| Literature DB >> 26627056 |
Teka Feyera1, Petros Admasu2, Ziad Abdilahi3, Bahar Mummed4.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Camel mange is an economically important parasitic disease affecting productivity in camel rearing areas of the world if appropriate treatment is not instituted.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26627056 PMCID: PMC4665877 DOI: 10.1186/s13071-015-1228-0
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Parasit Vectors ISSN: 1756-3305 Impact factor: 3.876
Prevalence of mange infestation in camels of the study area, on the basis of different risk factors
| Variable | Category level | Number examined | Number positive (%) | X2 |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| El-bahay | 45 | 17 (38 %) | |||
| Kollej | 50 | 12 (24 %) | |||
| Place of origin | Arro-aska | 47 | 17 (36.17 %) | 4.29 | 0.58 |
| Gol-marodi | 46 | 11 (24.1 %) | |||
| Guyow | 50 | 18 (32.70 %) | |||
| Garbo-hare | 57 | 18 (36 %) | |||
| Sex | Male | 84 | 27 (32.1 %) | 0.021 | 0.885 |
| Female | 211 | 66 (31.1 %) | |||
| Age | >3 year | 223 | 72 (32.2) | 0.245 | 0.620 |
| ≤3 year | 72 | 21 (29.16) | |||
| Good | 110 | 18 (16.3) | |||
| Body condition | Medium | 148 | 53 (35.8) | 26.34 | <0.001 |
| Poor | 37 | 22 (59.5) | |||
| <20 | 107 | 24 (22.4) | 16.22 | <0.001 | |
| Herd size | 20–40 | 136 | 41 (30.1) | ||
| >40 | 52 | 28 (53.8) |
Effect of ivermectin and diazinon treatment on mange infestation in camels
| Group | D0 | D7 | D14 | D21 | D28 | D42 | D56 | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| NPA | ENM | NPA | ENM | NPA | ENM | NPA | ENM | NPA | ENM | NPA | ENM | NPA | ENM | |
| Ivermectin | 6 | ++ | 0 | – | 0 | – | 0 | – | 0 | – | 0 | – | 0 | – |
| Diazinon | 6 | ++ | 0 | – | 0 | – | 0 | – | 0 | – | 0 | – | 1 | + |
| Infested untreated | 6 | ++ | 6 | + | 6 | ++ | 6 | + | 0 | + | 6 | ++ | 6 | ++ |
| Healthy untreated | 0 | – | 0 | – | 0 | – | 0 | – | 0 | – | 0 | – | 1 | + |
+: 1–10 mites; ++: 10–100 mites; −: No mites; n (number of animals in each group) = 6; D = day; D0 = the day treatment commenced; NPA = Number of Positive animals; ENM = Estimated number of mites
Effect of ivermectin and diazinon treatment on body condition score change of experimental camels
| Goup | D0 | D7 | D14 | D21 | D28 | D42 | D56 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ivermectin | 1.83 ± 0.17 | 1.67 ± 0.21 | 1.67 ± 0.21 | 2.17 ± 0.17 | 2.33 ± 0.21a | 2.50 ± 0.22a | 2.50 ± 0.22a |
| Diazinon | 2.00 ± 0.26 | 2.00 ± 0.26 | 2.17 ± 0.17 | 2.00 ± 0.26 | 2.67 ± 0.21 | 2.33 ± 0.21a | 2.00 ± 0.26 |
| Infested untreated | 2.00 ± 0.00 | 1.83 ± 0.17 | 1.83 ± 0.17 | 1.50 ± 0.22 | 1.50 ± 0.22 | 1.33 ± 0.21 | 1.50 ± 0.22 |
| Healthy untreated | 2.33 ± 0.21 | 2.67 ± 0.17 | 2.67 ± 0.17 | 2.67 ± 0.17 | 2.33 ± 0.21a | 2.67 ± 0.17a | 2.67 ± 0.17 |
Values are mean ± SEM; n (number of animals in each group) = 6; D = day; D0 = the day treatment commenced; SEM = standard error of mean; all superscripts indicate significance at p < 0.05 (acompared to infested untreated)
Effect of ivermectin and diazinon treatment on clinical score change of experimental camels
| Group | D0 | D7 | D14 | D21 | D28 | D42 | D56 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ivermectin | 1.83 ± 0.75b | 1.67 ± 0.52b | 1.33 ± 0.52b | 1.00 ± 0.63ab | 0.67 ± 0.52a | 0.67 ± 0.82a | 0.67 ± 0.52a |
| Diazinon | 1.67 ± 0.82b | 2.00 ± 0.90b | 1.33 ± 0.52b | 0.83 ± 0.41ab | 0.33 ± 0.52a | 0.67 ± 0.82a | 0.50 ± 0.84a |
| Infested untreated | 1.67 ± 0.82 | 1.13 ± 0.52 | 1.67 ± 0.82 | 2.17 ± 0.41 | 2.00 ± 0.63 | 2.17 ± 0.75 | 2. 33 ± 0.53 |
| Healthy untreated | 0.00 ± 0.00a | 0.00 ± 0.00a | 0.00 ± 0.00a | 0.00 ± 0.00 a | 0.00 ± 0.00a | 0.00 ± 0.00a | 0.33 ± 0.52a |
Values are mean ± SEM; n (number of animals in each group) = 6; D = day; D0 = the day treatment commenced; SEM = standard error of mean; all superscripts indicate significance at p < 0.05 (a compared to infested untreated; b compared to healthy untreated)