Suppr超能文献

荷兰养羊户对蠕虫感染的认知与行为

Perceptions and actions of Dutch sheep farmers concerning worm infections.

作者信息

Ploeger H W, Antonis A F G, Verkaik J C, Vellema P, Bokma-Bakker M H

机构信息

Department of Infectious Diseases and Immunology, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Utrecht University, P.O. Box 80165, 3508 TD, Utrecht, The Netherlands.

Central Veterinary Institute of Wageningen UR, P.O. Box 65, 8200 AB, Lelystad, The Netherlands.

出版信息

Vet Parasitol. 2016 Oct 15;229:150-158. doi: 10.1016/j.vetpar.2016.10.012. Epub 2016 Oct 18.

Abstract

Gastrointestinal (GI) nematode infections are considered among one of the toughest challenges sheep farmers face worldwide. Control still is largely based on the use of anthelmintics, but anthelmintic resistance is becoming rampant. To facilitate implementation of alternative nematode control strategies and to reduce anthelmintic usage, the purpose of this study was twofold: (i) to gain insight in common practices, knowledge gaps and perceptions of farmers regarding nematode control, and (ii) to provide foci of attention for improving parasite control practices and transfer of knowledge within the sheep husbandry. An internet-based questionnaire was made available to all sheep farmers pertaining to the year 2013, resulting in 450 entered questionnaires for analysis. The two most important nematodes mentioned, were Haemonchus contortus and, to a lesser extent, Nematodirus battus. Of all respondents, 25.6% said they did not have any worm problems. Of these, almost a third did notice clinical signs that can be related to worm infections and about three quarters did use anthelmintics. Overall, clinical symptoms mentioned by farmers matched the worm species they identified as the cause of problems. Ewes and lambs were treated up to 6 times in 2013. On average, ewes were treated 1.53 and lambs 2.05 times. Farmers who treated their ewes more often, also treated their lambs more often (P<0.001). Both ewes and lambs were frequently treated based on fixed moments such as around lambing, at weaning and before mating, rather than based on faecal egg counts. Treatments based on faecal egg counts were practiced, but on a minority of the farms (32.7%). The majority of the farms (75.6%) did not leave 2-5% of the sheep within a flock untreated. About 74% of farmers keep newly purchased animals quarantined for at least 10days, but some (13.4%) leave quarantined animals untreated nor check faecal egg counts. Of farmers who do treat their quarantined animals, just 12.6% check the efficacy of the treatment. Slightly over 40% of the respondents said they did not experience bottlenecks in parasite control. Yet, over half of these said having problems with worm infections, over half did see clinical signs related to worm infections and over three quarters used anthelmintics. Within the group of farmers experiencing difficulties in parasite control, the most often mentioned bottleneck concerned pasture management (75.8%). When asking farmers for solutions, 90% of all respondents indicated they are willing to adjust their pasture management. Farmers are also interested in other methods to reduce the risk of worm infections, such as possibilities to enhance the immune system of sheep in general (71%), to increase specific genetic resistance to worms and to apply anti-parasite forages, both about 40%. Results of this study gave the following potential foci of attention: (1) making complex scientific knowledge more accessible to farmers through simple tools and applicable in the daily farming process; (2) changing the mindset of farmers about their current worm control practices, i.e. breaking long-standing habits such as treating ewes and lambs at fixed moments rather than based on actual worm infection monitoring data; (3) demonstrating effective pasture rotation schemes on specific farms and using these in extension work; (4) making farmers more aware that checking anthelmintic efficacy is important; (5) improving quarantine procedures; (6) creating a wider array of applicable alternative control measures from which individual farmers can choose what fits them most; and finally, (7) improving mutual understanding among farmers, veterinary practitioners and parasitologists alike.

摘要

胃肠道线虫感染被认为是全球养羊户面临的最严峻挑战之一。目前的防治措施仍主要基于使用驱虫药,但驱虫药耐药性正变得越来越普遍。为了促进替代线虫控制策略的实施并减少驱虫药的使用,本研究有两个目的:(i)深入了解养羊户在控制线虫方面的常见做法、知识差距和认知;(ii)为改进寄生虫控制措施及在养羊业中传播知识提供关注重点。我们向所有2013年的养羊户发放了一份基于互联网的调查问卷,共收到450份问卷用于分析。提及最多的两种线虫是捻转血矛线虫,其次是较少提到的巴贝斯线虫。在所有受访者中,25.6%表示他们没有任何蠕虫问题。其中,近三分之一的人确实注意到了可能与蠕虫感染有关的临床症状,约四分之三的人使用了驱虫药。总体而言,养羊户提到的临床症状与他们认为是问题根源的蠕虫种类相符。2013年,母羊和羔羊接受治疗的次数多达6次。平均而言,母羊接受治疗1.53次,羔羊接受治疗2.05次。给母羊治疗更频繁的养羊户,给羔羊治疗也更频繁(P<0.001)。母羊和羔羊经常在诸如产羔前后、断奶时和配种前等固定时间接受治疗,而不是根据粪便虫卵计数。根据粪便虫卵计数进行治疗的情况存在,但仅在少数农场(32.7%)实施。大多数农场(75.6%)不会在羊群中留出2 - 5%的羊不进行治疗。约74%的养羊户会将新购入的动物隔离至少10天,但有些(13.4%)对隔离的动物既不治疗也不检查粪便虫卵计数。在对隔离动物进行治疗的养羊户中,只有12.6%会检查治疗效果。略多于40%的受访者表示他们在寄生虫控制方面没有遇到瓶颈。然而,其中超过一半的人表示存在蠕虫感染问题,超过一半的人看到了与蠕虫感染相关的临床症状,超过四分之三的人使用了驱虫药。在寄生虫控制方面遇到困难的养羊户群体中,最常提到的瓶颈是牧场管理(75.8%)。当询问养羊户解决办法时,90%的受访者表示他们愿意调整牧场管理方式。养羊户也对其他降低蠕虫感染风险的方法感兴趣,比如一般增强绵羊免疫系统的可能性(71%)、提高绵羊对蠕虫的特定遗传抗性以及应用抗寄生虫草料,这两项的兴趣度均约为40%。本研究结果给出了以下潜在关注重点:(1)通过简单工具让农民更容易获取复杂的科学知识,并使其能应用于日常养殖过程;(2)改变农民对当前蠕虫控制做法的观念,即打破长期以来在固定时间治疗母羊和羔羊的习惯,而不是根据实际蠕虫感染监测数据进行治疗;(3)在特定农场展示有效的轮牧方案,并将其用于推广工作;(4)让农民更加意识到检查驱虫药效果很重要;(5)改进隔离程序;(6)创造更多适用的替代控制措施,让个体农民能够选择最适合自己的措施;最后,(7)增进农民、兽医从业者和寄生虫学家之间的相互理解。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验