| Literature DB >> 28105466 |
Jelalu Kemal1, Nateneal Tamerat1, Temesgen Tuluka2.
Abstract
The study was conducted from October 2014 to June 2015 to estimate tick prevalence and identify major tick genera infesting cattle and the associated risk factors in Arbegona district, southern Ethiopia. A total of 2024 adult ticks were collected from main body parts of animals and eight species of ticks which belong to three genera were identified. Questionnaire survey was employed concerning the general case on the tick infestation problems on the cattle. From 384 cattle examined, 291 (75.7%) were found to be infested with one or more types of tick species. The relative prevalence of each genera was Amblyomma (34.9%), Rhipicephalus (Boophilus) (26.6%), Hyalomma (19.2%), and Rhipicephalus (19%). The prevalence of tick infestation in good (65.5%), medium (74%), and poor body condition animal (100%) was found to be statistically significant (p < 0.05). There was also significantly (p < 0.05) higher prevalence in old (98.4%) than adult (78.8%) and young (59.8%) age groups of animals. In the survey, 87.5% of respondents believe that there was tick infestation problem in their locality. This study showed there was high burden and prevalence of ticks that still play major roles in reducing productivity and cause health problems of cattle in the area which call for urgent attention.Entities:
Year: 2016 PMID: 28105466 PMCID: PMC5220475 DOI: 10.1155/2016/9618291
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Vet Med ISSN: 2314-6966
Figure 1Map representing the study area (Arbegona district).
Potential risk factors for tick infestation status of cattle in Arbegona district.
| Risk factors | Number of animals examined | Number of positive animals | 95% CI |
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||||
| Charicho | 128 | 109 (85%) | — | 1.402 | 0.705 |
| Gute | 128 | 88 (68.7%) | 47.4–68.5 | ||
| Yaye 01 | 128 | 94 (73.4%) | 53.8–73.4 | ||
|
| |||||
| Female | 249 | 290 (76.3%) | — | 0.559 | 0.454 |
| Male | 135 | 101 (74.8%) | 55.7–75.8 | ||
|
| |||||
| Old | 63 | 62 (98.4%) | — | 6.154 | 0.046 |
| Adult | 194 | 153 (78.8%) | 56.7–68.0 | ||
| Young | 127 | 76 (59.8%) | 42.4–68.8 | ||
|
| |||||
| Poor | 32 | 32 (100%) | — | 6.812 | 0.000 |
| Medium | 306 | 227 (74%) | 46.6–58.9 | ||
| Good | 46 | 32 (69.5%) | 69.1–100 | ||
|
| |||||
| Wet | 237 | 184 (77.6%) | — | 1.023 | 0.312 |
| Dry | 147 | 107 (72.7%) | 51.1–67.9 | ||
|
| |||||
|
|
|
| |||
Proportion of ticks identified in Arbegona district.
| Tick genera | Proportion |
|---|---|
|
| 708 (34.9%) |
|
| 540 (26.6%) |
|
| 389 (19.2%) |
|
| 387 (19%) |
|
| |
|
|
|
Figure 2Representative pictures of identified different tick species of cattle during the study in the area.
Genera of ticks and their distribution on body regions of cattle in Arbegona district.
| Body region |
|
|
|
| Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| +ve (counted) | +ve (counted) | +ve (counted) | +ve (counted) | +ve (counted) | |
| Dewlap | 31 (234) | 26 (174) | 19 (163) | 2 (7) | 78 (578) |
| Udder | 28 (226) | 17 (114) | 9 (35) | 3 (9) | 57 (384) |
| Scrotum | 22 (157) | — | 6 (31) | 2 (8) | 30 (196) |
| Anal region, under, tail | — | 20 (131) | 7 (14) | 25 (194) | 52 (339) |
| Sternum | 18 (91) | 19 (121) | 15 (146) | 3 (11) | 55 (369) |
| Ear | — | — | — | 19 (158) | 19 (158) |
|
| |||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Questionnaire data representing the question items and respondents response.
| Question contents | Alternatives | Respondents | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Male | Female | Total (%) | ||
| Know the ticks | Yes | 28 | 12 | 40 (100) |
| No | — | — | — (0) | |
|
| ||||
| Tick problems in your locality | Yes | 25 | 10 | 35 (87.5) |
| No | 3 | 2 | 5 (12.5) | |
|
| ||||
| Type of ticks you know in your locality | Hard tick | 16 | 8 | 24 (60) |
| Soft tick | 4 | 2 | 6 (15) | |
| Both | 8 | 2 | 10 (25) | |
|
| ||||
| Type of ticks that seriously damage (affect) cattle in your local area | Hard tick | 18 | 6 | 24 (60) |
| Soft tick | 8 | 2 | 10 (25) | |
| Both | 4 | 2 | 6 (15) | |
|
| ||||
| Know the season of tick infestation outbreak | Yes | 28 | 12 | 40 (100) |
| No | — | — | — (0) | |
|
| ||||
| Season of tick infestation outbreak | At the end of rain season | 2 | 1 | 3 (7.5) |
| At the beginning of rainy season | 16 | 6 | 22 (55) | |
| In mid of rainy season | 4 | 3 | 7 (17.5) | |
| At the dry season | 6 | 2 | 8 (20) | |
|
| ||||
| Know any tick-borne disease | Yes | 10 | 4 | 14 (35) |
| No | 18 | 8 | 26 (65) | |
|
| ||||
| Species of livestock mostly infected by ticks | Bovine | 28 | 12 | 40 (100) |
| Ovine, caprine, others | — | — | — | |
|
| ||||
| Breed of cattle comparatively more susceptible to the tick infestation in your locality | Indigenous breed | 9 | 8 | 17 (42.5) |
| Cross breed | 19 | 4 | 23 (57.5) | |
|
| ||||
| District veterinary workers contribute to minimize and control the prevalence of tick and tick infestation | Yes | 18 | 8 | 26 (65) |
| No | 10 | 4 | 14 (35) | |