Effects of Horn Fly (Diptera: Muscidae) Control on Cows and Gastrointestinal Worm (Nematode: Trichostrongylidae) Treatment for Calves on Cow and Calf Weight Gains

Schreiber, E. T.; Campbell, John B.; Kunz, Sidney E.; Clanton, D. C.; Hudson, David

doi:10.1093/jee/80.2.451

Cited by 34 publications

(20 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The signiÞcant reduction in horn ßy numbers at SEREC to a mean of Ϸ150 ßies per cow resulted in a signiÞcant increase in calf weaning weight. The tactics used at SWREC (excluding Brahman crossbreeding) reduced horn ßy numbers to levels (Ն200 ßies per cow) that were similar to levels that were achieved in previously published studies (Brethour et al 1987, Schreiber et al 1987, Hogsette et al 1991 where no economic weaning weight advantage was associated with horn ßy management.…”

Section: Table 2 Results Of F Tests Of the Main Effects And Interactsupporting

confidence: 68%

Evaluation of Alternative Tactics for Management of Insecticide-Resistant Horn Flies (Diptera: Muscidae)

Steelman

McNew

Simpson

et al. 2003

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A 3-yr study was conducted to determine the efficacy of tactics that could be used to manage populations of insecticide-resistant horn flies, Hematobia irritans irritans (L.). Insecticide spray, spot-on or pour-on formulations and two IGRs in bolus formulation, 1.3- and 3.2-ha pasture rotations on different rotation schedules, 0-50% Brahman breeding, selected fly-resistant cows, and a mechanical trap were evaluated singly and in combination. Concentration-mortality tests indicated that horn flies collected from cows used in the current study were significantly less susceptible to diazinon, coumaphos, and methoxychlor than horn flies from cows at the same locations previously used to determine baseline susceptibility. During the 3-yr study at the Southeast Research and Extension Center (SEREC), the IGR-bolus significantly reduced (P < 0.05) horn fly numbers on both the continuous and rotational graze regimens, resulting in significantly (P < 0.05) greater calf weaning weights (average of 24 kg). Horn fly numbers were significantly greater on untreated cows during the 3-yr study at the Southwest Research and Extension Center (SWREC) compared with the mean fly numbers on cows that received fly-management treatments. All tactics and tactic-combinations used at SWREC on cattle having no Brahman breeding failed to significantly reduce insecticide-resistant horn fly numbers. However, the combination of Brahman breeding with the IGR-Bolus and mechanical trap significantly reduced horn fly numbers and resulted in significant increases in calf weaning weight. In addition, mean horn fly numbers decreased significantly as the percentage Brahman breeding increased with 50% Brahman breeding reducing horn fly numbers by 140 flies per cow. No significant difference was found between the mean fly numbers on the fly-resistant purebred group and the cows that had no Brahman breeding but received the IGR-Bolus or used the mechanical trap. The use of synergized zeta-cypermethrin pour-on treatment successfully complimented the use of IGR-bolus and mechanical traps in reducing insecticide-resistant horn fly numbers. Neither 1.3- nor 3.2-ha size paddocks and stocking rates used in the rotation graze regimens at SEREC and SWREC, respectively, significantly reduced horn fly numbers when compared with continuously grazed paddocks. Data indicated the importance of using tactics that reduce horn fly numbers to approximately 150 horn flies per cow. These data demonstrated the efficacy of using tactic combinations to manage insecticide-resistant horn fly populations.

show abstract

Section: Table 2 Results Of F Tests Of the Main Effects And Interactsupporting

confidence: 68%

Evaluation of Alternative Tactics for Management of Insecticide-Resistant Horn Flies (Diptera: Muscidae)

