IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/caa/jnlvet/v48y2003i1-2id5744-vetmed.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comparative studies of early season moxidectin treatment and conventional ivermectin/ benzimidazole treatments in the control of cyathostomes in horses

Author

Listed:
  • I. Langrová

    (Department of Zoology and Fishery, Faculty of Agronomy, University of Agriculture, Prague, Czech Republic)

  • I. Jankovská

    (Department of Zoology and Fishery, Faculty of Agronomy, University of Agriculture, Prague, Czech Republic)

  • M. Borovský

    (Department of Zoology and Fishery, Faculty of Agronomy, University of Agriculture, Prague, Czech Republic)

Abstract

Moxidectin administered in January or February at a single dose was tested for efficacy in horses on two farms for 12 and 11 months, respectively. Horses were infected with cyathostomes naturally in the previous grazing period. Forty horses of farm 1 and 20 horses of farm 2 were used in controlled tests to evaluate the efficacy of moxidectin 2% gel formulation at the dosage 0.4 mg moxidectin per kg of live weight, ivermectin commercial paste formulation at the dosage 0.2 mg ivermectin per kg of live weight, mebendazole and fenbendazole commercial paste formulation at the dosage both 7.5 mg mebendazole and fenbendazole per kg of live weight, all applied orally. Three control groups of 10 horses each (farm 1) were treated twice a year with ivermectin and benzimidazoles, respectively. Individual faecal egg counts, faecal cultures and larval differentiation were performed. Moxidectin had more prolonged and greater suppressive effects on the post-treatment reappearance and magnitude of strongyle egg counts than did ivermectin or benzimidazoles. In the moxidectin treated group (M1) strongyle eggs were seen for the first time in April and a slight increase in the mean count of eggs per gram of faeces (EPG) was observed during the rest of the season. Litter larval counts significantly reflected levels of exposure during the tested season. Twenty animals of farm 2 were allocated into two groups of ten horses each based on pre-treatment eggs per gram (EPG) counts (moxidectin treated group and control group). In the moxidectin treated group mean egg counts remained very low throughout the study. A plateau was reached by autumn, with egg counts ranging from 74 to 145 EPG. The faecal egg counts of moxidectin treated group (M2) were significantly higher in March, April, May and June.

Suggested Citation

  • I. Langrová & I. Jankovská & M. Borovský, 2003. "Comparative studies of early season moxidectin treatment and conventional ivermectin/ benzimidazole treatments in the control of cyathostomes in horses," Veterinární medicína, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 48(1-2), pages 200-200.
  • Handle: RePEc:caa:jnlvet:v:48:y:2003:i:1-2:id:5744-vetmed
    DOI: 10.17221/5744-VETMED
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://vetmed.agriculturejournals.cz/doi/10.17221/5744-VETMED.html
    Download Restriction: free of charge

    File URL: http://vetmed.agriculturejournals.cz/doi/10.17221/5744-VETMED.pdf
    Download Restriction: free of charge

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.17221/5744-VETMED?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:caa:jnlvet:v:48:y:2003:i:1-2:id:5744-vetmed. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Ivo Andrle (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cazv.cz/en/home/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.