Untitled

White, Neil; Sutherst, R. W.; Hall, Nigel H.; Whish-Wilson, Patrick

doi:10.1023/a:1026354712890

Cited by 64 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Rainfall also affects tick population, since these vectors, hard or soft tick species, are very dependent on local hygrometry to survive in their respective habitats. In Australia, Argentina, and Kenya, global modifications of tick habitats through the modification of seasonality and intensities of rainfalls and temperature raising increase the densities of the cattle tick Boophilus microplus , and losses in beef cattle industry are expected ( White et al, 2003 ; Estrada-Pena et al, 2006 ; Keesing et al, 2017 ). Humidity is well known for promoting mosquito and tick survival, therefore enhancing their chance to transmit pathogens ( White et al, 2003 ; Schmidt et al, 2018 ).…”

Section: Role Of External Factors In Virus Transmission By Mosquitoes and Ticksmentioning

confidence: 99%

Vector Specificity of Arbovirus Transmission

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

More than 25% of human infectious diseases are vector-borne diseases (VBDs). These diseases, caused by pathogens shared between animals and humans, are a growing threat to global health with more than 2.5 million annual deaths. Mosquitoes and ticks are the main vectors of arboviruses including flaviviruses, which greatly affect humans. However, all tick or mosquito species are not able to transmit all viruses, suggesting important molecular mechanisms regulating viral infection, dissemination, and transmission by vectors. Despite the large distribution of arthropods (mosquitoes and ticks) and arboviruses, only a few pairings of arthropods (family, genus, and population) and viruses (family, genus, and genotype) successfully transmit. Here, we review the factors that might limit pathogen transmission: internal (vector genetics, immune responses, microbiome including insect-specific viruses, and coinfections) and external, either biotic (adult and larvae nutrition) or abiotic (temperature, chemicals, and altitude). This review will demonstrate the dynamic nature and complexity of virus–vector interactions to help in designing appropriate practices in surveillance and prevention to reduce VBD threats.

show abstract

Section: Role Of External Factors In Virus Transmission By Mosquitoes and Ticksmentioning

confidence: 99%

Vector Specificity of Arbovirus Transmission

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…) microplus is an endemic pest of cattle in tropical and subtropical regions of the world, causing major economic losses to cattle producers through direct physical effects on the parasitized animal and indirectly through disease transmission of infectious agents such as Babesia bovis, B. bigemina and Anaplasma marginale (SOLORIO-RIVERA et al, 1999;RODRÍGUEZ-VIVAS et al, 2004. In addition to the costs of chemicals, labor, equipment and production losses associated with treatment, the cost of maintaining tick-free zones and boundaries is highly expensive (WHITE et al, 2003).…”

Section: Effect Of Rhipicephalus (B) Microplus On Cattle Productionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Rhipicephalus(Boophilus) microplus resistant to acaricides and ivermectin in cattle farms of Mexico

Rodríguez-Vivas¹,

Pérez-Cogollo

Rosado-Aguilar

et al. 2014

Rev. Bras. Parasitol. Vet.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ticks and the diseases they transmit cause great economic losses to livestock in tropical countries. Non-chemical control alternatives include the use of resistant cattle breeds, biological control and vaccines. However, the most widely used method is the application of different chemical classes of acaricides and macrocyclic lactones. ResumoCarrapatos e as doenças por eles transmitidas causam grandes perdas econômicas ao gado dos países tropicais. Alternativas não-químicas incluem o uso de raças de gado que sejam resistentes, controle biológico e vacinas. No entanto, o método mais utilizado é a aplicação de diferentes classes químicas de acaricidas e lactonas macrocíclicas. Populações de piolhos de gado, Rhipicephalus (Boophilus) microplus, resistentes aos organofosfatos (OP), piretoides sintéticos (SP), amitraz e fipronil, foram descritas no México. Lactonas macrocíclicas são as drogas antiparasitárias mais vendidas no mercado veterinário mexicano. Populações de R. (B.) microplus resistentes à irvemectina foram relatadas no Brasil, Uruguai e especialmente no México (Veracruz e Yucatan). Embora os níveis de resistência à ivermectina no R. (B.) microplus do México tenha sido relativamente baixa, na maioria dos casos, algumas populações campestres de R. (B.) microplus mostraram altos níveis de resistência à ivermectina. A população CHPAT mostrou uma razão de resistência de 10,23 e 79,6 na concentração letal de 50% e 99%, respectivamente. Muitas populações campestres de R. (B.) microplus são resistentes a múltiplas classes de drogas antiparasitárias, incluindo organofosfatos (clorpirifós, coumafos e diazinon), piretoides (flumetrina, deltametrina e cipermetrina), amitraz e ivermectina. Este artigo relata o estado atual de resistência do R. (B.) microplus aos acaricidas, especialmente ivermectina, no gado mexicano.Palavras-chave: Rhipicephalus (B.) microplus, acaricida, resistência, lactona macrocíclica, controle de carrapatos.

show abstract

“…Field trials also suggest that the beneficial effect of CO 2 in stimulating plant production may decline over time due to Table 2. Variable effects of increasing temperature on processes in the grazing system Beneficial Increased forage production in winter/spring (Fitzpatrick and Nix 1970) Fewer frosts at some locations (Stone et al 1996a) Reduced animal stress in winter (Donnelly et al 1997;Howden et al 2008) Different responses of pasture species (Ivory and Whiteman 1978;McKeon et al 1998b) Detrimental Increased rainfall intensity (Pittock et al 1991) Increased potential evapotranspiration (depending on wind, Roderick et al 2007) Increased soil evaporation (Rose 1968) Decreased forage production in hot summers and reduced digestibility (Wilson 1982) Death of trees due to drought and fire (Fensham and Holman 1999;Dyer et al 2001) Increased animal stress in summer (Petty 1997;Howden et al 1999cHowden et al , 2008Thomas et al 2008) Reduced grazing time and increased water demand (Daly 1984) Increase in disease and pests when hot and wet (White et al 2003a) Impact on human health (Woodruff et al 2005) reduced photosynthesis (as a result of re-allocation of nitrogen by the plant away from photosynthetic enzymes) and progressive nitrogen limitation. However, such declines in CO 2 effects may be an experimental artefact of the 'shock effect' of a sudden experimental step increase in CO 2 temporarily tying up inorganic nitrogen in organic form (until the carbon and nitrogen cycles return to equilibrium).…”

Section: Co 2 Effectsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Climate change impacts on northern Australian rangeland livestock carrying capacity: a review of issues

McKeon¹,

Stone²,

Syktus³

et al. 2009

Rangel. J.

213

136

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Grazing is a major land use in Australia’s rangelands. The ‘safe’ livestock carrying capacity (LCC) required to maintain resource condition is strongly dependent on climate. We reviewed: the approaches for quantifying LCC; current trends in climate and their effect on components of the grazing system; implications of the ‘best estimates’ of climate change projections for LCC; the agreement and disagreement between the current trends and projections; and the adequacy of current models of forage production in simulating the impact of climate change. We report the results of a sensitivity study of climate change impacts on forage production across the rangelands, and we discuss the more general issues facing grazing enterprises associated with climate change, such as ‘known uncertainties’ and adaptation responses (e.g. use of climate risk assessment). We found that the method of quantifying LCC from a combination of estimates (simulations) of long-term (>30 years) forage production and successful grazier experience has been well tested across northern Australian rangelands with different climatic regions. This methodology provides a sound base for the assessment of climate change impacts, even though there are many identified gaps in knowledge. The evaluation of current trends indicated substantial differences in the trends of annual rainfall (and simulated forage production) across Australian rangelands with general increases in most of western Australian rangelands (including northern regions of the Northern Territory) and decreases in eastern Australian rangelands and south-western Western Australia. Some of the projected changes in rainfall and temperature appear small compared with year-to-year variability. Nevertheless, the impacts on rangeland production systems are expected to be important in terms of required managerial and enterprise adaptations. Some important aspects of climate systems science remain unresolved, and we suggest that a risk-averse approach to rangeland management, based on the ‘best estimate’ projections, in combination with appropriate responses to short-term (1–5 years) climate variability, would reduce the risk of resource degradation. Climate change projections – including changes in rainfall, temperature, carbon dioxide and other climatic variables – if realised, are likely to affect forage and animal production, and ecosystem functioning. The major known uncertainties in quantifying climate change impacts are: (i) carbon dioxide effects on forage production, quality, nutrient cycling and competition between life forms (e.g. grass, shrubs and trees); and (ii) the future role of woody plants including effects of fire, climatic extremes and management for carbon storage. In a simple example of simulating climate change impacts on forage production, we found that increased temperature (3°C) was likely to result in a decrease in forage production for most rangeland locations (e.g. –21% calculated as an unweighted average across 90 locations). The increase in temperature exacerbated or reduced the effects of a 10% decrease/increase in rainfall respectively (–33% or –9%). Estimates of the beneficial effects of increased CO2 (from 350 to 650 ppm) on forage production and water use efficiency indicated enhanced forage production (+26%). The increase was approximately equivalent to the decline in forage production associated with a 3°C temperature increase. The large magnitude of these opposing effects emphasised the importance of the uncertainties in quantifying the impacts of these components of climate change. We anticipate decreases in LCC given that the ‘best estimate’ of climate change across the rangelands is for a decline (or little change) in rainfall and an increase in temperature. As a consequence, we suggest that public policy have regard for: the implications for livestock enterprises, regional communities, potential resource damage, animal welfare and human distress. However, the capability to quantify these warnings is yet to be developed and this important task remains as a challenge for rangeland and climate systems science.

show abstract

Untitled

Cited by 64 publications

References 27 publications

Vector Specificity of Arbovirus Transmission

Vector Specificity of Arbovirus Transmission

Rhipicephalus(Boophilus) microplus resistant to acaricides and ivermectin in cattle farms of Mexico

Climate change impacts on northern Australian rangeland livestock carrying capacity: a review of issues

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About