of the southern cattle tick Boophilus microplus. Ann Entomol Soc Am. 1981;74:331–3.
Mahoney DF, Mirre GB. Bovine babesiasis: estimation of infection rates in the tick vector Boophilus microplus (Canestrini). Ann Trop Med Parasitol. 1971;65:309–17.
pubmed: 4999518
Quintão-Silva MG, Melo MN, Ribeiro MFB. Comparison of duplex PCR and microscopic techniques for the identification of Babesia bigemina and Babesia bovis in engorged female ticks of Boophilus microplus. Zoonoses Public Health. 2007;54:147–51.
pubmed: 17456146
Oliveira-Sequeira TCG, Oliveira MCS, Araujo JP, Amarante AFT. PCR-based detection of Babesia bovis and Babesia bigemina in their natural host Boophilus microplus and cattle. Int J Parasitol. 2005;35:105–11.
pubmed: 15619521
Riek R. The life cycle of Babesia bigemina (Smith and Kilborne, 1893) in the tick vector Boophilus microplus (Canestrini). Aust J Agric Res. 1964;15:802.
Hodgson JL. Biology and transmission of Babesia bigemina in Boophilus microplus. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 1992;653:42–51.
pubmed: 1626891
Souza RS, Resende MFS, Ferreira LCA, Ferraz RS, Araújo MVV, Bastos CV, et al. Monitoring bovine tick fever on a dairy farm: an economic proposal for rational use of medications. J Dairy Sci. 2021;104:5643–51.
pubmed: 33663816
Callow LL, Hoyte HMD. Transmission experiments using Babesia bigemina, Theileria mutans, Borrelia SP. and the cattle tick. Aust Vet J. 1961;37:381–90.
Roberts JA. Resistance of cattle to the tick Boophilus microplus (canestrini). II. Stages of the life cycle of the parasite against which resistance is manifest. J Parasitol. 1968;54:667–73.
pubmed: 5761113
Sutherst RW, Utech KBW. Controlling livestock parasites with host resistance. In: Pimentel D, editor. CRC Handbook of Pest Management in Agriculture. Boca Raton, CRC Press; 1981. p. 385–407.
Ristic M, Levi MG. A new era of research towards solution of bovine osis. In: Ristic M, Jriei JP, editors. Babesiosis. Cambridge, Academic Press; 1981. p. 509–22.
Smith G, Grenfell BT, Isham V, Cornell S. Anthelmintic resistance revisited: under-dosing, chemoprophylactic strategies, and mating probabilities. Int J Parasitol. 1999;29:77-91. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0020-7519(98)00186-6 .