...
  • 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Irish Veterinary Journal >High level of treatment failure with commonly used anthelmintics on Irish sheep farms
【24h】

High level of treatment failure with commonly used anthelmintics on Irish sheep farms

机译：爱尔兰绵羊养殖场常用驱虫药导致的高水平治疗失败

获取原文
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Background In 2013 a Technology Adoption Program for sheep farmers was established to encourage the implementation of best management practices on sheep farms in Ireland. There were 4,500 participants in this programme in 2013. As part of this programme, farmers had the option to carry out a drench test to establish the efficacy of their anthelmintic treatment. Results Flock faecal samples were collected before and after treatment administration and gastrointestinal nematode eggs enumerated. In total there were 1,893 participants in the task, however only 1,585 included both a pre- and post-treatment faecal sample. Of those, 1,308 provided information on the anthelmintic product that they used with 46%, 23% and 28% using a benzimidazole (BZ), levamisole (LEV) and macrocyclic lactone (ML) product respectively. The remaining farmers used a product inapplicable for inclusion in the task such as a flukicide or BZ/LEV combination product. Samples were included for analysis of drench efficacy if the pre-treatment flock egg count was ≥200 eggs per gram and the interval post-sampling was 10–14 days for BZ products, 4–7 days for LEV products and 14–18 days for ML products. These criteria reduced the number of valid tests to 369, 19.5% of all tests conducted. If the reduction post-treatment was ≥95% the treatment was considered effective. Only 51% of treatments were considered effective using this criterion. There was a significant difference in efficacy between the anthelmintic drug classes with BZ effective in only 30% of treatments, LEV effective in 52% of cases and ML effective in 76% of cases. Conclusions Gastrointestinal nematode anthelmintic treatments, as practiced on Irish farms, have a high failure rate. There was a significant difference between the efficacies of the anthelmintic classes with BZ the least effective and ML the most effective.
机译：背景信息2013年，制定了一项针对养羊者的技术采用计划，以鼓励在爱尔兰的养羊场实施最佳管理实践。 2013年，该计划有4,500名参与者。作为该计划的一部分，农民可以选择进行淋雨试验以确定其驱虫治疗的功效。结果在治疗前和治疗后收集了羊群粪便样品，并列举了胃肠道线虫卵。总共有1,893名参与者参加了该任务，但是只有1,585名患者包括了治疗前后的粪便样本。其中，1,308家提供了有关其驱虫剂产品的信息，他们分别使用苯并咪唑（BZ），左旋咪唑（LEV）和大环内酯（ML）产品分别使用了46％，23％和28％。其余的农民使用了不适合用于任务的产品，例如杀幼虫剂或BZ / LEV组合产品。如果治疗前的鸡群卵计数≥200蛋/克，并且BZ产品的采样后间隔为10–14天，LEV产品的采样为4–7天，而BZ产品的采样的间隔为14–18天，则包括样本以进行淋水效果分析。 ML产品。这些标准将有效测试的数量减少到369，占执行的所有测试的19.5％。如果治疗后减少量≥95％，则认为治疗有效。使用此标准，只有51％的治疗有效。驱虫药类别之间的疗效存在显着差异，其中BZ仅在30％的治疗中有效，LEV在52％的病例中有效，而ML在76％的病例中有效。结论在爱尔兰农场实行的胃肠道线虫驱虫治疗失败率很高。驱虫类药物的疗效之间存在显着差异，其中BZ效果最差，而ML效果最差。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号