Evaluation of an integrated control scheme against Rhipicephalus (Boophilus) microplus in pregnant cows and in cows with calf in northeastern Argentina
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.14409/favecv.2022.0.e0003Keywords:
ticks, control, Argentina, pregnant cowsAbstract
The aim was to evaluate an integrated control scheme for Rhipicephalus (Boophilus) microplus in pregnant and calving cows combining two treatments with chemical acaricides and paddock rest in a representative locality of northeastern Argentina. This scheme was designed to combine the therapeutic effect of strategic control (two treatments applied between late winter and spring) with the rest of pastures (in the present work of three months) on the amount of larvae present in a paddock. Twenty-two Braford-type heifers and cows were divided into two groups in paddocks naturally infested with ticks, with a rest of three months before the animals were admitted. Group I received two acaricidal treatments with fluazuron and flumethrin and group II remained without treatment as a control group. Tick infestation was monitored monthly and therapeutic efficacy was calculated. The infestation with Rhipicephalus (Boophilus) microplus in group I was significantly lower than that of the control group and the efficacy levels were always higher than 93%, with the exception of the February count, where the efficacy was 89.1%. The complementary integration of the partial decontamination applied through a three-month pasture rest with a strategic treatment scheme (two in a 10-month period) allowed reaching significant levels of efficacy in the control of Rhipicephalus (Boophilus) microplus while maintaining low levels of infestation with minimal movements to management pens, and providing sustainability to the use of acaricides.
References
Barnett SF. 1961. The control of ticks on livestock. Agriculture Studies No. 54, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome,115 pp.
Bush AO, Lafferty KD, Lotz JM, Shostak AW. 1997. Parasitology meets ecology on its own terms: Margolis et al.Revisited. J. Parasitol. 83: 575-583.
Cutullé C, Lovis L, D´Agostino BI, Balbiani GG, Morici G, Citroni D, Reggi J. Caracostantogolo JL, 2013. In vitro diagnosis of the first case of amitraz resistance in Rhipicephalus microplus in Santo Tomé (Corrientes), Argentina. Vet. Parasitol. 192: 296-300.
Evans DE. 1992. Tick infestation of livestock and tick control methods in Brazil: a situation report. Insect. Sci. Appl. 13: 629-643.
Guglielmone AA. 1992. The level of infestation with the vector of cattle babesiosis in Argentina. Mem. Inst. Oswaldo Cruz. 87: Suppl. III, 133-137.
Guglielmone AA, Nava S. 2013. Epidemiología y control de las garrapatas de los bovinos en la Argentina. En: Enfermedades Parasitarias con Importancia Clínica y Productiva en Rumiantes: Fundamentos Epidemiológicos para su Diagnóstico y Control (ed. A. Nari y C.Fiel), pp. 441–456. Editorial Hemisferio Sur, Buenos Aires.
Guglielmone AA, Castelli ME, Mangold AJ, Aguirre DH, Alcaraz E, Cafrune MM, Cetrá B, Luciani CA, Suárez VH. 2007. El uso de acaricidas para el control de Rhipicephalus .Boophilus. microplus (Canestrini) (Acari: Ixodidae) en la Argentina. Rev. Inv. Agropec. 36: 155-167.
Henderson CF, Tilton EW. 1955. Tests with acaricides against the brow wheat mite. J. Econ. Entomol. 48:157-161.
Ivancovich JC, Braithwaite GB, Barnett SF. 1982. Comportamiento de los estados no-parasitarios de la garrapata del ganado Boophilus microplus (Canestrini). I. El Colorado (provincia de Formosa). Boletín de la Estación Experimental Regional Agropecuaria Presidente Roque Sáenz Peña, Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria 82, 3-40.
Ivancovich JC, Braithwaite GB, Barnett SF. 1984. Comportamiento de los estados no-parasitarios de la garrapata del ganado Boophilus microplus (Canestrini). II. El Sombrerito (provincia de Corrientes). III. Bartolomé de las Casas (provincia de Formosa). IV. Siete diferentes localidades. Boletín de la Estación Experimental Regional Agropecuaria Presidente Roque Sáenz Peña, Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria 88, 4-109.
Mangold AJ, Castelli ME, Nava S, Aguirre DH, Guglielmone AA. 2004. Poblaciones de la garrapata Rhipicephalus .Boophilus. microplus resistentes a los piretroides en Córdoba y Salta, Argentina. Revista FAVE (sección Ciencias Veterinarias), 3: 55-59.
