Kenyon Fiona, Rinaldi Laura, McBean Dave, Pepe Paola, Bosco Antonio, Melville Lynsey, Devin Leigh, Mitchell Gillian, Ianniello Davide, Charlier Johannes, Vercruysse Jozef, Cringoli Giuseppe, Levecke Bruno
Moredun Research Institute, Pentlands Science Park, Bush Loan, Penicuik EH26 0PZ, UK.
Department of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Productions, University of Naples Federico II, Naples, Italy.
Vet Parasitol. 2016 Jul 30;225:53-60. doi: 10.1016/j.vetpar.2016.03.022. Epub 2016 Mar 28.
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 (D0) 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 D0, 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.
在小型反刍动物中,粪便虫卵计数(FECs)和粪便虫卵计数减少率(FECR)分别是评估胃肠道(GI)线虫感染强度和驱虫药疗效的最常用方法。这些方法的主要局限性在于,要对具有代表性数量的个体动物进行粪便虫卵计数,既耗时又费钱。一种节省成本的替代方法是检测混合粪便样本,然而,对于混合样本能否得出具有代表性的结果,人们了解甚少。在本研究中,我们比较了通过个体检测策略和混合检测策略获得的FECR结果,涉及不同的混合样本量以及粪便虫卵计数技术的分析灵敏度。在苏格兰的5个养羊场开展了一项调查,已知这些养羊场普遍存在驱虫药耐药性问题。给羔羊分别使用芬苯达唑(4组)、左旋咪唑(3组)、伊维菌素(3组)或莫西菌素(1组)进行治疗。对于每组,在驱虫药给药前(D0)和给药后14天(D14),从20只动物身上采集个体粪便样本。粪便样本被分析为3 - 5个、6 - 10个和14 - 20个个体样本的混合样本。使用两种具有三种不同分析灵敏度水平的粪便虫卵计数技术,对个体样本和混合样本进行胃肠道圆线虫和细颈线虫虫卵筛查,这两种技术分别是Mini - FLOTAC(分析灵敏度为每克粪便10个虫卵(EPG))和麦克马斯特法(分析灵敏度为15或50 EPG)。对于Mini - FLOTAC和麦克马斯特法(分析灵敏度为15 EPG),无论混合样本量大小,在将驱虫药疗效分类为“正常”“可疑”或“降低”方面都具有完全一致性。当使用麦克马斯特法(分析灵敏度为50 EPG)时,驱虫药疗效常常被错误地分类为“正常”,或者由于D0时粪便虫卵计数为零而无法进行评估,并且当混合样本量增加时,这种情况变得更加明显。总之,混合绵羊粪便样本有望成为一种节省成本且高效的评估胃肠道线虫FECR的策略。然而,对于评估FECR,需要考虑基线粪便虫卵计数、混合样本量和该方法的分析灵敏度。