Evaluation of Ivomec Pour-On for the Control of Horn Flies in West Central Nebraska, 1993

1994 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
pp. 363-363
Author(s):  
D. J. Boxler ◽  
J. B. Campbell
Keyword(s):  
Untreated Control ◽  
Native Range ◽  
Horn Fly ◽  
West Central ◽  
Horn Flies ◽  
Fly Control

Abstract Ivomec® pour-on was evaluated in two studies at two different locations in West Central Nebraska. In study No. 1, Ivomec was applied to 72 yearling steers located at the Gudmundsen Sandhills Laboratory, Whitman, NE. The steers were weighed and the Ivomec was applied at the recommended rate. A second application was made 28 d later, 7 Jul. A group of 44 cows served as an untreated control. In study No. 2, Ivomec pour-on was compared to 1% Co-Ral dust bags (force-use, to obtain water) for horn fly control. This study was located near North Platte, NE, in native range. Ivomec was first applied to 41 heifers 27 May at the recommended rate and subsequent applications were made about every 28 d until the end of the study. Treatment dates were 27 May, 30 June, and 4 Aug. Eighty heifers utilized the 1% Co-Ral dust bags and a group of 10 cows served as an untreated control. Horn fly counts for both studies were recorded at weekly intervals by counting the total number of horn flies on both sides on an animal.

scholarly journals Evaluation of Insecticide Ear Tags on Horn Flies in West Central Nebraska, 1993

1994 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
pp. 364-364
Author(s):  
D. J. Boxler ◽  
J. B. Campbell
Keyword(s):  
Beef Cattle ◽  
Central Research ◽  
Native Range ◽  
The West ◽  
Treatment Groups ◽  
Horn Fly ◽  
West Central ◽  
Horn Flies ◽  
Fly Control ◽  
Extension Center

Abstract Y-Tex experimental ear tags (YT-615) were compared with PYthon® 10% ear tags for horn fly control on beef cattle. The study was initiated 17 Jun at the West Central Research and Extension Center, North Platte, NE. Cattle used in the trial were randomly selected from a herd of 200 heifers. Ear tags were applied as follows: YT-615 applied to 25 heifers (one tag per heifer), PYthon applied to 30 heifers (two tags per heifer) and PYthon applied to 120 heifers (one tag per heifer). An untreated group of 10 heifers served as a comparison. The three treatment groups were maintained in separate native range pastures throughout the study period. Horn fly counts were recorded at weekly intervals by counting flies on both sides of a minimum of 15 heifers during each fly counting session.

PSI-2 Spices in Free-choice Mineral Offer Gain Advantages to Cattle on Tallgrass Native Range and Promise as Fly Control

2021 ◽  
Vol 99 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 224-225
Author(s):  
Macie E Reeb ◽  
Jaymelynn K Farney
Keyword(s):  
Free Choice ◽  
Control Method ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Native Range ◽  
Cost Effective Method ◽  
Grazing Period ◽  
Horn Flies ◽  
Fly Control ◽  
Treatment Structure ◽  
Mineral Type

Abstract This study aims to evaluate effectiveness of two operational management systems for steer gains and fly control. The first strategy evaluated was pasture burn date of March (MAR) or April (APR). The second management strategy was fly control through feeding free-choice mineral with spices (SPICE) or without spices (CON). Eight pastures (n = 281 steers; initial weight 277.7 ± 25.2 kg) were used in a 2 x 2 factorial treatment structure. Steers were weighed individually, randomly assigned to treatment, and grazed for 85 days. Weekly 33% of steers per pasture were photographed and fly numbers counted. ADG was impacted by both burn date and mineral type (P = 0.01). Cattle on the APR-SPICE treatment had a greater ADG than MAR-SPICE and APR-CON with MAR-CON intermediate. Cattle on SPICE gained 4.5 kg (P = 0.12) more than cattle consuming CON mineral. Flies per steer were impacted by burn x mineral x week (P < 0.001). In general, APR-SPICE steers had a greater number of flies weeks 8, 10, and 11 (P < 0.05), corresponding to a time when mineral intake averaged 72% of the formulated intake. The MAR-SPICE steers consumed on average the formulated amount of mineral and through the entire grazing period had lower number of flies than APR-SPICE steers (P < 0.05). The second largest ADG observed with the MAR-CON treatment may be attributed to lower fly numbers as this treatment had one extra week below economic threshold for horn flies. These results are somewhat inconclusive on pasture burn date, but show that the addition of spices to a free-choice complete mineral shows promise as a cost-effective method to increase gains in stocker steers on tallgrass native range. As a fly control method, the spices utilized in this study may be effective if intake is at formulated level.

