The renowned anthelmintic classes (with drug examples) reported resistance [3, 22].
Abstract
Anthelmintic, ectoparasiticides (insecticides, acaricides), and antiprotozoal chemotherapeutic drugs target parasites. Chenopodium oil like alkaloids, arsenic compounds, cupric sulfate, nicotine, and cupric silicate were used to destroy nematodes. Unfortunately, these chemicals were less effective and less safe for livestock. The four major groups of broad-spectrum antinematodal compounds are macrocyclic lactones such as milbemycins/ivermectin, benzimidazole/pro-benzimidazole, tetrahydro pyrimidines such as morantel, pyrantel tartrate, and imidazothiazoles such as tetramisole and levamisole. The various factors responsible for gastrointestinal (GI) parasitism make it difficult to develop effective control measures, to the best of our knowledge. Hence, an effective strategy for the control of parasitic diseases that do not solely rely on anthelmintic therapies needs to be developed at the regional level, based on the epidemiology of the disease. This book chapter aims to elaborate on the various other ways to control parasitic diseases due to Anthelmintic drug resistance.
Keywords
- gastrointestinal parasitism
- anthelmintic resistance
- chemical Control
- alternative control
- future trends in livestock
1. Introduction
Antiparasitic chemotherapeutics can be categorized as anthelmintics, ectoparasiticides (insecticides and acaricides), and antiprotozoals. Anthelmintics are those agents used to destroy worms and are used as anticestodal, antinematodal, and antinematodal agents [1].
The use of chemical agents against nematodes traced back to the 1990s and those agents were having less effectiveness. Chemicals used for nematode destruction were arsenic compounds, cupric sulfate, nicotine, Chenopodium oil like alkaloids. These chemical compounds were found less effective and more toxic for livestock. Synthetic drug phenothiazine antinematodal characteristics were first reported in the United States and were used as broad-spectrum medicine for nematode treatment in horses, ruminants, and chickens. Phenothiazine is removed from the therapeutic inventory in many countries [1].
From that time scientists were trying to produce an ideal anthelmintic drug that could be used as broad-spectrum dewormers and result in the use of organophosphorus compounds, imidazoles, and tetrahydro pyrimidines. Thiabendazole (TBZ) was developed in 1961 after two decades, and this drug is having high efficiency and safety and broad-spectrum. It was the first-generation benzimidazole group and used against a wide range of hosts, i.e., goats, poultry, sheep, cattle, pigs, horses, and humans against gastrointestinal nematodes, and it shows ovicidal, larvicidal, and adulticidal activities. After TBZ’s success, it was planned to structurally modify it toward evolving drugs with excellent properties. Levamisole was discovered in 1966 and was marketed with the name of hydrochloride (HCL) salt having broad-spectrum antinematodal activities and immunomodulator effects [2].
Macrocyclic lactone derivatives including ivermectin (IVM) were discovered in 1981 broad-spectrum insecticidal activities. After this in 2009 after 28 years, monepantel was commercially released [3]. Broad-spectrum antinematodal synthetic compounds are divided into four major groups, i.e., macrocyclic lactone derivatives including milbemycins/ivermectin, benzimidazole/pro-benzimidazole group, tetrahydro pyrimidines group including morantel, pyrantel tartrate, and imidazothiazoles group including tetramisole and levamisole [1].
Commonly used chemotherapeutic groups are briefly reviewed in this review.
2. Benzimidazoles/pro-benzimidazoles and their mode of action
Compounds of this group are metabolized in the body and activate BZ metabolites. Members of this group are oxfendazole, ricobendazole, albendazole, thiabendazole, mebendazole, triclabendazole, oxibendazole, cambendazole, and other chemicals belonging to pro-benzimidazole, i.e., thiophanate, febantel, and netobimin [1].
Benzimidazole is effective against adult nematodes in ruminants and also has ovicidal and larvicidal activities. Some benzimidazole also exhibits anti-trematode and anticestodal activities. They are used in various hosts such as bovine, canine, equine, ovine, feline, reptiles, caprine, birds, and human species. In the case of humans, thiabendazole, mebendazole, and albendazole are used. They are having low toxicity and in some cases can be drenched 10 times than the calculated standard dose rate [2, 4].
