No abstract

manufacturer's recommended dose rate. A further group of four animals remained as untreated controls which were infested on day zero and then observed for louse infestation twice a week throughout the trial period. Two ivermectin/clorsulon and two doramectin treated calves were infested individually with 50 L vituli on day 14 after drug injection and were observed for louse attachment four and seven days later.On day 21, two more ivermectin/clorsulon and a further two doramectin treated calves were infested individually with 50 L vituli lice and observed for louse attachment four and seven days later. Provided the animals remained clear of lice they were reinfested 14 days after the first challenge -thus calves used on day 14 were reused on day 28 and those used on day 21 were reused on day 35.In part 1, one calf from day 21 was showing seasonal hair loss making it unsuitable for rechallenge and so a louse-free animal from day 28 was rechallenged as a substitute for it on day 35.All untreated control calves became infested with lice, demonstrating the reliability of the infestation technique. Results obtained from the treated animals showed that all of the calves treated with either ivermectin/clorsulon or doramectin remained louse-free after challenge on day 14. In each part of the trial, one of the animals treated with ivermectin/clorsulon and challenged on day 21 became infested. In the case of the doramectin treatment, all animals challenged on days 21 and 28 remained lousefree. In the first part of the trial both doramectin-treated animals remained louse-free after challenge on day 35 but at this point in the second part one of them became positive for louse establishment ( Table 2).The present results thus confirm that ivermectin/clorsulon will give persistent protection against L vituli for more than 14 days but less than 21, while doramectin will give more than 28 days protection but less than 35.Endectocides have given farmers the opportunity to control ectoparasites at the same time as worming their cattle. In the case of lice the main advantage is seen to be a curative rather than a preventive one, and farmers sometimes complain, usually after a time interval of some months, that louse infestations have returned. Some of these could be the results of reinfestation following mixing of treated and untreated animals in common housing, and in this case the longer the preventive action of the endectocide the less the likelihood of complaints.

Antifungal resistance is increasing by the emergence of intrinsically resistant species and by the development of secondary resistance in susceptible species. A previous study performed in Spain revealed levels of azole resistance in molds of between 10 and 12.7%, but secondary resistance in was not detected. We used itraconazole (ITZ)-supplemented medium to select resistant strains. A total of 500 plates supplemented with 2 mg/liter of ITZ were sent to 10 Spanish tertiary hospitals, and molecular identification and antifungal susceptibility testing were performed. In addition, the gene in those strains showing azole resistance was sequenced. A total of 493 isolates were included in the study. Sixteen strains were isolated from patients with an infection classified as proven, 104 were isolated from patients with an infection classified as probable, and 373 were isolated from patients with an infection classified as colonization. was the most frequent genus isolated, at 80.3%, followed by (7.9%), (4.5%), (2.6%), and the order (1%). Antifungal resistance was detected in species,, , and Three strains of were resistant to azoles; two of them harbored the TR+L98H mechanism of resistance, and the other one had no mutations in The level of azole resistance in remains low, but cryptic species represent over 10% of the isolates and have a broader but overall higher range of antifungal resistance.

No abstract

No abstract