Comparison of an amitraz-impregnated collar with topical administration of fipronil for prevention of experimental and natural infestations by the brown dog tick (Rhipicephalus sanguineus)

Agustin Estrada-Peña From the Department of Parasitology, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Zaragoza, 50013-Zaragoza, Spain (Estrada-Peña); and Virbac SA, 1 06510-Carros, Cedex, France (Ascher).

Search for other papers by Agustin Estrada-Peña in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
 DVM
and
Frederic Ascher From the Department of Parasitology, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Zaragoza, 50013-Zaragoza, Spain (Estrada-Peña); and Virbac SA, 1 06510-Carros, Cedex, France (Ascher).

Search for other papers by Frederic Ascher in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
 DVM

Click on author name to view affiliation information

Objective

To compare the efficacies of amitraz and fipronil for prevention of experimental and natural infestations of Rhipicephalus sanguineus.

Design

Prospective study.

Animals

30 dogs.

Procedure

In 3 trials, dogs were allocated to 3 groups of 10 each. In trial 1, dogs were experimentally infested on day -1, and on day 0 were fitted with an amitraz-impregnated collar, treated topically with fipronil, or not treated. Ticks were counted daily until day 7, when viability of ticks and their progeny was determined. In trial 2, dogs were treated on day 0 and experimentally infested on days 7, 8,10, and 13. Ticks were counted on days 8, 10, 13, and 18, and viability of ticks and their progeny was determined on day 18. In trial 3, dogs were exposed weekly to a tick-infested environment from day -3 to day 70. Dogs were treated on day 0, and ticks were counted and removed weekly from day 3 to day 77.

Results

Fipronil and amitraz were acaricidal and inhibited attachment and feeding. Amitraz had a significantly greater effect than fipronil on numbers of live, feeding ticks, egg hatchability, and larval viability, indicating partial ability to interrupt the tick life cycle. In field conditions, amitraz remained effective over the entire observation period.

Clinical Implications

Amitraz had stronger and more sustained effects against tick infestation than fipronil. (J Am Vet Med Assoc 1999;214:1799-1803)

Objective

To compare the efficacies of amitraz and fipronil for prevention of experimental and natural infestations of Rhipicephalus sanguineus.

Design

Prospective study.

Animals

30 dogs.

Procedure

In 3 trials, dogs were allocated to 3 groups of 10 each. In trial 1, dogs were experimentally infested on day -1, and on day 0 were fitted with an amitraz-impregnated collar, treated topically with fipronil, or not treated. Ticks were counted daily until day 7, when viability of ticks and their progeny was determined. In trial 2, dogs were treated on day 0 and experimentally infested on days 7, 8,10, and 13. Ticks were counted on days 8, 10, 13, and 18, and viability of ticks and their progeny was determined on day 18. In trial 3, dogs were exposed weekly to a tick-infested environment from day -3 to day 70. Dogs were treated on day 0, and ticks were counted and removed weekly from day 3 to day 77.

Results

Fipronil and amitraz were acaricidal and inhibited attachment and feeding. Amitraz had a significantly greater effect than fipronil on numbers of live, feeding ticks, egg hatchability, and larval viability, indicating partial ability to interrupt the tick life cycle. In field conditions, amitraz remained effective over the entire observation period.

Clinical Implications

Amitraz had stronger and more sustained effects against tick infestation than fipronil. (J Am Vet Med Assoc 1999;214:1799-1803)

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 445 445 135
PDF Downloads 34 34 4
Advertisement