All members of this group are having the same mode of action and disturb the energy metabolism of parasitic nematodes through binding with tubulin protein (alpha and beta molecules). This protein is present in plasma and microtubules and forms heterodimers and constructs blocks in polymeric microtubules [1]. Microtubules formation is a dynamic process affected by tubulin ring polymerization and depolymerization. Microtubules play an important role in cell division, energy metabolism, shape, and transport of substrate and protein assemblage. Benzimidazole group members bundle with β-tubulin, and this complex integrates at the propagating ends of the microtubules and inhibits the assemblage of extra microtubules. This whole process is known as capping [5, 6, 7].
They cause parasite undernourishment (due to failure in glucose uptake, the proliferation of microtubules, and protein secretion), reduction in acetylcholinesterase enzyme secretion, reduction in carbohydrate catabolism through fumarate reductase enzyme. Histological investigation of benzimidazole pharmacodynamics also reports their role in disturbance of microtubule aggregation in nematodes at those concentrations that do not influence mammalian cells (Figure 1) [1, 6, 8].
3. Imidazothiazoles and their mode of action
Imidazothiazoles consist of two drugs, i.e., tetramisole and levamisole HCL (LEV). Levamisole is a Levo isomer and has true antinematodal activity while tetramisole is a mixture of Levo and destroys forms. That is why the calculated dose of levamisole is half that of tetramisole.
Levamisole is mostly used in goats, sheep, swine, and cattle while in the case of horses, it is contraindicated. This drug is having potency against both mature and immature stages. That’s why the calculated dosage of LEV is half that of tetramisole with a safety index of twice.
In sheep, goat, cattle, and swine, LEV is administrated, and in horses, mostly it is contraindicated. In several mature and immature stages of alimentary tract nematodes and lungworms, LEV has shown great potential. Whereas LEV is not anticestodal nor it is anti-trematode. LEV has not shown any ovicidal activity such as BZs. Whereas the remedial index of LEV is relatively lower than that of other antinematodal. LEV has also been found effective against hypobiotic larvae of the sheep parasitic nematode,
The working mode of action of levamisoles has depicted that it works as a cholinergic agonist; it acts as nicotinic acetylcholine receptors on the surface of the nematode muscle cells along with neuromuscular junction. The antinematodal potential of LEV is mostly associated with its ganglion stimulant activity. It induces ganglion-like structure in somatic muscle cells of nematodes. The induction ultimately results in determining muscle contractions that are in line with the depolarizing barricades causing paralysis.
The pharmacodynamics of the compound plays an important role in the paralysis that leads to the elimination of helminths promptly through normal intestinal peristalsis (Figure 2) [1, 2].
4. Macrocyclic lactones (avermectins/milbemycins) and their mode of action
Macrocyclic lactones have different commercialized products that show insecticidal activity against a broad range of parasitic nematodes and ectoparasites (ticks, mites, lice) that infest domestic animals [9, 10]. Avermectins that include doramectin, ivermectin, abamectin, and eprinomectin are the fermented products of actinomycete
The unequal larvicidal and adulticidal activity of IVM against Gastro-Intestinal Tract (GIT) roundworms and lungworms of ruminantia, porcine, and equine is its main factor of characterization [10, 11]. The control of microfilariae of canine heartworm
IVM along with other ML derivatives such as moxidectin is frequently used against haemonchosis in sheep due to its mode of action [1]. This increases their influence by binding to glutamate and GABA-gated chloride channel receptors in nematode and arthropod nerve cells. The whole process results in the opening of the channel and allows the entry of chloride ions (Cl−). This will lead to the paralysis of the body wall, pharyngeal muscles, and uterine muscles in nematodes [12]. It is stated that the sensitivity of dissimilar chloride channel subunits to MLs and expression location are variable characters, and it can be accounted for the paralytic effect of different concentrations of MLs on the neuromuscular systems. It is also stated that nematode paralysis and body wall muscle paralysis can be proved serious for prompt exclusion, also pharyngeal muscle paralysis is more sensitive [13]. It has also been revealed that MLs cause the flaccid paralysis of the pharynx of nematodes along with moxidectin and IVM as it is more sensitive than somatic musculature, which shows that the target is the nervous system of parasites. If the concentration of MLs drops, then the motility of the parasites can be recuperated. As compared with somatic muscles, the paralysis of the pharyngeal muscles, as well as consequential inhibition of nourishing, can be longer. The reason for the ineffectiveness of ML derivatives against trematode and cestode parasites is that these worms do not have receptors at their glutamate-gated chloride channel.
