School of Life Sciences, University of Sussex, Brighton, United Kingdom.
PeerJ. 2023 Aug 4;11:e15561. doi: 10.7717/peerj.15561. eCollection 2023.
Due to the convenience and efficacy of modern ectoparasiticides, routine prophylactic use has become commonplace for dogs and cats. However, the environmental consequences of this large-scale use are not well-understood, and multiple potential pathways for ectoparasiticides to the environment exist. Of particular concern is the potential for topically applied ectoparasiticides to pass to waterways, both down-the-drain via wastewater treatment plants and directly through swimming. In this online cross-sectional survey of 1,009 UK cat and dog owners, we investigated ectoparasiticide usage and the frequency of activities that are likely to result in transfer of the active substance to the environment, with a focus on pathways to waterways. A total of 603 dog owners and 406 cat owners completed the survey. Amongst dog and cat owners, 86.1% and 91.1% had administered an ectoparasiticide treatment to their pet in the preceding 12 months. Imidacloprid was the most frequently administered ectoparasiticide in both cats and dogs, followed by fluralaner in dogs and fipronil in cats. Eighty-four percent of owners who applied topical ectoparasiticides to their dog said they were aware of product warnings regarding swimming and bathing after application. Spot-on treated dogs were reported to swim significantly less frequently than non spot-on treated dogs ( = 0.007); however, 36.2% were reported to swim at least monthly. Similarly, significant differences were found in bathing frequency between spot-on treated and non spot-on treated dogs, with treated dogs less likely to be bathed at frequent (weekly) intervals, however 54.6% were reported to be bathed at least monthly. Washing of bedding was unaffected by ectoparasiticide treatment, and 87.8% of dog owners and 69.1% of cat-owners reported washing their pet's bedding at least every 3 months, suggesting that residue washoff from bedding may be occurring for most topically treated animals. Results suggest that transfer of ectoparasiticides to the environment is likely to occur for many of the millions of animals treated annually in the UK, with imidacloprid spot-on treated dogs estimated to swim, be bathed and have their bedding washed over 3.3 million, 5 million and 6.3 million times per year, respectively.
由于现代外寄生虫防治剂的便利性和功效，狗和猫的常规预防性使用已变得很普遍。然而，这种大规模使用的环境后果还没有被很好地理解，并且外寄生虫防治剂进入环境存在多种潜在途径。特别值得关注的是，局部应用的外寄生虫防治剂有可能通过废水处理厂和直接游泳进入水道。在这项针对 1009 名英国猫和狗主人的在线横断面调查中，我们调查了外寄生虫防治剂的使用情况以及可能导致活性物质转移到环境中的活动频率，重点是进入水道的途径。共有 603 名狗主人和 406 名猫主人完成了这项调查。在狗和猫主人中，86.1%和 91.1%在过去 12 个月内给他们的宠物使用过外寄生虫防治剂。在猫和狗中，最常使用的外寄生虫防治剂是吡虫啉，其次是氟虫腈在狗中，非泼罗尼在猫中。84%的给狗使用局部外寄生虫防治剂的主人表示，他们知道产品关于使用后游泳和洗澡的警告。据报道，使用局部外寄生虫防治剂的狗比未使用局部外寄生虫防治剂的狗游泳频率显著降低（=0.007）；然而，36.2%的狗被报告每月至少游泳一次。同样，在使用局部外寄生虫防治剂和未使用局部外寄生虫防治剂的狗之间，洗澡频率也存在显著差异，治疗狗不太可能经常（每周）洗澡，但 54.6%的狗被报告每月至少洗澡一次。床上用品的洗涤不受外寄生虫防治剂处理的影响，87.8%的狗主人和 69.1%的猫主人报告至少每 3 个月洗涤一次宠物的床上用品，这表明大多数局部治疗的动物可能会从床上用品中洗掉残留药物。结果表明，每年在英国接受治疗的数百万只动物中，许多动物都有可能将外寄生虫防治剂转移到环境中，估计每年有 330 多万、500 多万和 630 多万次使用吡虫啉局部处理的狗会游泳、洗澡和洗床上用品。
