Search

Introduction: Various draft horse breeds, especially breeds with abundant feathering on the lower limbs, are known to be susceptible to chorioptic mange. Clinical signs of chorioptic mange encompass intense pruritus leading to self-mutilation and hair loss, thickening of the epidermis, and the formation of hyperkeratotic crusts and scabs. Despite the frequent occurrence and high impact of this condition, treatment options are limited, with a conspicuous absence of registered products formulated for equines, and especially foals. This limited availability of approved products highlights the necessity for alternative approaches to effectively address chorioptic mange in draft horse populations, given the severity of the clinical signs and their negative impact on the well-being of infested horses. Methods: Two 9-months old Belgian draft horse foals with clinical signs of severe pruritus and skin scaling on the distal legs were included. Both horses tested positive for living mites by means of superficial skin scrapings. Topical treatment with ivermectin at a dose of 1 mg/kg body weight was applied twice with 1 week interval, directly onto the distal legs of the horses. Results: In both cases, the mites were morphologically identified as Chorioptes bovis. Negative scrapings were obtained 7 days after the second treatment. Pruritus resolved in both horses within 2 days after the first treatment. Clinical signs consisting of skin scaling and crusting in the pastern region had resolved as well at 1 week and 3 weeks after the second treatment, respectively. Conclusion: This case report presents the first successful treatment of two clinical cases of chorioptic mange in Belgian draft horse foals with 1 mg/kg topical ivermectin, applied directly onto the distal legs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article explores the issue of anthelmintic resistance in Europe and the environmental concerns associated with its use. It suggests sustainable worm control practices, such as diagnostics, grazing management, and selective breeding, as alternatives to reduce the reliance on anthelmintics. The article emphasizes the need for a Community of Practice across Europe to promote sustainable worm control and involve all relevant stakeholders. It provides examples of different approaches to worm control in various European countries, including Ireland, Poland, the United Kingdom, and Greece. The article also discusses the need for improved deworming practices in the ruminant livestock population in Spain, highlighting the lack of registered anthelmintics for goats and the inefficient use of deworming due to the lack of diagnostics. It suggests the use of complementary control approaches and diagnostic tools for effective and sustainable control of helminths. The authors stress the importance of implementing sustainable worm control practices across Europe and propose the establishment of local and national networks, supported by an international stakeholder network, to ensure long-term sustainability. [Extracted from the article]

To mitigate emerging anthelmintic resistance (AR) in cattle, sustainable gastrointestinal nematode control strategies should be adopted. A multi-centre study was set up to understand the factors affecting European dairy cattle farmers’ adoption of diagnostics and to gauge for differences between regions. The data were collected through a multi-lingual survey by participating countries of the European Co-operation in Science and Technology (COST) action COMbatting Anthelmintic Resistance in ruminants (COMBAR). Four countries provided sufficient data to be included in the data analysis: Norway, Italy, Germany and Austria. Three models were estimated and validated through structural equation modelling. Norway, along with Germany and Austria (pooled dataset) showed similar trends that align with previous studies. AR risk perception had no influence on the adoption intention of diagnostics, a positive influence was found for attitude towards diagnostics and subjective norms (i.e., perceived opinion of others), and a negative influence of attitudes towards anthelminthics. Additionally, routine (i.e., perception of the current treatment) had an indirect effect on adoption intention through attitudes. Italy’s data deviated from these findings, presenting a positive effect of the perceived severity of AR, and perceived behavioural control (i.e., perceived ability to perform a specific behaviour) on adoption intention of diagnostics. Finally, Norway’s data set allowed for inclusion of a measurement of current behaviour in the model, identifying a direct positive effect of the perceived actual behaviour of other farmers on their own behaviour.

Dicrocoelium dendriticum is a trematode that infects ruminant livestock and requires two different intermediate hosts to complete its lifecycle. Modelling the spatial distribution of this parasite can help to improve its management in higher risk regions. The aim of this research was to assess the constraints of using historical data sets when modelling the spatial distribution of helminth parasites in ruminants. A parasitological data set provided by CREMOPAR (Napoli, Italy) and covering most of Italy was used in this paper. A baseline model (Random Forest, VECMAP®) using the entire data set was first used to determine the minimal number of data points needed to build a stable model. Then, annual distribution models were computed and compared with the baseline model. The best prediction rate and statistical output were obtained for 2012 and the worst for 2016, even though the sample size of the former was significantly smaller than the latter. We discuss how this may be explained by the fact that in 2012, the samples were more evenly geographically distributed, whilst in 2016 most of the data were strongly clustered. It is concluded that the spatial distribution of the input data appears to be more important than the actual sample size when computing species distribution models. This is often a major issue when using historical data to develop spatial models. Such data sets often include sampling biases and large geographical gaps. If this bias is not corrected, the spatial distribution model outputs may display the sampling effort rather than the real species distribution.

Helminth infections are ubiquitous in grazing ruminant production systems, and are responsible for significant costs and production losses. Anthelmintic Resistance (AR) in parasites is now widespread throughout Europe, although there are still gaps in our knowledge in some regions and countries. AR is a major threat to the sustainability of modern ruminant livestock production, resulting in reduced productivity, compromised animal health and welfare, and increased greenhouse gas emissions through increased parasitism and farm inputs. A better understanding of the extent of AR in Europe is needed to develop and advocate more sustainable parasite control approaches. A database of European published and unpublished AR research on gastrointestinal nematodes (GIN) and liver fluke (Fasciola hepatica) was collated by members of the European COST Action “COMBAR” (Combatting Anthelmintic Resistance in Ruminants), and combined with data from a previous systematic review of AR in GIN. A total of 197 publications on AR in GIN were available for analysis, representing 535 studies in 22 countries and spanning the period 1980–2020. Reports of AR were present throughout the European continent and some reports indicated high within-country prevalence. Heuristic sample size-weighted estimates of European AR prevalence over the whole study period, stratified by anthelmintic class, varied between 0 and 48%. Estimated regional (country) prevalence was highly heterogeneous, ranging between 0% and 100% depending on livestock sector and anthelmintic class, and generally increased with increasing research effort in a country. In the few countries with adequate longitudinal data, there was a tendency towards increasing AR over time for all anthelmintic classes in GIN: aggregated results in sheep and goats since 2010 reveal an average prevalence of resistance to benzimidazoles (BZ) of 86%, macrocyclic lactones except moxidectin (ML) 52%, levamisole (LEV) 48%, and moxidectin (MOX) 21%. All major GIN genera survived treatment in various studies. In cattle, prevalence of AR varied between anthelmintic classes from 0–100% (BZ and ML), 0–17% (LEV) and 0–73% (MOX), and both Cooperia and Ostertagia survived treatment. Suspected AR in F. hepatica was reported in 21 studies spanning 6 countries. For GIN and particularly F. hepatica, there was a bias towards preferential sampling of individual farms with suspected AR, and research effort was biased towards Western Europe and particularly the United Kingdom. Ongoing capture of future results in the live database, efforts to avoid bias in farm recruitment, more accurate tests for AR, and stronger appreciation of the importance of AR among the agricultural industry and policy makers, will support more sophisticated analyses of factors contributing to AR and effective strategies to slow its spread.