| Literature DB >> 35592359 |
Marc K Kouam1,2, Fabrice D Ngueguim1.
Abstract
Helminthes affect satisfactory pig farming by causing poor growth rate and infertility. The objective of this study was to investigate the occurrence of helminthes in pig production, as well as factors influencing their prevalence in Menoua, Western Highlands of Cameroon. Thus, 597 fecal samples from 100 farms of three production types (farrower, grower, and farrow-to-finish) were collected together with data on farmer and management characteristics. Samples were qualitatively and quantitatively analyzed. Eggs of eight helminthes were identified: Hyostrongylus rubidus (81.10%, 50-550 epg), Strongyloides ransomi (34.5%, 50-150 epg), Trichostrongylus sp. (28.1%, 50-650 epg), Ascaris suum (11.6%, 50-200 epg), Metastrongylus sp. (10.4%, 50-250 epg), Oesophagostomum dentatum (5.7%, 50-150 epg), Trichuris suis (4.0%, 50-150 epg), and Macracanthorhynchus hirudinaceus (0.2%, 50-50 epg). The overall prevalence was 89.3% (533 out of 597). Single infestations were 30.2%, while mixed infestations were 59.1%. A. suum, S. ransomi, and strongyles (H. rubidus, Trichostrongylus sp., Metastrongylus sp., and O. dentatum) were found in almost all age groups but the prevalence of A. suum increased with the growing age to drop in older animals. H. rubidus was found in all farm types followed by S. ransomi in farrower and farrow-to-finish farms. The other parasites were present only in farrow-to-finish farms. Coccidia parasites were also found including Isospora suis (26.30%, 50-12500 oocysts per gram of feces (opg)) and Eimeria spp. (1.40%, 100-100 opg). The risk of infestation for some parasites was lower with increasing herd size, high education level of farmers, and in wooden piggeries and semipermanent structures. The infestation risk was higher for all the investigated parasites for pigs escaping the pens. The overall significance of these parasites on growth and reproduction of the naturally infested pigs deserve assessment. Necropsy studies to confirm the worm burden are needed. Risk factors were identified, thus paving the way to design successful helminth control in pig production enterprises.Entities:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35592359 PMCID: PMC9113898 DOI: 10.1155/2022/9151294
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Parasitol Res ISSN: 2090-0023
Figure 1Map of the West region of Cameroon showing Menoua Division.
Prevalence (%) and intensity of helminthes in pigs (N = 597) in Menoua.
| Helminthes | Prevalence | Intensity | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| n | % | 95% CI | Mean epg ± Sd | Range | |
|
| 489 | 81.90 | 78.5-84.9 | 88.8 ± 70.4a,b,c | 50-550 |
|
| 206 | 34.5 | 30.7-38.5 | 54.4 ± 16.5a,d,e | 50-150 |
|
| 168 | 28.1 | 24.6-32 | 70.7 ± 64.7b,d | 50-650 |
|
| 69 | 11.6 | 9.2-14.5 | 75.4 ± 48.2c,e | 50-200 |
|
| 62 | 10.4 | 8.1-13.2 | 60.5 ± 31.5 | 50-250 |
|
| 34 | 5.7 | 4-7.9 | 61.7 ± 32.7 | 50-150 |
|
| 24 | 4.0 | 2.6-6.0 | 54.2 ± 20.4 | 50-150 |
|
| 1 | 0.2 | 0.0-1.1 | 50 ± 0 | 50-50 |
n = number of infested pigs; CI = confidence interval; Sd = standard deviation; epg = egg per gram of feces; a,b,c,d,eMean epg with same superscripts are significantly different.