5. Anthelmintic resistance of GIT nematodes
Resistance development against anthelmintics consists of a certain phase, i.e., during first phase, number of parasites developing resistance against specific anthelmintics is less; there is a gradual increase, and heterozygous parasites develop resistance and lead to the final phase where individuals become resistant against those anthelmintics, and the population becomes homozygous parasites population. It is also observed that parasite resistance against a specific anthelmintic also brings resistance against some other anthelmintics groups [14].
Resistance is a drug tolerance ability of a worm and survives in the recommended doses of anthelmintics that are normally an effective dose [15]. Parasitic resistance was first described in 1957, and firstly studied anthelmintic agents were organophosphates, phenothiazine, rafoxanide, thiabendazole, and macrocyclic lactones [16]. Recently different GIT parasites especially
Common | Very common | Less common |
Common | Common | Less common |
6. Geographic regions where resistance has developed
Initially, the development of resistance against nematicidal drugs was reported in the Southern hemisphere, and the most resistant was studied on
Country | Anthelmintic drugs | Reference(s) |
---|---|---|
Argentina | BZs, LEV, IVM | [24] |
Australia | Ops, BZs, LEV, TBZ, OXF, Closantel, Morantel | [19, 20] |
Belgium | BZs | [25] |
Brazil | BZs, LEV, IVM, Closantel | [24] |
France | BZs, LEV | [26] |
Germany | IVM,BZs, Pyrantel tarterate, FEN, Febantel, OXF, LEV, TBZ, ALB, MBZ | [27] |
India | BZs, IVM, FEN, Morantel, Closantel, LEV, Thiophanate, | [28] |
Kenya | BZs, LEV, RAF, FEN, IVM | [29] |
Malaysia | BMZ, LEVS, IVM, Moxidectin, Closantel | [25] |
Netherlands | OXFS, LEVS, BMZ, IVM | [30] |
New Zealand | BMZ, LEVS, IVM | [18, 31] |
Pakistan | OXFS, LEVS, ALB, IVM | [32, 33] |
Paraguay | BMZ, LEVS, IVM | [34] |
South Africa | BMZ, IVM, RAF, Closantel | [35] |
Uruguay | BMZ, LEVS, IVM | [36] |
United State of America | FEN, IVM, Pyrantel pamoate, LEVS, TBZ, | [37, 38] |
Zimbabwe | RAF, BMZ, LEVS, | [39] |
Hence, the growing anthelmintic resistance is threatening livestock production, increasing the toxic level in the environment, and ultimately reducing the food availability for human beings [23, 40]. Therefore, the scientists and parasitologists are performing the duty to raise one’s hope by launching alternatives to overcome the developing resistance such as biological control (phytotherapy) [33].
7. Globally applicable gastrointestinal nematodes control measures/strategies
Control of gastrointestinal nematode parasite (GINP).
Numerous techniques and plans have been utilized to lower the gastrointestinal (GI) nematode parasites of small ruminants across the world. Some of the techniques and methods are appropriate, and a few of them have limitations. Moreover, new methods and new approaches are being evaluated and established. The prime methodologies that have been used routinely to reduce the burden of GI nematodes are reviewed here.
7.1 Chemical control methods
7.1.1 Chemotherapy (anthelmintic)
Anthelmintics are those drugs that kill the helminths and are playing a toxic role to the worms and can be achieved by exposing the nematodes to a higher concentration of anthelmintics. This higher concentration is for worms not for the host body cells. This higher concentration inhibits the vital metabolic processes of the worms and kills the worm either by starving it or paralyzing it [23]. Resistance is a reduction in the efficacy of certain anthelmintics against parasites that are susceptible to anthelmintics in normal conditions [41]. Chemotherapeutic application is a very common and primitive method (conventional) to control the GINP around the globe. The agents have been used for both therapy and prophylaxis. Benzimidazole, Ivermectin, and Imidathiazole are three major chemical groups that have been used frequently for decades.
