Identification and Prevalence of Ixodid Ticks of Cattle in case of Haramaya Eastern Hararghe, Ethiopia

Abstract

A cross-sectional study was conducted from December 2017 to April 2018 to determine the prevalence and identify major species of ixodid ticks of cattle and tick burden of different sex, age, breed, and body condition of cattle. Standard physical and direct stereomicroscopy techniques were employed for identification of tick species. During the study period, a total of 353 cattle were examined for presence of ticks and around 447 ticks were collected. The study showed that 34.3% cattle were infested with one or more tick species. The study reported different species of ticks in the order of their prevalence: A. variegatum (46.3%), Rh. decoloratus (20.1%), A. cohaerens (15.7%), A. gemma (11.9%), and Rh. pulchellus (6.04%), respectively. The prevalence of tick infestation between different risk factors such as sex, age, and body condition of cattle was statistically significant ( p < 0.05 ). The overall male-to-female ratio of ticks was 2.29 : 1. Also, it was reported that, in A. variegatum, A. cohaerens, and A. gemma, the number of male exceeded that of female, but female number exceeded male number in case of Rh. decoloratus. The result also reported difference in attachment site preference, for example, Amblyomma genus was attached mostly to the scrotum/udder and axial and Rh. pulchellus was specified on the ear and perianal area, while Rh. decoloratus was non site selective. In conclusion, findings of this study suggest that ticks were the most important problems of cattle of the study areas. Therefore, the increasing threat of ticks warrants urgent strategic control including application of acaricides and creation of awareness among livestock owners about the veterinary importance of ticks for the integrated tick control.

Study on distribution of Ixodid ticks of cattle in Bedele District, South Western Ethiopia

“…The highest prevalence in this study could be attributed to less awareness among livestock herders, less attention paid to cattle management, and the study area's climatic suitability for tick development, such as high temperatures and erratic precipitation ( Kemal and Abera, 2017 ). The current study, on the other hand, contradicts the findings of ( Tiki and Addis, 2011b ) (25.6%) in Holeta town and Anteneh and ( Wondimu and Bayu, 2021 ) (34.3%) in Haramaya. This difference could be attributed to differences in the agroclimatic conditions of the study areas, the season of sample collection, and the study area's environment, which may not be conducive to its reproduction and survival ( Kemal et al, 2020 ).…”

“…With a prevalence of 26.8%, Boophilus decoloratus was the second most prevalent tick species in infested cattle ( Table 2 ). This is consistent with Mohamed et al, 2014 (26.3%) and Haramaya, ( Wondimu and Bayu, 2021 ) (20.1%). However, this result contradicts ( Wondimu and Bayu, 2021 ) (10.37%) in the East Hararge zone.…”

“…This is consistent with Mohamed et al, 2014 (26.3%) and Haramaya, ( Wondimu and Bayu, 2021 ) (20.1%). However, this result contradicts ( Wondimu and Bayu, 2021 ) (10.37%) in the East Hararge zone.…”

Prevalence, Species Identification, and Associated Risk Factor Ixodid Tick Infestation of Cattle in Selamago District Southern Ethiopia

“…24 Recently published articles from Gondar, Eastern Hararghe, and Selamago support the current and previous studies finding in Ethiopia, where Amblyomma is the predominant genus. 19,25,26 The overall prevalence of tick populations in the Selamago district was significantly ( P < .05) higher compared to non-infected ones. The tick species identified were the same as those reported in various parts of Ethiopia.…”

Prevalence, trend comparisons, and identification of ixodid ticks (Acari: Ixodoidea) among cattle in Ethiopia: A systematic review and meta-analysis

“… Ixodid tick genera Total number of tick collected Prevalence Reference 1. Rhipicephalus ( Boophilus ) 39,357 47.53% ( Bahiru et al, 2018 ; Detamo and Handalo, 2020 ; Abera et al, 2010 ; Tiki and Addis, 2011 ; Alemu and Chanie, 2012 ; Asrate and Yalew, 2012 ; Amante et al, 2014 ; Kumsa et al, 2014 ; Meaza et al, 2014 ; Wolde and Mohamed, 2014 ; Admassu et al, 2015 ; Nateneal et al, 2015 ; Ayana et al, 2016 ; Gudina et al, 2016 ; Kemal et al, 2016a ; b ; Wogayehu et al, 2016 ; Mohammed et al, 2017 ; Seid, 2017 ; Tesgera et al, 2017 ; Yalew et al, 2017 ; Hussein et al, 2018 ; Leyikun et al, 2018 ; Mohammed and SAMARA, 2018 ; Nuna and Guder, 2018 ; Abiso et al, 2019 ; Gelelcha et al, 2019 ; Getiso and Geinoro, 2019 ; Tafesse and Amante, 2019 ; Amante, 2020 ; Ayana et al, 2021 ; Blate, 2021 ; Chumburo and Bayou, 2021 ; Wondimu and Bayu, 2021 ; Abdurehman et al, 2022 ; Adugna and Tamrat, 2022 ; Belete and Mekuria, 2023 ; Fanda, 2023 ; Fentahun et al, 2023 ; Lemu et al, 2023 ; Tadesse and Bulbula, 2023 ) 2. Amblyomma …”