Steelman

McNew

Simpson

et al. 2003

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As diferenças de ganhos de peso médio foram de 7, 1, 2 e 3 kg para as vacas e de 3, 2, 1 e 2 kg para os bezerros à desmama, no primeiro, segundo, terceiro e quarto ano, respectivamente. Estes resultados indicam que o nível de infestação da mosca produziu pouco efeito no ganho de peso de vacas e bezerros Nelore antes da desmama e são similares aos obtidos por outros estudos (Schreiber et al 1987, Hogsette et al 1991, Morrison & Foil 1995. Os resultados diferem dos estudos realizados por Kunz et al (1984), Quisenberry & Strohbehn (1984), Haufe (1986), Steelman et al (1991) e Suarez et al 1995, que encontraram diferenças significativas no ganho de peso de vacas e bezerros tratados contra a mosca-dos-chifres.…”

Section: Resul Resul Resul Resul Results T T T Tados E Discus Ados E Dunclassified

Mosca-dos-chifres, Haematobia irritans: comportamento e danos em vacas e bezerros Nelore antes da desmama

Bianchin

Alves

2002

Pesq. Vet. Bras.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The hornfly and losses caused by it in Nellore cows and pre-weaning calves where studied, using two groups of 60 animals each, one group with a natural infestation and the other without hornfly, during four consecutive years. It was seen that the number of flies on the cows did not exceed an average of 80 flies/animal in all years of observation. The majority of the cows (83%) had few flies, whereas 17% had larger numbers. The calves were infested with few flies. Rainfall in excess of 100 mm during short periods diminished fly infestation. Weight gain in the cows without flies (treated with insecticides) as well as their calves was greater than in the control cows, but not statistically significant (P>0.05). Mean percentage pregnancy during the four years was 15% more in treated cows than the non-treated animals, and this difference was probably due to the infestation of the bulls.

show abstract

“…At some locations, breeding season was initiated on 15 April (Central, St. Gabriel, and Iberia Research Stations); at others it was initiated on 1 May (Hill Farm and Rosepine Research Stations). In mid to late May when horn ßies approached the economic threshold of Ͼ200 per animal as suggested by Haufe (1979) and Schreiber et al (1987), the heifers were assigned to one of two horn ßy treatments (untreated with no horn ßy control and treated for horn ßy control) and were weighed. Heifers were weighed on a full-weight basis (no withdrawal from grazing or water before weighing).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of Horn Fly (<I>Haematobia irritans</I>) Control on Growth and Reproduction of Beef Heifers

DeRouen¹,

Foil²,

MacKay³

et al. 2003

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The influence of horn fly control with commercially available ear tags was studied on beef replacement heifers (n = 670) for growth and reproductive performance. The study was conducted at five sites in Louisiana over 3 yr. Heifers used were yearling replacement females that were exposed to fertile bulls during a limited spring breeding season that coincided with the horn fly season. In mid to late May of each year, heifers were randomly assigned to one of two horn fly treatments: untreated and treated for horn fly control. The trial continued each year until September or October at the end of fly season. Pregnancy status was determined by rectal palpation. Horn fly populations were controlled on the treated heifers at moderate levels (84%). Total weight gain of treated heifers was 14% greater than for untreated heifers. Horn fly treatment had no effect on pregnancy rate (78% and 75% for untreated and treated heifers, respectively). Treatment differences for weight gain were of greater magnitude for heifers failing to conceive than for heifers that became pregnant. Weight gains of nonpregnant treated heifers were 33% greater than for nonpregnant untreated heifers, whereas weight gains of pregnant treated heifers were 8% greater than for pregnant untreated heifers. In conclusion, horn fly control on yearling beef replacement heifers improved weight gain but had no effect on first exposure reproduction.

show abstract

Effects of Horn Fly (Diptera: Muscidae) Control on Cows and Gastrointestinal Worm (Nematode: Trichostrongylidae) Treatment for Calves on Cow and Calf Weight Gains

Cited by 34 publications

References 0 publications

Evaluation of Alternative Tactics for Management of Insecticide-Resistant Horn Flies (Diptera: Muscidae)

Evaluation of Alternative Tactics for Management of Insecticide-Resistant Horn Flies (Diptera: Muscidae)

Mosca-dos-chifres, Haematobia irritans: comportamento e danos em vacas e bezerros Nelore antes da desmama

Effect of Horn Fly (<I>Haematobia irritans</I>) Control on Growth and Reproduction of Beef Heifers

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About