scholarly journals Occurrence of internal parasites in cattle in various management systems in South-East Poland

2018 ◽  
Vol 74 (8) ◽  
pp. 501-506
Author(s):  
KRZYSZTOF TOMCZUK ◽  
KLAUDIUSZ SZCZEPANIAK ◽  
MARTA DEMKOWSKA-KUTRZEPA ◽  
MONIKA ROCZEŃ-KARCZMARZ ◽  
ANDRZEJ JUNKUSZEW ◽  
...  

The changes in the cattle farming system in Poland observed in the last two decades and related to its evolution into massive scale, specialized farming may have an influence on the occurrence of parasitoses. The study was aimed at showing differences in the prevalence of internal parasites in cattle depending on the herd size, management system and production type. In the period of October to December in 2016 and 2017, the study covered 46 farms with a livestock density from 2 to 160 animals (over 1 year of age), including 25 farms with a confined management system, 12 farms using pastures occasionally and 7 farms with animals using pastures during the whole season. Out of these farms, 36 were oriented towards dairy cattle and 10 to beef cattle. The analytical methods involved flotation, sedimentation and the Baermann technique. In total, 276 feces samples were analyzed. The analysis involved a representative number of samples from each farm, depending on the herd size: from 100% of the animals in the smallest farms to 10% in the largest ones. In total, eleven different taxa of parasites were identified, and their general prevalence was as follows: Eimeria spp. 24.6%, Buxtonella sulcata 25.7%, Strongyloides papillosus 7.6%, gastrointestinal nematodes (Trichostrongylidae, Chabertia, Oesophagostomum) 35.1%, Nematodirus spp. 4.7%, Bunostomum phlebotomum 7.6%, Trichuris spp. 6.2%, Fasciola hepatica 6.9%, Paramphistomum spp 2.5%, Moniezia spp. 2.9%, Dictyocaulus viviparus 2.5%. The forms of parasites were found in samples coming from all studied herds. Invasions of protozoa (Eimeria, Buxtonella) were most commonly found in dairy cattle, in large herds managed in a free stall barn system and in beef cattle, in large herds managed in a pasture system. These herds were also most frequently infected with gastrointestinal nematodes. The invasions of trematodes, tapeworms and pulmonary nematodes were detected only in cattle using pastures, most commonly in large herds..

Animals ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (7) ◽  
pp. 2078
Author(s):  
Andrea Springer ◽  
Daniela Jordan ◽  
Alina Kirse ◽  
Bettina Schneider ◽  
Amely Campe ◽  
...  

Pasture-borne parasites adversely affect bovine health and productivity worldwide. In Europe, gastrointestinal nematodes, especially Ostertagia ostertagi, the liver fluke Fasciola hepatica and the lungworm Dictyocaulus viviparus represent the most important parasites of dairy cattle. The present study assessed exposure towards these parasites among 646 cattle herds in three parts of Germany during 2017–2019 via antibody detection in bulk tank milk (BTM). Overall, O. ostertagi levels indicative of production losses were detected in 41.2% (266/646; 95% confidence interval (CI): 37.4–45.1%) of BTM samples, while F. hepatica seroprevalence amounted to 14.9% (96/646; 95% CI: 12.2–17.9%). Only 2.3% (15/646; 95% CI: 1.4–3.9%) of samples were D. viviparus antibody-positive. Significantly lower O. ostertagi as well as F. hepatica seroprevalence was detected in dual-purpose breeds compared to high-performance breeds from the same region. Management factors related to parasite exposure included access to fresh grass and hay, silage quality and anthelmintic treatment. Furthermore, F. hepatica and O. ostertagi seropositivity was significantly associated with suboptimal herd-level body condition. Interestingly, the relationship between seropositivity and productivity differed between breed types. Negative impacts on milk yield were detected only in high-performance breeds, while O. ostertagi seropositivity was associated with a lower milk fat content in dual-purpose herds.


Animals ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (7) ◽  
pp. 2077
Author(s):  
David García-Dios ◽  
Rosario Panadero ◽  
Pablo Díaz ◽  
Miguel Viña ◽  
Susana Remesar ◽  
...  