Several reports are published that demonstrate the resistance generation of GI nematodes to these chemicals worldwide [23]. Few studies reported the higher level of resistance produced against the broad-spectrum anthelmintics and also reported the side effects at higher dose levels [41]. A higher level of resistance in
Resistance is a global issue, and some regions are more exposed to it as compared with others, e.g., tropical and subtropical regions are more affected by the resistance of GI nematodes [33]. Soli
Regions where haemonchosis is endemic and anthelmintic treatment is frequently used at the farm level are exhibiting more resistance in
7.1.2 Copper oxide wire particles
In grazing ruminants, copper is administered along with diet as a feed additive to overcome the deficiency symptoms. The use of copper started in the 1900s, in various forms to minimize the worm load (SCSRPC). The use of copper oxide wire particles (COWPs) was found more successful in reducing nematodes, more precisely
For administration in cattle, COWP boluses (Copasure©) of 12.5 and 25 g are available and for small ruminants, smaller dosages of 0.5–2 g are used [40, 43]. The recommended COWP dosage for cattle of weight above 227 kilograms was 12.5 g [45]. The sensitivity of sheep is higher against copper, and a little higher dosage may lead to toxicity although COWP is released slowly. Risk factors of copper toxicity that should be considered during administration are animal breed, age, health status, and other minerals deficiency such as molybdenum, poultry litter exposure [46]. Investigation on the use of COWP among exotic artiodactyls has been performed at Disney’s Animal Kingdom® Lodge. During the trials, four artiodactyl species included roan antelope, blesbuck, scimitar-horned oryx, and blackbuck. The corollary of their study indicated a marked reduction in EFC (above 90%) on day 7 post-COWP therapy. The animal species variations, liver health status, copper level, interaction level with other minerals, and history of copper supplementation should be considered before the implementation of the COWP GIN control program in exotic animals. Before the use of COWP in an integrated pest management program, the impact of COWP on reproduction, accumulation level, and sensitivity level among species should be investigated [45].
7.2 Nonchemical methods to control GI parasitism
7.2.1 Biological control
In this perspective, the naturally found pest antagonist organisms are used to control the pest population. Grønvold
The biological control strategies were proposed to reduce the parasite population below the economic threshold and clinical level above that considerable production losses are there. High efficacy of
Sheep feeding supplemented with
7.3 Control through monitoring
7.3.1 Parasite monitoring strategies
Strategies for worm load investigation: FEC, larval developmental assays (LDA), FEC reduction test, and fecal larval culture (FLC) have proved valuable linkage with monitoring and control of worm infection. Mainly FEC is used for monitoring and management of GIN parasites. LDA is used for nematode species identification and to explore the resistance level [57]. FLC helps in identifying worm species, seasonal variation, and enclosure of GIN population. FECRT is the most authentic approach to determine anthelmintic resistance, but it is expensive and labor-intensive [57]. The demands for the exploration of alternative strategies toward helminth control have been augmented due to the lack of new anthelmintics. The applications of plants having condensed tannins, COWP, nematophagous fungi, and other biological approaches in combination with anthelmintics, animal management, control of ecological factors, and GIN level monitoring strategies could be effective to overcome GIN resistance in small ruminants.
7.3.2 FAMACHA chart and mac master technique
Among TST methods FAMACHA chart and McMaster are mainly used way to identify the worm-infected animals and require treatment. The former method is used to diagnose anemic animals by comparing their eye (conjunctiva) color with the chart. The latter method provides a real-time picture of parasite burden via egg counting in fecal material. In the McMaster method, fecal material is suspended in floatation solution and supernatants are taken on a specific glass slide (Mc Master chamber) and observed under a microscope for egg counting. For reducing anthelmintic resistance among GI parasites, selective therapy is highly effective. By using the aforementioned methods, medicinal cost of animals declines because they selectively purchase few anthelmintics and animals are responsive against these drugs. On the other hand, selective therapy is laborious and time-taking, farmers have to perform the FAMACHA check once a month. Routine-wise performance of McMaster is mandatory because sometimes with FAMACHA check animals found healthy while through McMaster they were found with high worm burden, and such animals should be treated because these animals may act as a source for others. The FAMACHA score system is found to be highly effective in the selection of worm-resilient animal breeds [58].
