...
首页> 外文期刊>Veterinary Parasitology >Pooling sheep faecal samples for the assessment of anthelmintic drug efficacy using McMaster and Mini-FLOTAC in gastrointestinal strongyle and Nematodirus infection
【24h】

Pooling sheep faecal samples for the assessment of anthelmintic drug efficacy using McMaster and Mini-FLOTAC in gastrointestinal strongyle and Nematodirus infection

机译:使用McMaster和Mini-FLOTAC合并绵羊粪便样品以评估驱虫药在胃肠道扁桃体和线虫感染中的功效

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

In small ruminants, faecal egg counts (FECs) and reduction in FECs (FECR) are the most common methods for the assessment of intensity of gastrointestinal (GI) nematodes infections and anthelmintic drug efficacy, respectively. The main limitation of these methods is the time and cost to conduct FECs on a representative number of individual animals. A cost-saving alternative would be to examine pooled faecal samples, however little is known regarding whether pooling can give representative results. In the present study, we compared the FECR results obtained by both an individual and a pooled examination strategy across different pool sizes and analytical sensitivity of the FEC techniques. A survey was conducted on 5 sheep farms in Scotland, where anthelmintic resistance is known to be widespread. Lambs were treated with fenbendazole (4 groups), levamisole (3 groups), ivermectin (3 groups) or moxidectin (1 group). For each group, individual faecal samples were collected from 20 animals, at baseline (DO) and 14 days after (D14) anthelmintic administration. Faecal samples were analyzed as pools of 3-5, 6-10, and 14-20 individual samples. Both individual and pooled samples were screened for GI strongyle and Nematodirus eggs using two FEC techniques with three different levels of analytical sensitivity, including Mini-FLOTAC (analytical sensitivity of 10 eggs per gram of faeces (EPG)) and McMaster (analytical sensitivity of 15 or 50 EPG). For both Mini-FLOTAC and McMaster (analytical sensitivity of 15 EPG), there was a perfect agreement in classifying the efficacy of the anthelmintic as 'normal', 'doubtful' or 'reduced' regardless of pool size. When using the McMaster method (analytical sensitivity of 50 EPG) anthelmintic efficacy was often falsely classified as 'normal' or assessment was not possible due to zero FECs at DO, and this became more pronounced when the pool size increased. In conclusion, pooling ovine faecal samples holds promise as a cost-saving and efficient strategy for assessing GI nematode FECR. However, for the assessment FECR one will need to consider the baseline FEC, pool size and analytical sensitivity of the method. (C) 2016 Published by Elsevier B.V.
机译:在小型反刍动物中,粪便卵数(FEC)和FEC减少(FECR)是分别用于评估胃肠道(GI)线虫感染强度和驱虫药功效的最常用方法。这些方法的主要局限性是对代表性动物个体进行FEC的时间和成本。一种节省成本的替代方法是检查合并的粪便样本,但是对于合并是否可以产生代表性的结果知之甚少。在本研究中,我们比较了个人和合并检查策略在不同合并大小和FEC技术的分析灵敏度下获得的FECR结果。在苏格兰的5个养羊场进行了一项调查,已知那里的驱虫抗药性很普遍。用芬苯达唑(4组),左旋咪唑(3组),伊维菌素(3组)或莫昔克丁(1组)治疗小羊。对于每组,在基线(DO)和驱虫后14天(D14),从20只动物收集单独的粪便样品。粪便样本被分析为3-5、6-10和14-20个单独样本的集合。使用两种具有三种不同分析灵敏度水平的FEC技术,对单个样本和合并样本中的肠胃强壮和线虫卵进行筛查,包括Mini-FLOTAC(每克粪便10个鸡蛋的分析灵敏度)和McMaster(15克分析灵敏度)或50 EPG)。对于Mini-FLOTAC和McMaster(分析灵敏度为15 EPG),无论池大小如何,在将驱虫药的功效分为“正常”,“可疑”或“减少”方面达成了完美的协议。当使用McMaster方法(分析灵敏度为50 EPG)时,驱虫药的功效常常被错误地归类为“正常”,或者由于DO处的FEC值为零,因此无法进行评估,并且当池规模增大时,驱虫药的功效更加明显。总之,汇集绵羊粪便样本有望成为评估胃肠道线虫FECR的一种节省成本的有效策略。但是,对于评估FECR,将需要考虑基线FEC,库大小和方法的分析灵敏度。 (C)2016由Elsevier B.V.发布

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