Small ruminants in northwestern Spain are frequently managed in mixed flocks. Sheep–goat joint management has not been considered a risk factor for parasite infection, so the main objective of this study was to establish if mixed management with goats supposes a risk factor for parasitic infections in ovine flocks. Two thousand and ninety-three sheep were sampled from 74 commercial meat ovine flocks for diagnostic of the main parasites. Goat contact was a risk factor for sheep to be infected by protostrongylids, Dictyocaulus filaria, gastrointestinal nematodes and Eimeria spp. In contrast, Moniezia, Fasciola hepatica, Dicrocoelium dendriticum and Paramphistomidae prevalences were not influenced. Sheep–goat mixed management can be considered as a risk factor, since goats would act as a source of pasture contamination for interspecific parasites (protostrongylids, Dictyocaulus filaria and gastrointestinal nematodes). In relation to host-specific parasites, such as Eimeria spp., goats cannot be considered as a source for sheep, but competition for food and spaces between both small ungulates can suppose a reduced grazing area to sheep, provoking high environmental contamination and stress that facilitate their infection. Future epidemiological studies for parasitic infections in small ruminants should consider sheep–goat mixed management as a possible risk factor to be included in multivariate analyses.


2018 ◽  
Vol 69 (2) ◽  
pp. 999 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. FOUNTA ◽  
E. PAPADOPOULOS ◽  
S. CHLIOUNAKIS ◽  
V. A. BAMPIDIS ◽  
M. PAPAZAHARIADOU

This study was conducted in order to determine the presence of parasitic infections of the Greek buffalo (Bubalus bubalis) in the Prefecture of Serres, Northern Greece. During the period from February to October 2014, faecal samples from 110 buffaloes of the Greek buffalo breed (Bubalus bubalis), from 9 farms located in proximity to Lake Kerkini, in the Prefecture of Serres, Northern Greece, were examined, in order to find reproductive elements of parasites. Out of 110 faecal samples examined, 102 (92.73%) were found infected with reproductive elements (eggs, larvae, cysts and oocysts) of parasites. Specifically, the parasites found were: Eimeria spp. (40%), Entamoeba bovis (16.36%), Paramphistomum cervi (10%), Fasciola hepatica (16.36%), Dicrocoelium dendriticum (28.18%), Moniezia benedeni (27.27%), Toxocara vitulorum (11.82%), Strongylida (gastrointestinal nematodes) (31.82%) and lungworms (28.18%). The present study appears to be the first report of the detection of lungworms in buffaloes, in Greece.


1983 ◽  
Vol 113 (19) ◽  
pp. 441-445 ◽  
Author(s):  
G. Rowlands ◽  
A. Russell ◽  
L. Williams

2017 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 61 ◽  
Author(s):  
Roger Iván Rodríguez-Vivas ◽  
Laerte Grisi ◽  
Adalberto Angel Pérez de León ◽  
Humberto Silva Villela ◽  
Juan Felipe de Jesús Torres-Acosta ◽  
...  

Here, economic losses caused by cattle parasites in Mexico were estimated on an annual basis. The main factors taken into consideration for this assessment included the total number of animals at risk, potential detrimental effects of parasitism on milk production or weight gain, and records of condemnation on livestock byproducts. Estimates in US dollars (US$) were based on reported yield losses in untreated animals. These estimates reflect the major effects on cattle productivity of six parasites, or parasite group. The potential economic impact (US$ millions) was: gastrointestinal nematodes US$ 445.10; coccidia (Eimeria spp.) US$ 23.78; liver fluke (Fasciola hepatica) US$ 130.91; cattle tick (Rhipicephalus microplus) US$ 573.61; horn fly (Haematobia irritans) US$ 231.67; and stable fly (Stomoxys calcitrans) US$ 6.79. Overall, the yearly economic loss due to the six major parasites of cattle in Mexico was estimated to be US$ 1.41 billion. Considering that the national cattle herd registered in 2013 included 32.40 million head, the estimated yearly loss per head was US$ 43.57. The limitations of some of the baseline studies used to develop these estimates, particularly when extrapolated from local situations to a national scale, are acknowledged. However, the general picture obtained from the present effort demonstrates the magnitude and importance of cattle parasitism in Mexico and the challenges to maximize profitability by the livestock industry without adapting sustainable and integrated parasite control strategies.