7.4 Control through management
7.4.1 Pasture management, grazing management, rotational grazing
For the control of GI nematodes infections, two most commonly used methods include the use of anthelmintics and pasture management; they are associated with reduction of production losses because of nematodes infections. Two ways of producing safe pastures and reducing the infectivity of pasture include rotational grazing and pasture spelling, this strategy is very [59]. In rotational grazing, it is assumed that significant larval mortality occurs because of break-in grazing. But, unfortunately, the period in between animal rotations makes the best use of available and nutritious forage coincides with the period during that high concentration of L3 becoming available for reinfection. In the United States, a study was conducted at a farm and reported that lambs raised under a rotational grazing system were highly infested with helminths in comparison with others. Most of them were infected with nematodes,
7.4.2 Manipulating supplementation of nutrients
With the provision of a good and high level of nutrition, the productivity of animals can be improved with an increase in the immune response against parasites. With an increase in the level of proteins in the diet, an increase in the resistance and resilience of lamb against
7.5 Control through medicinal plants
In ethnoveterinary medicine, medicinal plants are used for the prevention and treatment of gastrointestinal parasitism. There is a wide range of medicinal plants or plant extracts that are used to treat almost every kind of livestock disease related to parasites. There are so many studies and available literature on the anthelmintic properties of plants and their extracts, which confirms the antinematodal effects of these plants [33, 42, 64, 65, 66, 67]. In comparison to synthetic drugs the herbal preparations are way cheaper and easily available and thus have been used for a long time in the therapy of livestock diseases of helminth parasites [68].
Many plants and herbs are used as control agents for human and veterinary endoparasites, and the efficacy of each plant depends upon the chemical composition and secondary metabolites composition. The composition of a plant is a variable character depending upon soil properties, climatic conditions, geographical variability, and environmental conditions. Anthelmintic activity of a plant is variable in different areas of the world and depends upon the harvest of the plant, plant parts, which are used as anthelmintics, storage of the plant, and combination of different plant extracts [68]. Choice of extraction solvent is also an important factor that affects the solubility of secondary metabolites of the target plants usually water and methanol are used as extraction solvents. Ethanolic extracts are considered a better choice as they can easily enter the body of the parasite through absorption [69].
To determine the plant properties, two different study types are used. i.e., in vitro and in vivo, and each study type has some merits and demerits. In vitro studies are cost-effective and can study a variety of plants at the same time, allowing the study of specific parasites and their lifecycle stages [70]. While in vivo studies are lengthy processes and can study a single plant at a time. Sometimes the result of the in vivo and in vitro can be different as the outcome of the study depends on the internal factor of the host and plant species, e.g., the digestive system of the host [71].
Till today 25% of modern pharmacopeia use plant-derived drugs and some semisynthetic using plant as prototype compound [72]. Anthelmintic efficacy of plants is derived from different parts, e.g., saponins (can cause teguments degradation and vacuolization), tannins, and polyphenols can form a protein complex in the rumen and increase the protein supply, interfere with energy generation, reduction in gastrointestinal metabolism, and ultimately death of the helminth and alkaloids (effect the transport of sucrose transfer from the stomach to the intestine and helminth glucose support is disturbed causing paralysis) [73].
7.5.1 Condensed tannins
Tannins are compounds that attach with proteins and other molecules and are used as a biological alternative against chemical anthelmintic; many plants naturally contain condensed tannins. There are two main groups in which tannins are divided: one is hydrolyzable tannins (HTs) and the other one is condensed tannins (CTs). Among the two of these groups, condensed tannins are more abundant and are naturally present in browse, legumes, plants, and forage. The concentration of CT, type of animal consuming CT, the plant itself, and the concentration of CT in the plant are the factors that stimulate the effects of CTs. The high concentration of CT can have negative effects, and the noticeable negative effect is reduced palatability that ultimately causes a reduction in intake and digestion, which exerts a negative impact on productivity [46]. There are several benefits of CT intake that include increased wool growth and growth rate, increased amount of bypass protein, reduced bloating, high milk production, as well as a high rate of ovulation.
