Moore Hope, Pandolfi Fanny, Kyriazakis Ilias
School of Agriculture, Food and Rural Development, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne NE1 7RU, UK.
School of Agriculture, Food and Rural Development, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne NE1 7RU, UK.
Vet Parasitol. 2016 May 15;221:1-8. doi: 10.1016/j.vetpar.2016.03.002. Epub 2016 Mar 4.
A questionnaire was distributed electronically amongst sheep farmers in England; it aimed to provide a quantification of current anthelmintic practices, farmer awareness of the issue of anthelmintic resistance (AR) and the uptake, awareness and opinions surrounding conventional and alternative methods of nematode control. The majority of farmers relied on several anthelmintics and used faecal egg counts to identify worm problems. Although farmers were aware of the issue of AR amongst helminth parasites in the UK, there was a disconnection between such awareness and on farm problems and practice of nematode control. Grazing management was used by 52% of responders, while breeding for resistance and bioactive forages by 22 and 18% respectively. Farms with more than 500 ewes, and farmers who felt nematodes were a problem, had a higher probability of using selective breeding. Farmers who considered their wormer effective, had a qualification in agriculture and whose staff did not include any family members, were more likely to use bioactive forages; the opposite was the case if farmers dosed their lambs frequently. Amongst the alternatives, highest preference was for selective breeding and vaccination, if the latter was to become commercially available, with more respondents having a preference for breeding than actually using it. Several barriers to the uptake of an alternative were identified, the most influential factor being the cost to set it up and the length of time for which it would remain effective. The disconnection between awareness of AR and practice of nematode control on farm reinforces the need for emphasising the links between the causes of AR and the consequences of strategies to address its challenge.
一份调查问卷通过电子方式分发给了英国的养羊户；其目的是对当前的驱虫做法进行量化，了解养殖户对驱虫抗性（AR）问题的认识，以及对传统和替代线虫控制方法的采用情况、认识和看法。大多数养殖户依赖多种驱虫药，并通过粪便虫卵计数来确定蠕虫问题。尽管养殖户了解英国蠕虫寄生虫中存在的AR问题，但这种认识与农场实际问题和线虫控制做法之间存在脱节。52%的受访者采用了放牧管理，而分别有22%和18%的受访者采用了抗虫育种和生物活性草料。拥有500只以上母羊的农场，以及认为线虫是个问题的养殖户，采用选择性育种的可能性更高。认为自己使用的驱虫药有效的养殖户、具有农业资质且员工中没有家庭成员的养殖户，更有可能使用生物活性草料；如果养殖户频繁给羔羊用药，则情况相反。在替代方法中，如果疫苗能够商业化，最受青睐的是选择性育种和疫苗接种，更多受访者表示倾向于育种而非实际使用。确定了采用替代方法的几个障碍，最有影响力的因素是建立该方法的成本以及其有效的持续时间。农场对线虫控制的认识与实践之间的脱节，强化了强调AR成因与应对其挑战的策略后果之间联系的必要性。