DUNG BURIAL ACTIVITY AND FLY CONTROL POTENTIAL OF ONTHOPHAGUS NUCHICORNIS (COLEOPTERA: SCARABAEINAE) IN BRITISH COLUMBIA

1975 ◽  
Vol 107 (11) ◽  
pp. 1215-1220 ◽  
Author(s):  
Angus Macqueen ◽  
Bryan P. Beirne
Keyword(s):  
British Columbia ◽  
Harmful Effect ◽  
Dung Beetle ◽  
Cattle Dung ◽  
Control Potential ◽  
Horn Fly ◽  
Fly Larvae ◽  
Horn Flies ◽  
Fly Control ◽  
Burial Efficiency

AbstractOnthophagus nuchicornis (Linnaeus), an accidentally introduced dung beetle, is the only scarabaeine species encountered commonly in cattle dung in British Columbia. Its dung burial efficiency and its potential for inhibiting development of coprophagous fly larvae were measured in greenhouse experiments.The beetles buried dung most efficiently when they were present in the ratio of one pair per 40–50 g of feces. Higher or lower rates of infestation resulted in reduced burial Survival of fly larvae was inversely related to the numbers of brood balls constructed by the beetles, and hence to the amount of dung buried. Beetle activity in the field probably has little harmful effect on the dung-breeding horn fly as the beetles cease burial activity before midsummer, when horn flies reach their greatest numbers, and as they do not bury significant amounts of dung in pastures.The desirability and possibility of introducing exotic dung beetles into British Columbia for fly control is discussed.

scholarly journals Susceptibility of field populations of Haematobia irritans to fipronil in Uruguay

2021 ◽  
Vol 41 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cecilia Miraballes ◽  
Antonio Thadeu M. Barros ◽  
Martin Lucas ◽  
Guilherme M. Klafke ◽  
Luísa N. Domingues ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Research Laboratory ◽  
Probit Analysis ◽  
Rhipicephalus Microplus ◽  
Susceptible Strain ◽  
Single Population ◽  
Haematobia Irritans ◽  
Horn Fly ◽  
Horn Flies ◽  
Fly Control

ABSTRACT: Fipronil was registered in Uruguay in 1997, and, since then, it has been used for the control of Haematobia irritans irritans and Rhipicephalus microplus. The susceptibility of H. irritants to this drug has not been evaluated. Therefore, the goal of the present study was to evaluate the resistance of H. irritans to fipronil. Additionally, a survey was carried out with the farmers to evaluate the use of fipronil for H. irritans control in the ranches where the flies came from. For the bioassays, 31 field populations of H. irritans were exposed to 10 concentrations of fipronil (3.2-16.0μg.cm2), and their LC50 values were calculated using probit analysis. A bioassay was performed with horn flies from the susceptible colony maintained at the USDA-ARS Knipling-Bushland U.S. Livestock Insects Research Laboratory for comparison and calculation of resistance ratios (RRs). All 31 field populations surveyed in the study were susceptible to fipronil, with resistance ratios ranging from <0.5 to 2.2. Four populations with RRs >1 did not differ significantly from the susceptible strain. A single population showed an RR >2.2. Overall, the survey shows that fipronil was mostly used for R. microplus control, and in only three ranches, which were free of R. microplus, was fipronil used for horn fly control. Seventeen farmers did not use fipronil at all in the last three years. It is concluded that, in Uruguay, field populations of horn flies remain susceptible to fipronil.

EFFICACY OF INSECTICIDAL EAR TAGS ON FLY CONTROL AND MILK PRODUCTION OF DAIRY COWS

1986 ◽  
Vol 66 (1) ◽  
pp. 47-51 ◽  
Author(s):  
ELLIOT BLOCK ◽  
DAVID J. LEWIS
Keyword(s):  
Dairy Cows ◽  
Key Words ◽  
Milk Production ◽  
Milk Fat ◽  
The Other ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Horn Fly ◽  
Horn Flies ◽  
Fly Control ◽  
And Control

Twenty Holstein cows were blocked into two groups of 10 cows each to evaluate an insecticidal ear tag (8% fenvalerate) on fly control and milk production. One group received one tag in each ear while the control group remained untagged. Each group was allowed access to an exercise-pasture lot of similar size. Forages were fed in the lots and grain was fed in the barn at milking. Tagging resulted in a 99.9% reduction in horn flies over the 16 wk of the trial. However, other flies (house, stable and face) were not controlled to the same extent. As horn fly numbers decreased the number of the other flies increased on tagged cows. Tagging resulted in an overall increase in milk yield by 1.06 kg/d for the trial but not all weeks of the trial showed significant responses. Milk fat and protein percentages were not different between tagged and control animals. Key words: Diptera, dairy cattle, milk production, fenvalerate, ear tags, fly control

scholarly journals Susceptibility of the horn fly, Haematobia irritans irritans (Diptera: Muscidae), to insecticides in Brazil

