Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-4rdpn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-04T18:23:07.012Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A Study of the Gastro-intestinal Worm Burden in Grazing Ewes

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 June 2009

R. G. Bruce  and
J. B. Owen
R. G. Bruce
Affiliation:
Molteno Institute, University of Cambridge and School of Agriculture, University of Cambridge
J. B. Owen
Affiliation:
Molteno Institute, University of Cambridge and School of Agriculture, University of Cambridge
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The worm burden in grazing ewes was studied. Analysis of the results showed that correcting worm egg counts (e.p.g. fresh faeces) for variations in faecal D.M. content and in total faeces output is not of any great benefit unless precise information is available.

Data are also presented which suggest that under normal circumstances variations in the sub-clinical worm burden of adult grazing ewes are not related to any variations in food intake.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Helminthology , Volume 40 , Issue 3-4 , September 1966 , pp. 285 - 290
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1966

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

Brambell, M. R., 1963.—“Variations in counts of Haemonchus contortus eggs in the faeces of housed sheep.” J. Helminth., 37, 1–10.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Crofton, H. D., 1958.—“Nematode parasite populations in sheep on lowland farms. V. Further observations on the post-parturient rise and a discussion of its significance.” Parasitology, 44, 465–477.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Czarnocki, j., Sibbald, I. R. and Evans, E. V.,1901.—“The, determination of chromic oxide in samples of feed and excreta by acid digestion arid spectrophotometry.” Can. J. Anim. Sci., 41, 107–179.Google Scholar
Gibson, T. E., 1955.—“Studies on Trichostrongylus axei. (iv). Factors in the causation of pathogenic effects by T. axei.” J. comp. Path., 65, 315–324.Google Scholar
Gibson, T. E. 1905.—“Examination of faeces for helminth eggs and larvae.” Vet. Bull. Weybridge, 35, 403–410.Google Scholar
Gordon, H.MCL., 1958.—“The effect of worm parasites on the productivity of sheep.” Proc. Aust. Soc. Anim. Prod., 2, 59–68.Google Scholar
Gordon, H.MCL. and Whitlock, H. V., 1939.—“A new technique for counting nematode eggs in sheep faeces.” J. Coun.sci.ind. Res. Aust., 12, 50–52.Google Scholar
Hunter, G.C. and Quenouille, M. H., 1952.—“A statistical examination of the worm egg count sampling technique for sheep.” J. Helminth., 26, 157–179.Google Scholar
Morgan, D. O., Parnell, I. W. and Rayski, C., 1950.“Further observations on the seasonal, variation in worm egg output in Scottish hill sheep. J. Helminth., 24, 101–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Owen, j. B. and Ingleton, J. W., 1963.—“A study of food intake and production in grazing ewes. II. The interrelationships between food intake and productive output.” J.agric. Sci. Camb., 61, 329–340.Google Scholar
Spedding, C. R. W., 1952.—“The value of the faecal egg count in sheep.” Vet. Rec., 64, 813–815.Google Scholar
Spedding, C. R. W. 1965.—Sheep production and grazing management. London: Baillière, Tindall & Cox, pp. 122.Google Scholar
Taylor, E. L., 1935.—“Seasonal fluctuations in the number of eggs of trichostrongylid worms in the faeces of ewes.” J. Parasit., 21, 175–179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar