Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t8hqh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T07:21:22.613Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Resistance to Hyalomma anatolicum anatolicum Koch (1844) and Rhipicephalus evertsi Neumann (1897) (Ixodoidea: Ixodidae) by cattle in the Sudan

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 September 2011

A. A. Latif
A. A. Latif
Affiliation:
Tick and Tick-borne Diseases Control Projects,†c/o FAO, P. O. Box 1117, Khartoum, Sudan
Get access

Abstract

A test with 100 nymphs of Hyalomma anatolicum anatolicum for evaluation of resistance of cattle to ticks was found to have a good potential for assessing the resistance status of cattle. Thus, 7% of nymphs engorged and moulted on a resistant host with average engorgement weight of 7.6 mg compared to 19 and 45% of engorged nymphs on two susceptible hosts with 15.8 and 13.6 mg average engorgement weights. Similarly, the number of detached fully engorged Rhipicephalus evertsi nymphs dropped from the resistant cows ranged between 14 and 57 compared with 118–124 from the two susceptible animals. The correlations between the three parameters; ranking cattle for resistance (natural tick burdens), the number of detached fully engorged R. evertsi nymphs, and the percentage survival of H. a. anatolicum nymphs after artificial infestation are discussed and found to be significant (r = +0.778; r = +0.886; r = +0.936). It is, therefore possible to assess the overall resistance status of hosts and cull the susceptible, if necessary.

Keywords

Hyalomma anatolicumRhipicephalus evertsicattle resistance to ticksthe Sudansusceptible hosttick burden
Type
Research Articles
Information
International Journal of Tropical Insect Science , Volume 5 , Issue 6 , December 1984 , pp. 509 - 511
Copyright
Copyright © ICIPE 1984

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Kaiser, M. N., Sutherst, R. W. and Bourne, A. S. (1982) Relationships between ticks and zebu cattle in Southern Uganda. Trop. anim. Hlth Prod. 14, 63–74.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Latif, A. A. (1984) Resistance to natural tick infestations in different breeds of cattle in Sudan. Insect Sci. Applic. 5, 95–97.Google Scholar
Sutherst, R. W., Roberts, J. A. and Wagland, B. M. (1979a) Resistance in cattle to Haemaphysalis (Kaiseriana) longicornis. Int. J. Parasit. 9, 183–188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sutherst, R. W., Wharton, R. H., Cook, I. M., Sutherland, I. D. and Bourne, A. S. (1979b) Long-term population studies on the cattle tick Boophilus microplus on untreated cattle selected for different levels of tick resistance. Aust. J. agric. Res. 30, 353–368.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sutherst, R. W., Norton, G. A. and Maywald, G. F. (1979c) Analysis of control strategies for cattle tick on Zebu x British cattle. Proceedings of the 56th Annual Conference of Australian Veterinary Association, pp. 46–51.Google Scholar
Trager, W. (1939) Acquired immunity to ticks. J. Parasit. 25, 57–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Utech, K. B. W., Wharton, R. H. and Kerr, J. D. (1978a) Resistance to Boophilus microplus in different breeds of cattle. Aust. J. agric. Res. 29, 885–895.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Utech, K. B. W., Seifert, G. W. and Wharton, R. H. (1978b) Breeding Australian Illawarra shorthorn cattle for resistance to Boophilus microplus. I. Factors affecting resistance. Aust. J. agric. Res. 29, 411–422.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wharton, R. H., Harley, K. L. S., Wilkinson, P. R., Utech, K. B. W. and Kelley, B. M. (1969) A comparison of cattle tick control by pasture spelling, planned dipping, and tick resistant cattle. Aust. J. agric. Res. 20, 783–793.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wharton, R. H. and Utech, K. B. W. (1970) The relation between engorgement and dropping of Boophilus microplus (Canestrini Ixodidae) to the assessment of tick numbers on cattle. J. Aust. ent. Soc. 9, 171–182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wikel, S. K. (1982) Immune responses to arthropods and their products. A. Rev. Ent. 27, 21–48.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed