Table 2.
Number of animals infested with ticks < 4 mm in length between the legs of the animal or in the dewlap region and average counts of female Rhipicephalus microplus (≥ 4.5 mm in length) present on the left side of the body of animals subjected to different control schemes against R. microplus
| Number of animals with ticks < 4 mm in lenght (%) | Tick counts (females (≥4.5 mm in lenght) | Value of P | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Day | Animal age in months | Treatment (FLU) | Control (FIFLUA) | |||||||||||
| Treatment (FLU) | Control (FIFLUA) | Mean* | Range | Mean* | Range | |||||||||
| 0 | 4 | 6/30 (20) | 6/30 (20) | 0.03 | A | 0 | – | 1 | 0.23 | A | 0 | – | 2 | 0.0761 |
| 7 | 7/30 (23.3) | 6/30 (20) | 0.19 | A | 0 | – | 2 | 0.20 | A | 0 | – | 4 | 0.7248 | |
| 14αβ | 13/30 (43.3) | 14/30 (46.6) | 0.00 | A | 0 | – | 0 | 0.03 | A | 0 | – | 1 | 0.3094 | |
| 21 | 0/30 (0) | 1/30 (3.3) | 0.00 | A | 0 | – | 0 | 0.03 | A | 0 | – | 1 | 0.3094 | |
| 28 | 5/30 (16.6) | 6/30 (20) | 0.00 | A | 0 | – | 0 | 0.00 | A | 0 | – | 0 | 1.0000 | |
| 35 | 5 | 0/30 (0) | 2/30 (6.6) | 0.00 | A | 0 | – | 0 | 0.10 | A | 0 | – | 1 | 0.0733 |
| 42 β | 0/30 (0) | 28/30 (93.3) | 0.00 | A | 0 | – | 0 | 0.07 | A | 0 | – | 2 | 0.3094 | |
| 49 | 2/30 (6.6) | 21/30 (70) | 0.00 | B | 0 | – | 0 | 0.83 | A | 0 | – | 7 | 0.0011 | |
| 56 | 7/30 (23.3) | 20/30 (66.6) | 0.00 | B | 0 | – | 0 | 0.87 | A | 0 | – | 5 | < 0.0001 |
| 63 α | 6 | 20/30 (66.6) | 21/30 (70) | 0.65 | A | 0 | – | 8 | 0.73 | A | 0 | – | 5 | 0.3237 |
| 70 | 0/30 (0) | 18/30 (60) | 0.03 | B | 0 | – | 1 | 1.00 | A | 0 | – | 6 | 0.0009 | |
| 77 | 1/30 (3.3) | 12/30 (40) | 0.00 | A | 0 | – | 0 | 0.00 | A | 0 | – | 0 | 1.0000 | |
| 84 β | 0/30 (0) | 26/30 (86.6) | 0.00 | B | 0 | – | 0 | 0.20 | A | 0 | – | 2 | 0.0187 |
| 91 | 7 | 0/30 (0) | 19/30 (63.3) | 0.00 | B | 0 | – | 0 | 0.97 | A | 0 | – | 8 | 0.0023 |
| 98 | 0/30 (0) | 24/30 (80) | 0.00 | B | 0 | – | 0 | 0.67 | A | 0 | – | 5 | 0.0002 | |
| 105 | 0/30 (0) | 30/30 (100) | 0.00 | B | 0 | – | 0 | 1.93 | A | 0 | – | 8 | < 0.0001 | |
| 112 | 0/30 (0) | 22/30 (73.3) | 0.00 | B | 0 | – | 0 | 0.43 | A | 0 | – | 6 | 0.0188 |
| 119 | 8 | 0/30 (0) | 23/30 (76.6) | 0.03 | B | 0 | – | 1 | 0.60 | A | 0 | – | 3 | 0.0010 |
| 126 β | 8/30 (26.6) | 29/30 (96.6) | 0.03 | B | 0 | – | 1 | 0.70 | A | 0 | – | 5 | 0.0010 | |
| 133 α | 29/30 (96.6) | 22/30 (73.3) | 0.39 | A | 0 | – | 4 | 1.00 | A | 0 | – | 9 | 0.4115 | |
| 140 | 0/30 (0) | 30/30 (100) | 1.29 | A | 0 | – | 5 | 0.90 | A | 0 | – | 4 | 0.3342 |
| 154 | 9 | 0/30 (0) | 24/30 (80) | 0.00 | B | 0 | – | 0 | 0.70 | A | 0 | – | 6 | < 0.0001 |
| 175 | 10 | 5/30 (16.6) | 27/30 (90) | 0.00 | B | 0 | – | 0 | 0.90 | A | 0 | – | 11 | < 0.0001 |
*Mean count values followed by the same letter in the same row do not differ significantly at a 95% reliability level of significance (Kruskal–Wallis test)
FIFLUA Fipronil + fluazuron formulation, FLU fluralaner formulation
αAll 30 animals in FLU group received fluralaner
βAll 30 animals in FIFLUA group received fipronil + fluazuron