Helminth infestation according to age class (month) of pigs and farm type in Menoua.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||||||
| [1-6[( | 262 (86.5) | 115 (38.0) | 87 (28.7) | 27 (8.9) | 32 (10.6) | 23 (7.6) | 10 (3.3) |
| [6-12[( | 132 (74.6) | 40 (22.6) | 34 (19.2) | 119 (10.7) | 9 (5.1) | 4 (2.3) | 6 (3.4) |
| [12-18[( | 64 (80.0) | 34 (42.5) | 25 (31.3) | 17 (21.3) | 10 (12.5) | 3 (3.8) | 20 (10.0) |
| [18-24[( | 14 (77.8) | 4 (22.2) | 16 (88.9) | 4 (22.2) | 7 (38.9) | 0 (0.0) | 0 (0.0) |
| [24-36[( | 17 (89.5) | 13 (68.4) | 6 (31.6) | 2 (10.5) | 4 (21.1) | 4 (21.1) | 0 (0.0) |
|
| |||||||
| Grower ( | 4 (100) | 0 (0.0) | 0 (0.0) | 0 (0.0) | 0 (0.0) | 0 (0.0) | 4 (0.0) |
| Farrower ( | 7 (87.5) | 7 (87.5) | 0 (0.0) | 0 (0.0) | 0 (0.0) | 0 (0.0) | 1 (12.5) |
| Farrow-to-finish ( | 417 (81.7) | 199 (34.1) | 167 (28.6) | 69 (11.8) | 62 (10.6) | 34 (5.8) | 19 (3.3) |
N = number of samples examined; n = number positive; (%) = prevalence in percentage; H. rubidus = Hyostrongylus rubidus; S. ransomi = Strongyloides ransomi; T. sp. = Trichostrongylus sp.; A. suum = Ascaris suum; M. sp. = Metastrongylus sp.; O. dentatum = Oesophagostomum dentatum; T. suis = Trichuris suis.
Logistic regression analysis of risk factors for Hyostrongylus rubidus infection in pig farms in Menoua Division. Results are expressed in terms of odd ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI).
| Factor | Univariate analysis | Multivariate analysis | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
| (%) | OR |
| OR | 95% CI |
| |
|
| ||||||||
| Farmer age (year) | 597 | 489 | 81.9 | 0.98 | 0.17 | |||
| Pig age (month) | 597 | 489 | 81.9 | 0.97 | 0.12 | |||
| Herd size | 597 | 489 | 81.9 | 0.94 | 0.01 | 0.95 | 0.91-0.98 | 0.01∗ |
|
| ||||||||
|
| ||||||||
| Male | 488 | 403 | 82.6 | 1.26 | 0.36 | |||
| Female | 109 | 86 | 78.9 | 1.00 | ||||
|
| ||||||||
| Higher education | 51 | 45 | 88.2 | 0.00 | 0.99 | |||
| Secondary school | 378 | 298 | 78.8 | 0.00 | 0.99 | |||
| Primary school | 158 | 136 | 86.1 | 0.00 | 0.99 | |||
| Never schooled | 10 | 10 | 100.0 | 1.00 | ||||
|
| ||||||||
| Crossed breed | 547 | 444 | 81.2 | 0.00 | 0.99 | |||
| Duroc | 10 | 10 | 100.0 | 1.00 | 1.00 | |||
| Landrace | 2 | 0 | 0.0 | 0.00 | 0.99 | |||
| Large white | 35 | 33 | 94.3 | 0.00 | 0.99 | |||
| Pietrain | 2 | 2 | 100.0 | 1.00 | ||||
| Naima | 1 | 0 | 0.0 | — | ||||
|
| ||||||||
| Wooden piggery | 525 | 426 | 81.1 | 0.00 | 0.99 | |||
| Semipermanent structure | 39 | 30 | 76.9 | 0.00 | 0.99 | |||
| Permanent structure | 33 | 33 | 100.0 | 1.00 | ||||
|
| ||||||||
| Cemented | 201 | 162 | 80.6 | 0.87 | 0.55 | |||
| Non cemented | 396 | 327 | 82.6 | 1.00 | ||||
|
| ||||||||
| Yes | 208 | 202 | 97.1 | 11.96 | 0.01 | 5.03 | 2.07-12.18 | 0.01∗ |
| No | 389 | 287 | 73.8 | 1.00 | 1.00 | |||
|
| ||||||||
| Yes | 545 | 441 | 80.9 | 0.35 | 0.05 | |||
| No | 52 | 48 | 92.3 | 1.00 | ||||
N = number of samples examined; n = number positive; (%) = prevalence in percentage. ∗ = significant p value.
Logistic regression analysis of risk factors for Strongyloides ransomi infection in pig farms in Menoua Division. Results are expressed in terms of odd ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI).
| Factor | Univariate analysis | Multivariate analysis | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
| (%) | OR |
| OR | 95% CI |
| |
|
| ||||||||
| Farmer age (year) | 597 | 206 | 34.5 | 1.00 | 0.26 | |||
| Pig age (month) | 597 | 206 | 34.5 | 1.01 | 0.36 | |||
| Herd size | 597 | 206 | 34.5 | 0.92 | 0.01 | 0.97 | 0.93-1.02 | 0.36 |
|
| ||||||||
|
| ||||||||
| Male | 488 | 161 | 33.0 | 0.70 | 0.10 | |||
| Female | 109 | 45 | 41.3 | 1.00 | ||||
|
| ||||||||
| Higher education | 51 | 11 | 21.6 | 0.06 | 0.01 | 0.13 | 0.04-0.39 | 0.01∗ |
| Secondary school | 378 | 100 | 26.5 | 0.09 | 0.01 | 0.19 | 0.09-0.43 | 0.01∗ |
| Primary school | 158 | 87 | 55.1 | 0.30 | 0.14 | — | ||
| Never schooled | 10 | 8 | 80.0 | 1.00 | 1.00 | |||
|
| ||||||||
| Crossed breed | 547 | 181 | 33.1 | 0.52 | 0.06 | |||
| Duroc | 10 | 8 | 80.0 | 4.23 | 0.09 | |||
| Landrace | 2 | 0 | 0.0 | 0.00 | 0.99 | |||
| Large white | 35 | 17 | 48.6 | 1.00 | ||||
| Pietrain | 2 | 0 | 0.0 | |||||
| Naima | 1 | 0 | 0.0 | |||||
|
| ||||||||
| Wooden piggery | 525 | 183 | 34.9 | 0.39 | 0.01 | 0.15 | 0.06-0.39 | 0.01∗ |
| Semipermanent structure | 39 | 4 | 10.3 | 0.08 | 0.01 | 0.18 | 0.03-0.90 | 0.03∗ |
| Permanent structure | 33 | 19 | 57.6 | 1.00 | 1.00 | |||
|
| ||||||||
| Cemented | 201 | 39 | 19.4 | 0.33 | 0.01 | 0.61 | 0.35-1.06 | 0.08 |
| Non cemented | 396 | 167 | 42.2 | 1.00 | 1.00 | |||
|
| ||||||||
| Yes | 208 | 89 | 42.8 | 1.73 | 0.01 | 2.47 | 1.38-4.43 | 0.02∗ |
| No | 389 | 117 | 30.1 | 1.00 | 1.00 | |||
|
| ||||||||
| Yes | 545 | 175 | 32.1 | 0.32 | 0.01 | |||
| No | 52 | 31 | 59.6 | 1.00 | ||||
N = number of samples examined; n = number positive; (%) = prevalence in percentage; † variable dropped in multivariate analysis due to collinearity. ∗ = significant p value.
Logistic regression analysis of risk factors for Trichostrongylus sp. infection in pig farms in Menoua Division. Results are expressed in terms of odd ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI).
| Factor | Univariate analysis | Multivariate analysis | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
| (%) | OR |
| OR | 95% CI |
| |
|
| ||||||||
| Farmer age (year) | 597 | 168 | 28.1 | 1.00 | 0.66 | |||
| Pig age (month) | 597 | 168 | 28.1 | 1.04 | 0.01 | 1.04 | 1.01-1.08 | 0.01∗ |
| Herd size | 597 | 168 | 28.1 | 1.06 | 0.01 | 1.02 | 0.98-1.06 | 0.22 |
|
| ||||||||
|
| ||||||||
| Male | 488 | 154 | 31.6 | 3.12 | 0.01 | 2.45 | 1.33-4.53 | 0.01∗ |
| Female | 109 | 14 | 12.8 | 1.00 | 1.00 | |||
|
| ||||||||
| Higher education | 51 | 0 | 0.0 | 0.00 | 0.99 | |||
| Secondary school | 378 | 147 | 38.9 | 2.54 | 0.24 | |||
| Primary school | 158 | 19 | 12.0 | 0.54 | 0.46 | |||
| Never schooled | 10 | 2 | 20.0 | 1.00 | ||||
|
| ||||||||
| Crossed breed | 547 | 154 | 28.2 | 1.32 | 0.49 | |||
| Duroc | 10 | 6 | 60.0 | 5.06 | 0.03 | |||
| Landrace | 2 | 0 | 0.0 | 0.00 | 0.99 | |||
| Large white | 35 | 8 | 22.9 | 1.00 | ||||
| Pietrain | 2 | 0 | 0.0 | |||||
| Naima | 1 | 0 | 0.0 | |||||
|
| ||||||||
| Wooden piggery | 525 | 122 | 23.2 | 0.41 | 0.01 | 0.39 | 0.18-0.83 | 0.01∗ |
| Semipermanent structure | 39 | 32 | 82.1 | 6.02 | 0.01 | 5.46 | 1.81-16.45 | 0.01∗ |
| Permanent structure | 33 | 14 | 42.4 | 1.00 | 1.00 | |||
|
| ||||||||
| Cemented | 201 | 73 | 36.3 | 1.80 | 0.01 | 0.85 | 0.54-1.35 | 0.49 |
| Non cemented | 396 | 95 | 24.0 | 1.00 | 1.00 | |||
|
| ||||||||
| Yes | 208 | 63 | 30.3 | 1.17 | 0.39 | |||
| No | 389 | 105 | 27.0 | 1.00 | ||||
|
| ||||||||
| Yes | 545 | 153 | 28.1 | 0.96 | 0.90 | |||
| No | 52 | 15 | 28.8 | 1.00 | ||||
N = number of samples examined; n = number positive; (%) = prevalence in percentage; ∗ = significant p value.
Logistic regression analysis of risk factors for Ascaris suum infection in pig farms in Menoua Division. Results are expressed in terms of odd ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI).
| Factor | Univariate analysis | Multivariate analysis | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
| (%) | OR |
| OR | 95% CI |
| |
|
| ||||||||
| Farmer age (year) | 597 | 69 | 11.6 | 1.02 | 0.03 | 1.06 | 1.02-1.09 | 0.01∗ |
| Pig age (month) | 597 | 69 | 11.6 | 1.04 | 0.03 | 0.99 | 0.93-1.06 | 0.95 |
| Herd size | 597 | 69 | 11.6 | 1.07 | 0.01 | 1.04 | 0.99-1.09 | 0.05 |
|
| ||||||||
|
| ||||||||
| Male | 488 | 42 | 8.6 | 0.28 | 0.01 | 1.90 | 0.23-15.12 | 0.54 |
| Female | 109 | 27 | 24.8 | 1.00 | 1.00 | |||
|
| ||||||||
| Higher education | 51 | 3 | 5.9 | 0.34 | 0.09 | |||
| Secondary school | 378 | 42 | 11.1 | 0.69 | 0.19 | |||
| Primary school | 158 | 24 | 15.2 | 1.00 | ||||
| Never schooled | 10 | 0 | 0.0 | |||||
|
| ||||||||
| Crossed breed | 547 | 60 | 11.0 | 0.49 | 0.11 | |||
| Duroc | 10 | 2 | 20.0 | 1.00 | 1.00 | |||
| Landrace | 2 | 0 | 0.0 | 0.00 | 0.99 | |||
| Large white | 35 | 7 | 20.0 | 1.00 | ||||
| Pietrain | 2 | 0 | 0.0 | |||||
| Naima | 1 | 0 | 0.0 | |||||
|
| ||||||||
| Wooden piggery | 525 | 62 | 11.8 | 0.61 | 0.26 | |||
| Semipermanent structure | 39 | 7 | 17.9 | 1.00 | ||||
| Permanent structure | 33 | 0 | 0.0 | |||||
|
| ||||||||
| Cemented | 201 | 21 | 10.4 | 0.84 | 0.54 | |||
| Non cemented | 396 | 48 | 12.1 | 1.00 | ||||
|
| ||||||||
| Yes | 208 | 36 | 17.3 | 2.25 | 0.01 | 3.98 | 1.64-9.62 | 0.01∗ |
| No | 389 | 33 | 8.5 | 1.00 | 1.00 | |||
|
| ||||||||
| Yes | 545 | 65 | 11.9 | 1.62 | 0.36 | |||
| No | 52 | 4 | 7.7 | 1.00 | ||||
N = number of samples examined; n = number positive; (%) = prevalence in percentage. ∗ = Significant p-value.