2012 ◽  
Vol 21 (2) ◽  
pp. 125-132 ◽  
Author(s):  
Antonio Thadeu Medeiros Barros ◽  
Thelma Maria Saueressig ◽  
Alberto Gomes ◽  
Wilson Werner Koller ◽  
John Furlong ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pyrethroid Resistance ◽  
Pyrethroid Insecticides ◽  
General Picture ◽  
Horn Fly ◽  
The Status ◽  
Control Failure ◽  
Horn Flies ◽  
Filter Papers ◽  
Fly Control ◽  
First Time

Since horn fly populations became established throughout Brazil, complaints regarding control failure have increased around the country. A broad survey to evaluate the susceptibility of horn flies to both organophosphate (OP) and pyrethroid insecticides was conducted from October 2000 to April 2003. Bioassays using filter papers impregnated with cypermethrin, permethrin or diazinon were conducted on 154 horn fly populations in 14 states and 78 municipalities. Resistance to cypermethrin, the active ingredient present in most insecticide products for horn fly control in Brazil, was detected in 98.46% of the populations, with resistance ratios (RR) ranging from 2.5 to 719.9. Resistance to permethrin (RRs < 6.3) was found in 96.67% of the populations, despite its lack of use. In general, pyrethroid resistance was detected in 97.18% of the horn fly populations, with frequencies greater than 87% in all regions of the country. The status of susceptibility of horn fly populations in Brazil to insecticides can be characterized by high susceptibility to OPs and widespread resistance to pyrethroids, potentially compromising the efficacy of pyrethroid products in most cases. Although some partial results have previously been presented, a general picture of horn fly susceptibility in Brazil is presented here for the first time.

SUMMER TREATMENTS FOR CATTLE GRUB CONTROL AND THEIR EFFECTS ON HORN FLIES AND CATTLE WEIGHT GAINS

1965 ◽  
Vol 45 (1) ◽  
pp. 43-50 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. A. Khan ◽  
J. E. Lawson
Keyword(s):  
Average Daily Gain ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Haematobia Irritans ◽  
Horn Fly ◽  
Systemic Control ◽  
Weight Gains ◽  
Horn Flies ◽  
Daily Gain

Spraying yearlings with 2% Co-Ral in July was 100% effective for systemic control of cattle grubs (Hypoderma spp.). Spraying spring calves with 1% Co-Ral in August was equally effective, and gave better control (P < 0.01) than spraying with 1 or 2% Co-Ral in June or 0.5% Co-Ral in July. Co-Ral sprays were not suitable for horn fly (Haematobia irritans L.) control.Two per cent Sevin sprayed on calves in June or July did not control cattle grubs, and only partially controlled horn flies.Compared with the control group, the average daily gain was higher (P < 0.05) to weaning but lower (P < 0.05) in the feedlot in calves sprayed with 2% Sevin in June. Similarly, it was higher (P < 0.05) from birth to the end of the feedlot period in calves sprayed with 2% Co-Ral in June, but lower (P < 0.05) in calves sprayed with 0.5% Co-Ral in July.Mild toxicosis occurred in five calves sprayed with 2% Co-Ral in June, and subclinical toxicosis in calves sprayed with 1% Co-Ral in August.

Horn Fly Control and Growth Implants are Effective Strategies for Heifers Grazing Flint Hills Pasture

2017 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
S. S. Trehal ◽  
J. L. Talley ◽  
K. D. Sherrill ◽  
T. Spore ◽  
R. N. Wahl ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Horn Fly ◽  
Effective Strategies ◽  
Flint Hills ◽  
Growth Implants ◽  
Fly Control

scholarly journals Evaluation of Three Ear Tag Formulations for Control of Flies on Beef Cattle, 1993

1994 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
pp. 366-366
Author(s):  
R. W. Miller
Keyword(s):  
Beef Cattle ◽  
Untreated Control ◽  
The Other ◽  
Stable Flies ◽  
Angus Cattle ◽  
Mixed Breed ◽  
Cow Calf ◽  
Research And Education ◽  
Horn Flies

Abstract Three herds (36-122 head per herd) of Angus cattle (cow-calf or yearling heifers) located at the Wye Research and Education Center, Queenstown, MD, were tagged with one of three ear tag formulations. On 17 May one of the herds was tagged with Optimizer tags (2 per head) and on 2 Jun the other 2 herds were tagged with Python tags (2 per head) or experimental YT-615 tags (1 per head). A herd of mixed-breed beef cattle located approximately 4 km from the treated cattle served as an untreated control. Fly density was determined by making biweekly counts on 15 cattle in each of the herds. Counts were made ol face flies/face, horn flies/animal, and stable flies/4 legs. Two (Optimizer herd) or 3 (other 2 herds) pretreatment and 11 or 10 posttreatment counts were made.

Ronnel and Co-Ral for Horn Fly Control on Cable Type Back Rubbers

1959 ◽  
Vol 52 (4) ◽  
pp. 648-650 ◽  
Author(s):  
Edward C. Burns ◽  
S. E. Mccraine ◽  
D. W. Moody
Keyword(s):  
Horn Fly ◽  
Fly Control
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document