The efficacy of injectable and pour‐on formulations of moxidectin against lice on cattle

Abstract

The efficacy of one administration of moxidectin against natural infestations of the 3 common species of cattle lice in Australia: Linognathus vituli, Damalinia bovis and Haematopinus eurysternus, was determined. A high degree of control of L vituli (the long-nosed sucking louse) was achieved with both the cattle injection (96.7% and 100%) at 0.2 mg/kg and the cattle pour-on formulation (94.6% and 100%) at 0.5 mg/kg on the 2 farms where this louse occurred. An injection of moxidectin at 0.2 mg/kg did not eliminate D bovis. In these trials efficacy ranged from nil to 85.2%. In contrast the pour-on formulation at 0.5 mg/kg provided consistently high efficacy (83.6 to 100%) against D bovis on 3 farms. Infestations of H eurysternus (the short-nosed sucking louse) were low and no significant difference was recorded between treatment groups in a single trial, however, lice persisted on 3 to 7 cattle in the untreated group at each inspection, whereas none were found on any animals in the 2 groups treated with moxidectin on inspection after treatment.

Effects of ivermectin and moxidectin on the insects of cattle dung

“…It differs from ivermectin in chemistry, structure and potency, and is effective against nematode and arthropod parasites (Williams et al, 1922;Craig et al, 1992;Chick et al, 1993;Doherty et al, 1994;Kieran, 1994). The low toxicity of moxidectin to dung-breeding Coleoptera has been recorded by Fincher & Wang (1992) who found that dung from moxidectin-treated cattle had no effects on brood ball production or adult emergence in Euomhcellus intermedius (Reiche) and Onthophagus gazella.…”

Therapeutic efficacy of zeta‐cypermethrin pour‐on for the treatment of biting and sucking lice in cattle under field conditions

“…18,25 In contrast OPs have inconsistent performance against B bovis, the efficacy ranging from 73 to 100%. 17,18 Similarly MLs given parenterally have efficacies ranging from 0 to 100%, [19][20][21][22][23] most commonly in the 80 to 90% range. Topically applied MLs have better efficacy than parenterally administered MLs (84 to 100%) [22][23][24] but are still less effective than synthetic pyrethroids.…”

“…17,18 Similarly MLs given parenterally have efficacies ranging from 0 to 100%, [19][20][21][22][23] most commonly in the 80 to 90% range. Topically applied MLs have better efficacy than parenterally administered MLs (84 to 100%) [22][23][24] but are still less effective than synthetic pyrethroids. Deltamethrin and MLs are very effective against H eurysternus 1,[8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21]25 as was zeta-cypermethrin.…”

“…L vituli is controlled well (95 to 100% efficacy, generally 100%) by the MLs irrespective of the route of administration. [19][20][21][22][23][24] The OPs are not as effective (0 to 100%) with efficacy dependant on dose and frequency of application. 17,18,[26][27][28] Deltamethrin gives 98 to 100% efficacy.…”

Uso de la moxidectina para el tratamiento de los parásitos internos y externos de los animales.

“…También la moxidectina inyectable es eficiente para el control de piojos chupadores (99-100%), contra Haematopinus euryternus, Linognathus vituli y Solenoptes capillatus y miasis bovina (Hypoderma lineatum). Sin embargo, la formulación "pour-on" proporciona mejor control de piojos mordedores (Damalinia bovis) que la formulación inyectable (37). Lonneux y Losson (36) demostraron que la moxidectina "pour on" (0.5 mg/kg p.v.)…”