A test with 100 nymphs of Hyalomma anatolicum anatolicum for evaluation of resistance of cattle to ticks was found to have a good potential for assessing the resistance status of cattle. Thus, 7% of nymphs engorged and moulted on a resistant host with average engorgement weight of 7.6 mg compared to 19 and 45% of engorged nymphs on two susceptible hosts with 15.8 and 13.6 mg average engorgement weights. Similarly, the number of detached fully engorged Rhipicephalus evertsi nymphs dropped from the resistant cows ranged between 14 and 57 compared with 118–124 from the two susceptible animals. The correlations between the three parameters; ranking cattle for resistance (natural tick burdens), the number of detached fully engorged R. evertsi nymphs, and the percentage survival of H. a. anatolicum nymphs after artificial infestation are discussed and found to be significant (r = 0.778; r = +0.886; r = +0.936). It is, therefore possible to assess the overall resistance status of hosts and cull the susceptible, if necessary.
Hyalomma anatolicum Rhipicephalus evertsicattle resistance to ticks the Sudan susceptible host tick burden
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.
Kaiser M. N., Sutherst R. W. and Bourne A. S. (1982) Relationships between ticks and zebu cattle in Southern Uganda. Trap. anim. Hlth Prod.14, 63–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Latif A. A. (1984) Resistance to natural tick infestations in different breeds of cattle in Sudan. Insect Sci. Applic.5, 95–97.Google Scholar
Sutherst R. W., Roberts J. A. and Wagland B. M. (1979a) Resistance in cattle to Haemaphysalis (Kaiseriana) longi-cornis. Int. J. Parasit.9, 183–188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sutherst R. W., Wharton R. H., Cook I. M., Sutherland I. D. and Bourne A. S. (1979b) Long-term population studies on the cattle tick Boophilus microplus on untreated cattle selected for different levels of tick resistance. Aust. J. agric. Res.30, 353–368.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sutherst R. W., Norton G. A. and Maywald G. F. (1979c) Analysis of control strategies for cattle tick on Zebu x British cattle. Proceedings of the 56th Annual Conference of Australian Veterinary Association, pp. 46–51.Google Scholar
Utech K. B. W., Wharton R. H. and Kerr J. D. (1978a) Resistance to Boophilus microplus in different breeds of cattle. Aust. J. agric. Res.29, 885–895.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Utech K. B. W., Seifert G. W. and Wharton R. H. (1978b) Breeding Australian Illawarra shorthorn cattle for re-sistance to Boophilus microplus. I. Factors affecting resistance. Aust. J. agric. Res.29, 411–422.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wharton R. H., Harley K. L. S., Wilkinson P. R., Utech K. B. W. and Kelley B. M. (1969) A comparison of cattle tick control by pasture spelling, planned dipping, and tick resistant cattle. Aust. J. agric. Res.20, 783–793.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wharton R. H. and Utech K. B. W. (1970) The relation between engorgement and dropping of Boophilus micro -plus (Canestrini Ixodidae) to the assessment of tick numbers on cattle. J. Aust. ent. Soc.9, 171–182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wikel S. K. (1982) Immune responses to arthropods and their products. A. Rev. Ent.27, 21–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar