Skip to main content
Log in

Characterisation of cattle anal odour constituents associated with the repellency of Rhipicephalus appendiculatus

  • Published:
Experimental and Applied Acarology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Adults of the Brown Ear Tick (Rhipicephalus appendiculatus) have a predilection for feeding inside and around the ears of cattle and other hosts. A previous study has shown that the tick locates the host ears by ‘push–pull’ deployment of a repellent blend emitted at the anal region and an attractant blend emitted at the ears. Interestingly, the two odours play reverse roles with Rhipicephalus evertsi, which prefer to feed around the anal region. The present study was undertaken to characterize the major constituents of the cattle anal odour and to evaluate their repellence to R. appendiculatus. The anal odour was trapped with reverse-phase C18-bonded silica, Porapak Q and Super Q placed in an oven bag attached at the anal region of the cattle for 6 h. The adsorbents were then removed and extracted with dichloromethane, and the extracted compounds analyzed by linked gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC–MS). The major constituents of the odour were o-xylene, 4-hydroxy-4-methyl-2-pentanone, 4-methyl-2-methoxyphenol, ethylbenzene, 2,6,6-trimethyl-[1S(1α,β,5α)]bicycloheptanes, 5-ethoxydihydro-2(3H)-furanone, 3-methylene-2-pentanone, 5-methyl-2-phenyl-1H-indole, and 3-pentanone. The repellency of the available compounds (o-xylene, 4-hydroxy-4-methyl-2-pentanone, 4-methyl-2-methoxyphenol, ethyl benzene, 3-methylene-2-pentanone, and 3-pentanone) and blends was evaluated using a dual choice tick climbing assay at different doses. The anal odour showed repellence with RD75 of 0.39. Of the compounds tested, 4-methyl-2-methoxyphenol was found to be most repellent (RD75 = 0.56) and 3-pentanone least repellent (RD75 = 622.7). The blend of the six constituents showed RD75 of 0.34, comparable to that of the crude anal odour blend. A series of subtractive bioassays with one constituent of the 6-component blend missing was also carried out. Subtraction of 3-methylpentanone gave the most repellent blend (RD75 = 0.097), whereas subtraction of 4-methylguaiacol gave the least repellent blend (RD75 = 160.7) consistent with the high individual activity of this phenol. The study lays down useful groundwork for on-host deployment of controlled-release of a selected repellent or blend to disrupt the tick’s ability to locate its preferred feeding site.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • African Union-Interafrican Bureau for Animal Resources (2011) Pan African animal health yearbook 2011. Pan African animal health yearbook, 2011:xiii + 90 pp. http://www.au-ibar.org/pan-african-animal-health-yearbook. Accessed 2 Dec 2017

  • Bett MK, Saini RK, Hassanali A (2015) Repellency of tsetse-refractory waterbuck (Kobus defassa) body odour to Glossina pallidipes (Diptera: Glossinidae): assessment of relative contribution of different classes and individual constituents. Acta Trop 146:17–24

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cunningham MP, Brown CG, Burridge MJ, Purnell RE (1973) Cryopreservation of infective particles of Theileria parva. Int J Parasitol 3:583–587

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • De Deken R, Martin V, Saido A, Madder M, Brandt J, Geysen D (2007) An outbreak of east coast fever on the Comoros: a consequence of the import of immunized cattle from Tanzania? Vet Parasitol 143:245–253

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Drummond R (1983) Tick-borne livestock diseases and their vectors. Chemical control of ticks. Wild Anim Revolut (FAO) 36:28–33

    Google Scholar 

  • Garcia-Garcia JC, Montero C, Redondo M, Vargas M, Canales M, Boue O, Rodriguez M, Joglar M, Machado H, Gonzalez IL (2000) Control of ticks resistant to immunization with Bm86 in cattle vaccinated with recombinant antigen Bm95 isolated from the cattle tick, Boophilus microplus. Vaccine 18:2275–2287

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • George J (2000) Present and future technologies for tick control. Ann NY Acad Sci 916:583–588

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Irvin AD, Brocklesby DW (1970) Rearing and maintaining Rhipicephalus appendiculatus in the laboratory. J Inst Anim Tech 21:106

    Google Scholar 

  • Kogo K, Michuki G, Okemo P, Skilton R, Kemp S, Muthee M, Hassanal A. The role of microbes in cattle ears in the production of volatile semiochemical blend attractive to the Brown Ear tick. Rhipicephalus appendiculatus (In Preparation)

  • Laffont C, Alvinerie M, Bousquet-Melou A, Toutain P (2001) Licking behavior and environmental contamination arising from pour-on ivermectin for cattle. Int J Parasitol 31:1687–1692

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Mbogo KS, Kariuki PD, McHardy N, Payne R (1995) Training manual for veterinary staff on immunization against East Coast fever using the ECFiM system. Kenya Agricultural Research Institute and Overseas Development Administration of UK

  • Norval R, Perry D, Young S (1992) The epidemiology of theileriosis in Africa. Academic Press, London, p 481

    Google Scholar 

  • Saini RK, Hassanali A (2007) A 4-alkyl-substituted analogue of guaiacol shows greater repellency to Savannah Tsetse (Glossina spp.). J Chemo Ecol 33:985–995

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Saini RK, Orindi BO, Mbahin N, Andoke JA, Muasa PN, Mbuvi DM, Muya CM, Pickett JA, Borgemeister CW (2017) Protecting cows in small holder farms in East Africa from tsetse flies by mimicking the odor profile of a non-host bovid neglected tropical diseases. PLoS Negl Trop Dis 11:10

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spickett AM (1998) Acaricide and resistance. Vet Ectoparasitol Protozool 1:113

    Google Scholar 

  • Tholl D, Bolland W, Hansel A, Loreto F, Schnitzer J (2006) Techniques for molecular analysis. Plant J 45:540

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Wachira B, Mireji P, Okoth S, Ng’ang’a M, William J, Grace A, Hassanali A (2016) Responses of Glossina pallidipes and Glossina morsitans morsitans tsetse flies to analogues of δ-octalactone and selected blends. Acta Trop 160:53–57

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Walker BJ (1974) The ixodid ticks of Kenya: a review of present knowledge of their hosts and distribution. The Eastern Press Limited, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Wanzala W, Sika N, Gule S, Hassanali A (2004) Attractive and repellent host odours that guide ticks to their respective feeding sites. Chemoecology 14:229–232

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Young A, Groocock C, Kariuki D (1988) Integrated control of ticks and tick borne diseases of cattle in Africa. Parasitology 96:403–432

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgement

This work was supported by funds from National Council of Science Technology (Grant No. NCST/5/003/W44). We also acknowledge Dr Rajindar K. Saini, of ICIPE for facilitating in the purchase of synthetic chemicals, Wanyama Kaye (ICIPE) for assisting in running GC–MS of the cattle anal odours, and E. Maina Kenyatta University for technical support.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Margaret W. Kariuki.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Human and animal rights statement

All applicable international, national, and/or institutional guidelines for the care and use of animals were followed. This article does not contain any studies with human participants performed by any of the authors.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kariuki, M.W., Hassanali, A. & Ng’ang’a, M.M. Characterisation of cattle anal odour constituents associated with the repellency of Rhipicephalus appendiculatus. Exp Appl Acarol 76, 221–227 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10493-018-0304-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10493-018-0304-5

Keywords

Navigation