1997
DOI: 10.1016/s0304-4017(97)00060-5
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Evaluation of a composite method for counting helminth eggs in cattle faeces

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

1
16
0
3

Year Published

2003
2003
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 31 publications
(21 citation statements)
references
References 8 publications
1
16
0
3
Order By: Relevance
“…For that reason the real number of eggs in faeces could not be properly assessed (Ward et al 1997, Ojeda-Robertos et al 2007, Pereckiene et al 2007, Daş et al 2011. Therefore, samples were enriched with a known number of parasite eggs in the present study to obtain results as reliable as possible.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…For that reason the real number of eggs in faeces could not be properly assessed (Ward et al 1997, Ojeda-Robertos et al 2007, Pereckiene et al 2007, Daş et al 2011. Therefore, samples were enriched with a known number of parasite eggs in the present study to obtain results as reliable as possible.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It is worth mentioning that most papers on McMaster method and its modifications were based on examinations carried out with faeces of animals naturally or experimentally infected, in which real numbers of parasite eggs in samples were not known (Ward et al 1997, Ojeda-Robertos et al 2007, Pereckiene et al 2007, Daş et al 2011. Most authors confined their analysis only to comparison of different methods without estimation of the real accuracy and precision of detection of parasitic developmental stages (Rossangio and Gruner 1991, Turkson and Ahafia 1994, Levecke et al 2009.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A modified McMaster egg-counting method (Raynaud 1970, Thienpont et al 1986, Ward et al 1997) was used to estimate endoparasite load from fresh fecal samples: dung pats were sampled on the ground (30 separate dung pats per herd) within two hours of deposition; samples were stored at 2-4ЊC for 12-48 h after collection; subsamples were mixed with a dense liquid (MgSO 4 ·7H 2 O) for flotation of endoparasite eggs; 70 mL of this mixture was placed on a McMaster slide and all eggs were counted under a microscope. The 30 samples per herd were divided by means of random allocation into six groups and each was mixed separately to make six composite samples per herd, which dampened individual variability and maximized herd coverage per unit sampling effort (Ward et al 1997).…”
Section: Endoparasite Loadmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The 30 samples per herd were divided by means of random allocation into six groups and each was mixed separately to make six composite samples per herd, which dampened individual variability and maximized herd coverage per unit sampling effort (Ward et al 1997). The largest dung pats (Ͼ25 cm in diameter) were sampled to include as many adults as possible.…”
Section: Endoparasite Loadmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Both the high number of eggs and the tendency of these parasite eggs to cluster in solution renders egg counts using traditional methods such as McMaster's inaccurate (e.g. Ward et al 1997). Instead, each parasite was teased apart in 2 ml of distilled water within an adapted microscope slide, with a 2 mm high rim surrounding a 15 mm 2 central arena.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%