A survey of external parasites of free-range chickens and their ethno-veterinary control remedies used by resource-limited farmers in Eastern Cape, South Africa.
{"title":"A survey of external parasites of free-range chickens and their ethno-veterinary control remedies used by resource-limited farmers in Eastern Cape, South Africa.","authors":"B. Moyo, S. Moyo, P. Masika","doi":"10.14196/SJVA.V4I2.1820","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In most rural areas, chicken infestation with external parasites poses a challenge to their productivity and associated benefits. External parasites cause anemia, thus reducing growth, egg production and may lead to death. They are mainly controlled by commercial remedies, although resource-limited farmers resort to using alternative remedies which are available and affordable. This study was conducted to document external parasites of free-range chickens and their ethno-veterinary control remedies used by resource-limited farmers. A questionnaire survey was conducted amongst 93 households, 3 of which were herbalists, in Eastern Cape, South Africa. The farmers considered several external parasites to be a problem: mites (79.6%) stick tight fleas (64.5%), lice (10.8%) and ticks (6.5%). Various ethno-veterinary remedies were used to control the parasites, which included ash (28%), madubula (26.7%) and Jeyes fluid (10%) both of which are comprised of 13% carbolic acid, paraffin (8.4%), plants (5.2%), used engine oil (2.8%), dip wash (2.5%), doom spray (d-phenothrin 0.4%), blue death (permethrin 0.03%) (1.9%), diesel (1.9%), smoke (0.9%) and a few (4.2%) used conventional insecticides namely karbadust (carbarly 5%) and mercaptothion 5%). A small proportion (7.5%) does not use either of the remedies. The materials used by resource-limited farmers in controlling parasites were identified and documented.","PeriodicalId":17430,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Veterinary Advances","volume":"43 1","pages":"13-20"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2015-02-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Veterinary Advances","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14196/SJVA.V4I2.1820","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2
Abstract
In most rural areas, chicken infestation with external parasites poses a challenge to their productivity and associated benefits. External parasites cause anemia, thus reducing growth, egg production and may lead to death. They are mainly controlled by commercial remedies, although resource-limited farmers resort to using alternative remedies which are available and affordable. This study was conducted to document external parasites of free-range chickens and their ethno-veterinary control remedies used by resource-limited farmers. A questionnaire survey was conducted amongst 93 households, 3 of which were herbalists, in Eastern Cape, South Africa. The farmers considered several external parasites to be a problem: mites (79.6%) stick tight fleas (64.5%), lice (10.8%) and ticks (6.5%). Various ethno-veterinary remedies were used to control the parasites, which included ash (28%), madubula (26.7%) and Jeyes fluid (10%) both of which are comprised of 13% carbolic acid, paraffin (8.4%), plants (5.2%), used engine oil (2.8%), dip wash (2.5%), doom spray (d-phenothrin 0.4%), blue death (permethrin 0.03%) (1.9%), diesel (1.9%), smoke (0.9%) and a few (4.2%) used conventional insecticides namely karbadust (carbarly 5%) and mercaptothion 5%). A small proportion (7.5%) does not use either of the remedies. The materials used by resource-limited farmers in controlling parasites were identified and documented.