Morel N, Signorini ML, Mangold AJ, Guglielmone AA, Nava S. 2017. Strategic control of Rhipicephalus .Boophilus. microplus infestation on beef cattle grazed in Panicum maximum grasses in a subtropical semi-arid region of Argentina. Prev. Vet. Med. 144: 179-183.
Nava S, Mangold AJ, Canevari JT, Guglielmone AA. 2015. Strategic applications of long-acting acaricides against Rhipicephalus.Boophilus. microplus in northwestern Argentina, with an analysis of tick distribution among cattle. Vet. Parasitol. 208: 225-230
Nava S, Morel N, Mangold AJ, Guglielmone AA. 2018. Un caso de resistencia de Rhipicephalus microplus (Acari: Ixodidae) al fipronil detectado en pruebas de campo en el este de Santiago del Estero, Argentina. Revista FAVE (sección Ciencias Veterinarias). 17: 1-5.
Nava S, Rossner MV, Torrents J, Morel N, Martínez NC, Mangold AJ, Guglielmone AA. 2020. Management strategies to minimize the use of synthetic chemical acaricides in the control of the cattle tick Rhipicephalus .Boophilus. microplus (Canestrini, 1888) in an area highly favourable for its development in Argentina. Med. Vet. Entomol. 34: 264-278.
Nava S, Toffaletti JR, Rossner MV, Morel N, Mangold AJ. 2021. Alternative applications of the strategic control against the cattle tick Rhipicephalus .Boophilus. microplus in a subtropical area. Parasitol. Res. 10: 3653-3661.
Norton GA, Sutherst RW, Maywald GF. 1983. A framework for integrating control methods against the cattle tick, Boophilus microplus in Australia. J. Appl. Ecol. 20: 489-505.
Reck J, Marks FS, Rodrigues RO, Souza UA, Webster A, Leite RC, Gonzalez JC, Klafke GM, Martins JR. 2014. Does Rhipicephalus microplus tick infestation increase the risk for myiasis caused by Conchliomyia hominivorax in cattle?. Prev. Vet. Med. 113: 59-62.
Snowball GJ. 1957. Ecological observations on the cattle tick, Boophilus microplus (Canestrini). Aust. J. Agric. Res. 8: 394-413.
Spath EJA, Guglielmone AA, Signorini AR, Mangold AJ. 1994. Estimación de las pérdidas económicas directas producidas por la garrapta Boophilus microplus y las enfermedades asociadas en la Argentina. 1ra parte. Therios. 23: 341-360.
Torrents J, Sarli M, Rossner MV, Toffaletti JR, Morel N, Martinez NC, Webster A, Mangold AJ, Guglielmone AA, Nava S. 2020a. Resistance of the cattle tick Rhipicephalus .Boophilus. microplus to ivermectin in Argentina. Res. Vet. Sci. 132: 332-337.
Torrents J, Morel N, Rossner MV, Martinez NC, Toffaletti JR, Nava S. 2020b. In vitro diagnosis of resistance of the cattle tick Rhipicephalus .Boophilus. microplus to fipronil in Argentina. Exp. Appl. Acarol. 82: 397-403.
Utech KBW, Sutherst RW, Dallwitz MJ, Wharton RH, Maywald GF, Sutherland ID. 1983. A model of the survival of larvae of the cattle tick, Boophilus microplus, on pasture. Aust. J. Agric. Res. 34: 63-72.
Wilkinson PR, Wilson JT. 1959. Survival of cattle ticks in Central Queensland pastures. Aust. J. Agric. Res. 10: 129-143.
Wharton RH. 1972. Ticks with special emphasis on Boophilus microplus. In: R. Pal and R.H. Wharton (eds.), Control of Arthropods of Medical and Veterinary Importance. Plenum Press, New York, pp. 35-52.
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
FAVE Sección Ciencias Veterinarias ratifies the open access model, in which contents (in full) are available free to anyone in the internet. The costs of production and publication are not transfered to the authors. This policy intends to break social and economical barriers that generate inequities in the access to information, and for the publication of research results.
All articles can be accessed at http://bibliotecavirtual.unl.edu.ar/publicaciones/index.php/FAVEveterinaria/issue/current/, under license Creative CommonsAtribución-NoComercial-Compartir Igual 4.0 Internacional.
