4.0 Article

ANTHELMINTIC RESISTANT HAEMONCHUS CONTORTUS IN A GIRAFFE (GIRAFFA CAMELOPARDALIS) IN FLORIDA

期刊

JOURNAL OF ZOO AND WILDLIFE MEDICINE
卷 40, 期 1, 页码 131-139

出版社

AMER ASSOC ZOO VETERINARIANS
DOI: 10.1638/2007-0094.1

关键词

Anthelmintic resistance; Haemonchus contortus; giraffe; Giraffa camelopardalis; haemonchosis; molecular characterization; ribosomal RNA

资金

  1. Texas Agricultural Experiment Station [H8987]
  2. U.S. Department of Agriculture CSREES Formula Animal Health [05-009]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A young male giraffe (Giraffa camelopardalis) recently acquired by the Lion Country Safari in Loxa-hatchee. Florida. was diagnosed and successfully treated for Haemonchus infection while in quarantine. Seven weeks after introduction into a group of resident giraffes, this giraffe presented with diarrhea. Fecal evaluation revealed an extremely high count of 16,700 eggs/g, with larval identification of the parasite as Haemonchus. A larval development assay showed resistance to the three classes of anthelmintics currently used to treat Haemonchus contortus: the benzimidazoles. imidazothiazoles, and macrocyclic lactones. The giraffe was treated with a combination of moxidectin topically and fenbendazole orally, and follow-up fecal examination 2 wk later showed a marked reduction in strongyle-type eggs. However. within 2 mo the giraffe had it packed cell volume of 22% and an eggs per grain Count Of 11,900. The animal was then treated with moxidectin topically and copper oxide wire particles orally and removed from the contaminated area. Because of the Unusual host, molecular analysis of the parasite was employed, which confirmed the nematode as H. contortus. It is likely that the monthly rotational deworming schedule first implemented more than 5 yr earlier contributed to the development Of multiple anthelmintic resistance in this H. contortus Population. The proper use of anthelmintics and good pasture management are crucial to reducing the parasite burden in captive giraffe,

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.0
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据