监测反刍动物养殖场的驱虫治疗,在低流行区发现耐药性。

IF 2.6 2区 农林科学 Q1 VETERINARY SCIENCES
Rosa D'Ambrosio, Loredana Baldi, Stefania Cavallo, Alessandro Nappa, Luigia Di Donato, Roberta Brunetti, Mirella Santaniello, Antonella Pesce, Marialuisa Buonanno, Laura Rinaldi, Antonio Bosco
{"title":"监测反刍动物养殖场的驱虫治疗,在低流行区发现耐药性。","authors":"Rosa D'Ambrosio, Loredana Baldi, Stefania Cavallo, Alessandro Nappa, Luigia Di Donato, Roberta Brunetti, Mirella Santaniello, Antonella Pesce, Marialuisa Buonanno, Laura Rinaldi, Antonio Bosco","doi":"10.1186/s12917-025-04894-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Difficulty in combating gastrointestinal nematode (GIN) infection in ruminants is increasing worldwide, owing to progressive anthelmintic resistance (AR). This study evaluates the AR current status against benzimidazoles and macrocyclic lactones on 20 sheep and 10 cattle farms in southern Italy that have performed a greater number of anthelmintic treatments in recent years. On each farm, the animals were randomly divided into two groups of 20 animals; one group was treated with ivermectin (IVM, 0.2 mg/kg of body weight), and the other with albendazole (ALB, 3.8 mg/kg of body weight). In each farm, an individual faecal egg count was performed on samples collected on the day of treatment (D0) and after 14 days (D14) using the Mini-FLOTAC technique. For each group, coprocultures were performed on D0 and D14. An in vitro test (egg hatch assay-EHA) and a follow-up FECR test with fenbendazole were performed to confirm the low in vivo efficacy. To better understand farm management and the anthelmintic treatment methods commonly adopted, a questionnaire was formulated and submitted to farmers during the recruitment phase. The content of the questionnaire was identical for cattle and sheep.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The in vivo test (FECR) showed a high efficacy (from 96.7% to 100%) for both tested anthelmintics in all cattle farms and in 18 sheep farms. A low efficacy for ALB has been detected in two sheep farms, with FECR value of 86.0% for Farm 1 and 92.4% for Farm 2 with predominant GIN genera of Trichostrongylus and Haemonchus on post-treatment samples. The EHA confirmed AR on both sheep farms with low efficacy in Farm 1 of 87.0% and in Farm 2 of 77.0%. At the end of the administration period, questionnaires were collected and a descriptive analysis of data was carried out. Cattle farmers displayed a low perception of the AR problem, while sheep farmers had a higher perception.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The phenomenon of AR in low-prevalence areas certainly needs to be monitored on each farm in conjunction with the usual anthelmintic treatments, so as to be able to promptly identify and solve the problem.</p>","PeriodicalId":9041,"journal":{"name":"BMC Veterinary Research","volume":"21 1","pages":"476"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12275430/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Surveillance of anthelmintic treatments on ruminant farms to detect resistance in a low-prevalence area.\",\"authors\":\"Rosa D'Ambrosio, Loredana Baldi, Stefania Cavallo, Alessandro Nappa, Luigia Di Donato, Roberta Brunetti, Mirella Santaniello, Antonella Pesce, Marialuisa Buonanno, Laura Rinaldi, Antonio Bosco\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s12917-025-04894-7\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Difficulty in combating gastrointestinal nematode (GIN) infection in ruminants is increasing worldwide, owing to progressive anthelmintic resistance (AR). This study evaluates the AR current status against benzimidazoles and macrocyclic lactones on 20 sheep and 10 cattle farms in southern Italy that have performed a greater number of anthelmintic treatments in recent years. On each farm, the animals were randomly divided into two groups of 20 animals; one group was treated with ivermectin (IVM, 0.2 mg/kg of body weight), and the other with albendazole (ALB, 3.8 mg/kg of body weight). In each farm, an individual faecal egg count was performed on samples collected on the day of treatment (D0) and after 14 days (D14) using the Mini-FLOTAC technique. For each group, coprocultures were performed on D0 and D14. An in vitro test (egg hatch assay-EHA) and a follow-up FECR test with fenbendazole were performed to confirm the low in vivo efficacy. To better understand farm management and the anthelmintic treatment methods commonly adopted, a questionnaire was formulated and submitted to farmers during the recruitment phase. The content of the questionnaire was identical for cattle and sheep.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The in vivo test (FECR) showed a high efficacy (from 96.7% to 100%) for both tested anthelmintics in all cattle farms and in 18 sheep farms. A low efficacy for ALB has been detected in two sheep farms, with FECR value of 86.0% for Farm 1 and 92.4% for Farm 2 with predominant GIN genera of Trichostrongylus and Haemonchus on post-treatment samples. The EHA confirmed AR on both sheep farms with low efficacy in Farm 1 of 87.0% and in Farm 2 of 77.0%. At the end of the administration period, questionnaires were collected and a descriptive analysis of data was carried out. Cattle farmers displayed a low perception of the AR problem, while sheep farmers had a higher perception.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The phenomenon of AR in low-prevalence areas certainly needs to be monitored on each farm in conjunction with the usual anthelmintic treatments, so as to be able to promptly identify and solve the problem.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9041,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"BMC Veterinary Research\",\"volume\":\"21 1\",\"pages\":\"476\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12275430/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"BMC Veterinary Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"97\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12917-025-04894-7\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"农林科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"VETERINARY SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Veterinary Research","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12917-025-04894-7","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"VETERINARY SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:在世界范围内,对抗胃肠道线虫(GIN)感染的难度正在增加,这是由于寄生虫耐药性(AR)的进展。本研究评估了意大利南部20个羊场和10个牛场近年来对苯并咪唑和大环内酯进行了大量驱虫治疗的AR现状。在每个农场,动物被随机分为两组,每组20只;一组给予伊维菌素(IVM, 0.2 mg/kg体重),另一组给予阿苯达唑(ALB, 3.8 mg/kg体重)。在每个农场,使用Mini-FLOTAC技术对处理当天(D0)和14天后(D14)收集的样本进行个体粪蛋计数。各组在D0和D14进行共培养。体外试验(卵孵化试验- eha)和随后用芬苯达唑进行的FECR试验证实其体内效果较低。为了更好地了解农场管理和常用的驱虫治疗方法,在招募阶段制定了一份调查问卷并向农民提交。牛羊问卷的内容是一样的。结果:体内试验(FECR)对所有牛场和18个羊场的被试驱虫药均显示出较高的有效性(96.7% ~ 100%)。2个羊场检测到ALB效力较低,1场的FECR值为86.0%,2场的FECR值为92.4%,处理后样品上的GIN属主要为毛线虫属和Haemonchus。EHA证实两个羊场的AR效率较低,1号场为87.0%,2号场为77.0%。在管理期结束时,收集问卷并对数据进行描述性分析。养牛户对AR问题的认知程度较低,而养羊户对AR问题的认知程度较高。结论:低流行地区的AR现象,当然需要在每个养殖场进行监测,并结合常规的驱虫处理,以便及时发现和解决问题。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Surveillance of anthelmintic treatments on ruminant farms to detect resistance in a low-prevalence area.

Surveillance of anthelmintic treatments on ruminant farms to detect resistance in a low-prevalence area.

Surveillance of anthelmintic treatments on ruminant farms to detect resistance in a low-prevalence area.

Surveillance of anthelmintic treatments on ruminant farms to detect resistance in a low-prevalence area.

Background: Difficulty in combating gastrointestinal nematode (GIN) infection in ruminants is increasing worldwide, owing to progressive anthelmintic resistance (AR). This study evaluates the AR current status against benzimidazoles and macrocyclic lactones on 20 sheep and 10 cattle farms in southern Italy that have performed a greater number of anthelmintic treatments in recent years. On each farm, the animals were randomly divided into two groups of 20 animals; one group was treated with ivermectin (IVM, 0.2 mg/kg of body weight), and the other with albendazole (ALB, 3.8 mg/kg of body weight). In each farm, an individual faecal egg count was performed on samples collected on the day of treatment (D0) and after 14 days (D14) using the Mini-FLOTAC technique. For each group, coprocultures were performed on D0 and D14. An in vitro test (egg hatch assay-EHA) and a follow-up FECR test with fenbendazole were performed to confirm the low in vivo efficacy. To better understand farm management and the anthelmintic treatment methods commonly adopted, a questionnaire was formulated and submitted to farmers during the recruitment phase. The content of the questionnaire was identical for cattle and sheep.

Results: The in vivo test (FECR) showed a high efficacy (from 96.7% to 100%) for both tested anthelmintics in all cattle farms and in 18 sheep farms. A low efficacy for ALB has been detected in two sheep farms, with FECR value of 86.0% for Farm 1 and 92.4% for Farm 2 with predominant GIN genera of Trichostrongylus and Haemonchus on post-treatment samples. The EHA confirmed AR on both sheep farms with low efficacy in Farm 1 of 87.0% and in Farm 2 of 77.0%. At the end of the administration period, questionnaires were collected and a descriptive analysis of data was carried out. Cattle farmers displayed a low perception of the AR problem, while sheep farmers had a higher perception.

Conclusions: The phenomenon of AR in low-prevalence areas certainly needs to be monitored on each farm in conjunction with the usual anthelmintic treatments, so as to be able to promptly identify and solve the problem.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
BMC Veterinary Research
BMC Veterinary Research VETERINARY SCIENCES-
CiteScore
4.80
自引率
3.80%
发文量
420
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: BMC Veterinary Research is an open access, peer-reviewed journal that considers articles on all aspects of veterinary science and medicine, including the epidemiology, diagnosis, prevention and treatment of medical conditions of domestic, companion, farm and wild animals, as well as the biomedical processes that underlie their health.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信