Williams Eiry Gwenllian, Brophy Peter M, Williams Hefin Wyn, Davies Nia, Jones Rhys Aled
Institute of Biological, Environmental and Rural Sciences (IBERS), Aberystwyth University, Penglais, Aberystwyth, Ceredigion SY23 3DA, UK.
Hybu Cig Cymru, Tŷ Rheidol, Parc Merlin, Glanyrafon Industrial Estate, Aberystwyth, SY23 3FF., UK.
Vet Parasitol Reg Stud Reports. 2021 Apr;24:100562. doi: 10.1016/j.vprsr.2021.100562. Epub 2021 Mar 30.
Gastrointestinal nematodes (GIN) negatively impact productivity and welfare in sheep globally and are estimated to cost the European sheep industry €157-477 million annually. GIN are mainly controlled by anthelmintic treatment, however, as anthelmintic resistance becomes prominent, the routine treatment of ewes against GIN has been questioned. A questionnaire survey of 383 sheep farmers in Great Britain was conducted to identify strategies currently used to control GIN infections in ewes. Ordinal and binary regression analysis were used to identify factors associated with use of practices known to influence anthelmintic resistance development, including number and timing of ewe GIN anthelmintic treatment, targeted selective treatment (TST) of ewes, drench and move of ewes and long-acting moxidectin treatment of periparturient ewes. Participating farmers treated their ewes against GIN 1.68 times per year on average, with 42.3% and 32.1% of participating farmers worming their ewes once or twice a year on average, respectively. 17.2% of participating farmers wormed their ewes more than twice a year, and 8.4% never worm their ewes. Participating farmers who devised GIN control strategies based on SCOPS guidelines treated their ewes significantly less per year (P < 0.001), whilst those determining treatment timing based on ewe DAG scores or the time of year treated their ewes significantly more frequently (P < 0.001). Farmers who devised GIN control strategies in conjunction with their vet had greater odds of using TST (P < 0.001), as well as farmers who determined flock treatment timing based on ewe condition (P = 0.027). The use of narrow spectrum flukicides was significantly associated with reduced number of annual ewe GIN anthelmintic treatments (P < 0.001), TST of ewes against GIN (P < 0.001) and the avoidance of moving ewes to clean pastures following GIN treatment (P < 0.001). The presence of sheep scab on a farm or in the area was significantly associated with increased annual GIN treatments for ewes (P = 0.002), not using TST strategies to control GIN in ewes (P < 0.001) and moving ewes to clean pasture after anthelmintic treatment, whilst using macrocyclic lactones treatments to prevent sheep scab was significantly associated with the treatment of periparturient ewes with long-acting moxidectin (P = 0.001). This research suggests that by encouraging the application of evidence based targeted or targeted selective treatment strategies, further interaction between farmers and veterinarians/SCOPS guidance, and the uptake of best practices for controlling liver fluke and sheep scab on farms, sustainable GIN control strategies can become the common practice in ewes.
胃肠道线虫(GIN)对全球绵羊的生产性能和健康状况产生负面影响,据估计,每年给欧洲绵羊产业造成的损失达1.57 - 4.77亿欧元。GIN主要通过驱虫治疗来控制,然而,随着驱虫抗性日益突出,对母羊进行常规GIN治疗受到了质疑。对英国383位养羊农民进行了问卷调查,以确定目前用于控制母羊GIN感染的策略。采用有序和二元回归分析来确定与已知影响驱虫抗性发展的做法相关的因素,包括母羊GIN驱虫治疗的次数和时间、母羊的靶向选择性治疗(TST)、母羊的药浴和转移以及围产期母羊的长效莫西菌素治疗。参与调查的农民平均每年给母羊进行1.68次GIN驱虫治疗,分别有42.3%和32.1%的参与调查农民平均每年给母羊驱虫一次或两次。17.2%的参与调查农民每年给母羊驱虫超过两次,8.4%的农民从不给母羊驱虫。根据SCOPS指南制定GIN控制策略的参与调查农民每年给母羊的治疗次数显著减少(P < 0.001),而根据母羊预产期评分或一年中的时间来确定治疗时间的农民给母羊治疗的频率显著更高(P < 0.001)。与兽医共同制定GIN控制策略的农民采用TST的可能性更大(P < 0.001),根据母羊状况确定羊群治疗时间的农民也是如此(P = 0.027)。使用窄谱杀吸虫剂与母羊每年GIN驱虫治疗次数减少(P < 0.001)、母羊针对GIN的TST(P < 0.001)以及GIN治疗后避免将母羊转移到干净牧场显著相关(P < 0.001)。农场或所在地区存在羊疥癣与母羊每年GIN治疗次数增加(P = 0.002)、不采用TST策略控制母羊GIN(P < 0.001)以及驱虫治疗后将母羊转移到干净牧场显著相关,而使用大环内酯类药物治疗预防羊疥癣与用长效莫西菌素治疗围产期母羊显著相关(P = 0.001)。这项研究表明,通过鼓励应用基于证据的靶向或靶向选择性治疗策略、农民与兽医/SCOPS指南之间的进一步互动以及在农场采用控制肝吸虫和羊疥癣的最佳做法,可持续的GIN控制策略可以成为母羊养殖中的常见做法。