Relationships between stable fly infestation with some physical facility characteristics and sanitation practices in several dairy farms in the State of Aguascalientes, Mexico

Cruz-Vázquez, Carlos; Ramos-Parra, Miguel; Vitela-Mendoza, Irene; García-Vázquez, Zeferino; Quintero-Martínez, M. T.

doi:10.1016/j.vetpar.2007.08.020

Cited by 5 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Regular sanitation schedules, where stable fly oviposition substrates and larval developmental sites are removed, have been shown to be effective in reducing stable fly adult populations [317][318][319][320]. Bishopp [321] noted that stable fly numbers can be kept down by proper handling of stable refuse, either by stacking or otherwise disposing properly of any accumulations of straw or hay, especially adjacent to stables.…”

Section: Sanitationmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Historical Review of Management Options Used against the Stable Fly (Diptera: Muscidae)

Cook

2020

Insects

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The stable fly, Stomoxys calcitrans (L.) (Diptera: Muscidae), remains a significant economic pest globally in situations where intensive animal production or horticultural production provide a suitable developmental medium. Stable flies have been recorded as pests of livestock and humans since the late 1800s to early 1900s. Over 100 years of research has seen numerous methodologies used to control this fly, in particular to protect cattle from flies to minimise production losses. Reduced milk production in dairy cows and decreased weight gain in beef cattle account for losses in the US alone of > $2000 million annually. Rural lifestyles and recreation are also seriously affected. Progress has been made on many control strategies against stable fly over a range of chemical, biological, physical and cultural options. This paper reviews management options from both a historical and a technical perspective for controlling this pest. These include the use of different classes of insecticides applied to affected animals as toxicants or repellents (livestock and humans), as well as to substrates where stable fly larvae develop. Arthropod predators of stable flies are listed, from which potential biological control agents (e.g., wasps, mites, and beetles) are identified. Biopesticides (e.g., fungi, bacteria and plant-derived products) are also discussed along with Integrated Pest Management (IPM) against stable flies for several animal industries. A review of cultural and physical management options including trapping, trap types and methodologies, farm hygiene, scheduled sanitation, physical barriers to fly emergence, livestock protection and amendments added to animal manures and bedding are covered. This paper presents a comprehensive review of all management options used against stable flies from both a historical and a technical perspective for use by any entomologist, livestock producer or horticulturalist with an interest in reducing the negative impact of this pest fly.

show abstract

Section: Sanitationmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Historical Review of Management Options Used against the Stable Fly (Diptera: Muscidae)

Cook

2020

Insects

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…conditions and cultural practices, 100% loss was observed [4]. Cultural practices, fungicides and genetic resistance are interchangeably used among different rice production areas worldwide to prevent blast disease [5][6][7][8].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Identification of Rice Blast Resistance Genes in South Central Coast of Vietnam Using Monogenic Lines under Field Condition and Pathogenicity Assays

Nguyen¹,

Truong²,

Nguyen³

et al. 2015

JAST-A

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:In the present study, the authors studied the interaction between 26 monogenic differentials carrying 26 blast resistance genes with 15 isolates of Pyricularia oryzae under field conditions and pathogenicity assays. The result in field conditions showed that area under disease progress curves (AUDPC) of monogenic lines was found to range from 0 to 142.3. Lijiangxintuanheigu (LTH) was susceptible in all of regions. The monogenic lines carrying Pik, Piz, Pi1, Pi7(t), Pi4(t), Pish, Pi9(t) and Pita were highly resistant to blast in all of regions. In plastic house net conditions, the percentage of virulent reactions of monogenic lines to 15 isolates was found to range from 23.1% to 84.6%. LTH was susceptible to all 15 isolates. All 26 monogenic lines were resistant to at least 3 isolates of P. oryzae, and the frequency of resistant reactions of the monogenic lines carrying Pik, Piz, Pi4(t), Pish, Pi1, Pi7(t), Pi9, Pik-m and Pita were 80.0%, 93.3%, 93.3%, 80.0%, 73.3%, 86.7%, 73.3%, 80.0%, 80.0%, 80.0% and 80.0%, respectively. These findings suggest that Pik, Piz, Pi4(t), Pish, Pi1, Pi7(t), Pi9, Pik-m and Pita may be important R genes for preventing blast disease in South Central Vietnam. Based on these data, a useful strategy for managing rice blast disease by stacking pyramiding blast R genes against pathogenic P. oryzae isolates at hotspot in South Central Coast of Vietnam was proposed.