2018 ◽  
Vol 27 (2) ◽  
pp. 169-176 ◽  
Author(s):  
Leonardo Bueno Cruvinel ◽  
João Eduardo Nicaretta ◽  
Thiago de Souza Azeredo Bastos ◽  
Luiz Fellipe Monteiro Couto ◽  
Jordana Belos dos Santos ◽  
...  

Abstract This study aimed to identify the frequency of occurrence of Eimeria species in Holstein (taurine dairy cattle) and Nelore (zebu beef cattle) on 12 farms in the state of Goiás, Brazil. A total of 2,601 animals were evaluated, and the cattle were divided into the following age-group categories: up to three months old, four to eight months old, nine to 16 months old and cows. Fecal samples were collected directly from the rectum of all animals. None of the cattle presented any clinical signs of eimeriosis during the survey. From the results obtained, it could be concluded that higher rates of infection by Eimeria spp. were observed in Holstein cattle between the 1st and 16 th months of age and in Nelore cattle between the 1st and 8th months of age. Twelve and nine Eimeria species were diagnosed in Holstein and Nelore cattle, respectively. However, Eimeria zuernii was more prevalent in animals up to three months old, while Eimeria bovis was more common in the remaining categories (cattle aged four months and over). Future studies on the epidemiology and/or seasonality of infection by Eimeria species in cattle, from birth onwards, are needed in order to better understand the dynamics of E. zuernii and E. bovis occurrences, especially in cattle under three months of age.


Author(s):  
C. Van der Geest

I am a 30-year-old sharemilker on my parent's 600 cow developing farm near Blackball on the western side of the Grey Valley. Earlier this year I competed in the National Young Farmer of the Year competition and finished a close third. So what is information? There are two types of information that I use. There is data gathered from my farm to help fine tune the running of the day to day operations on the farm And directional information This is the information that arrives in papers and directs the long-term direction and plans of the farm and farming businesses. Due to the variability in weather on the Coast there is a greater need to monitor and adjust the farming system compared to an area like Canterbury. This was shown last year (2001/02) when the farm was undergoing a rapid period of development and I was under time restraints from increasing the herd size, building a new shed as well as developing the farm. The results of the time pressure was that day to day information gathering was lower resulting in per cow production falling by 11% or around $182 per cow. So what information was lacking that caused this large drop in profit. • Pasture growth rates • Cow condition • Nitrogen requirements • Paddock performance • Milk production • Pre-mating heat detection As scientists and advisers I hear you say that it is the farmer's responsibility to gather and analyse this information. You have the bigger topics to research and discover, gene marking, improving pasture species, sexing of sperm and ideas that I have not even contemplated yet. This is indeed very valuable research. Where would farming be without the invention of electric fences, artificial breeding and nitrogen research? But my problem is to take a farm with below average production to the top 10% in production with the existing technology and farming principles. I have all the technical information I need at the end of a phone. I can and do ring my consultant, fertiliser rep, vet, neighbour and due to the size and openness of New Zealand science, at present if they do not know I can ring an expert in agronomy, nutrition, soils and receive the answer that I require. I hope that this openness remains as in a time of privatisation and cost cutting it is a true advantage. I feel that for myself the next leap in information is not in the growing of grass or production of milk but in the tools to collect, store and utilise that information. This being tied to a financial benefit to the farming business is the real reason that I farm. Think of the benefits of being able to read pasture cover on a motorbike instantly downloaded, overlaying cow intake with milk production, changes in cow weight, daily soil temperature and predicted nitrogen response. Telling me low producing cows and poor producing paddocks, any potential feed deficits or surpluses. This would be a powerful information tool to use. The majority of this information is already available but until the restraints of time and cost are removed from data gathering and storage, this will not happen.


2012 ◽  
Vol 9 (7) ◽  
pp. 579-582 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jian-Hua Qiu ◽  
Chun-Ren Wang ◽  
Xu Zhang ◽  
Zhong-Hua Sheng ◽  
Qiao-Chen Chang ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document