show abstract

“…is responsible for loss of milk production and weight gain (due to the blood loss caused by adult feeding), annoyance from pain, a possible anaphylactic reaction from fly-derived substances left in the animal, interference with normal eating habits, and increased energy utilization by the animal in its effort to ward off flies (Cruz-Vázquez, 2012;Taylor et al, 2012). Animals may repel or dislodge biting flies by ear twitching, head tossing, leg stamping, muscle flicking, muscle twitching, and tail switching, all with the purpose of chasing flies away and reducing animal discomfort caused by pain from bites and, in general, the stress that ensues.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The farm was located at 20°30 N and 101°50 W, which is 2,052 m above sea level. This region is classified as a semi-arid climate with summer rain; in the region, the stable fly infestation is seasonal, being more intense from the middle of summer to the middle of autumn (Cruz-Vázquez et al, 2007). The farm maintains Holstein cattle in a free confinement system, which is characterized by open pens with dirt floors, shaded areas, and concrete drinking and feeding troughs, providing 40 m 2 /animal.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The number of stable flies on each of the cows was determined daily during the experimental period (62 d) by direct counting of adult flies found resting or feeding on the front of the legs of the animals, by lateral observation with the aid of binoculars when necessary (Thomas et al, 1989;Cruz-Vázquez et al, 2007). Animals were habituated to the presence of the observer before the experiment as the groups were established.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Short communication: Relationship between serum cortisol concentration and defensive behavioral responses of dairy cows exposed to natural infestation by stable fly, Stomoxys calcitrans

Vitela-Mendoza

Cruz-Vázquez

Solano-Vergara

et al. 2016

Journal of Dairy Science

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this study was conducted to evaluate the effect of natural infestation by Stomoxys calcitrans on the behavioral and adrenocortical responses of dairy cattle. Twenty Holstein cows randomly selected were individually sprayed with insecticide once every 7d, whereas no insecticide was applied to the other 20 animals. The average number of flies per cow was estimated daily, and the frequency of fly-avoidance behaviors was measured daily; plasma cortisol concentration was measured each morning. No flies were ever counted on the treated cows at any time during the experiment, whereas an average of 17.13±1.14 (±standard error) flies/d were recorded on untreated cows. Tail movement was the most frequent behavior displayed, with stamps or kicks showing the highest increment rate (41.2×) when fly population increased from zero to greater than 51 flies/cow. Cortisol concentration increased to a maximum of 56.81±39.53ng/mL with 26 to 30 flies/cow per day. Coefficients of determination between the number of flies, cortisol concentration, tail movements, and stamps or kicks were 0.73, 0.78, and 0.81, respectively. The multiple correlation coefficient was 0.90, with 81% of the variation in cortisol concentration explainable by variation in the number of flies per cow and the frequency of fly-avoidance behaviors. It was concluded that plasma cortisol concentration is linearly related to a combination of the number of flies and the frequency of fly-dislodging behaviors, producing a maximum response before reaching maximum fly loads.

show abstract

Relationships between stable fly infestation with some physical facility characteristics and sanitation practices in several dairy farms in the State of Aguascalientes, Mexico

Cited by 5 publications

References 13 publications

A Historical Review of Management Options Used against the Stable Fly (Diptera: Muscidae)

A Historical Review of Management Options Used against the Stable Fly (Diptera: Muscidae)

Identification of Rice Blast Resistance Genes in South Central Coast of Vietnam Using Monogenic Lines under Field Condition and Pathogenicity Assays

Short communication: Relationship between serum cortisol concentration and defensive behavioral responses of dairy cows exposed to natural infestation by stable fly, Stomoxys calcitrans

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About