The prominent and most important benefit of CTs is their positive impact on the GIN infection. It has been observed that CTs specifically
7.5.2 Plants as nutraceuticals
The nutritional combination of animal feed affects the biodiversity of GIT fauna, which may affect the parasite fitness by altering the intestinal environment in which the parasites propagate [63]. Tannins, flavonol glycosides, sesquiterpene, and secondary metabolites are potential candidates for integrated nematode control at the farms level [63, 74, 75]. The plants having these properties are known as nutraceuticals, which are considered for both the nutritional value and as an anthelmintic. It has been reported that supplementation of bioactive plants to goats played role in the regulation of bionomics of resistant parasitic populations along with enhancing the ability of the goat to withstand negative effects of the pathophysiology of parasitic infections [63]. An increase in post-ruminal protein availability playing role in reducing the parasitic infections in large ruminants has also been reported, which may be attributed to the availability of condensed tannins (CTs) or proanthocyanidins and polymers of flavonoid units [48].
7.6 Control through immunological interventions
7.6.1 Vaccines (immunization and vaccination)
The most effective way of controlling infection is vaccination; therefore, demand for vaccine development against GI parasites rises. In disparity with vaccines of viral and bacterial pathogens, vaccine development against parasites did not gain similar success although parasitologists are working in this regard for the last 30 years. The vaccine has been developed against tapeworm and lungworm sheep and cattle respectively. Studies have been conducted in the identification of various antigens of nematodes as vaccine agents [76]. Gut-associated antigens have been reported as vaccine candidates, namely H-gal-GP and H11 of
Traditional use of chemotherapeutic agents against infection of ectoparasites as well as endoparasites leads to the development of resistance against these therapeutic agents. It converges the scientists for exploring the nontraditional ways of controlling GI parasites; development of a resistant breed of the host through selective breeding, vaccine development, implementation of other control measures (alternate pasture grazing and rotational grazing), and synergistic use of anthelmintics [80].
In vaccines, acquired immunity plays a pivotal role in the protection of the host against pathogens, and it needs to be explored for the development of a vaccine. In the case of parasites, the role of acquired immune response is not fully explored. Therefore, vaccine development against GI parasites for protection remains ineffective [81].
Some fungi of
8. Alternatives
Gastrointestinal nematode resistance to anthelmintics has been growing day by day, gaining currency to consider it for adopting control measures shortly of the domestic livestock industry. The use of chemical anthelmintics in combination with bioactive plants as nutraceuticals seems to be a potential strategy for parasitic control. Alternate strategies, i.e., use of plants containing condensed tannins, plant-based vaccines, COWP, and biological control through nematode-trapping fungi along with husbandry management may prove helpful in minimizing the mortality and morbidity of parasitic diseases in small ruminants. However, animal breeds selected based on their response to nematodes present in the gastrointestinal tract are an alternate control strategy toward minimizing gastrointestinal problems in goats [43].
8.1 Breeding for resistance
Identification of resistant individuals is necessary for the production of parasitic-resistant breeds. Two parameters are mostly reported for the selection of resistant breeds, i.e., FEC, which is an indirect parameter for measurement of the relative level of infection [82]. Hematocrit and PCV are being used for the identification of worm burden, especially in the case of
The researchers cannot divide the magnitude of resistance into discrete genetic units; therefore, the resistance is described in the form of heritability estimates [84]. The phenotype of quantitative traits is regulated by the additive effect of specialized genes [85], which are yet to be identified. The resulting resistance may be attributed to the effect of a combination of many small genes or a group of major genes that are being regulated not only by additive effects but also by the environmental effects [84].
8.2 Genetic and phenotypic parameters for worm resistance
Packed cell volume and fecal egg count are the most useful markers/parameters to estimate the response of host challenge and natural infection with nematodes present in GI in general and specifically
8.3 Genetic and phenotypic correlation between resistant traits
Estimations of phenotypic and genetic correlation explained the amount to which genes affect two different traits and the phenotypic correlation guides the number of relations between two traits. Correlation evaluations are important in the measurement of the appropriateness of indicator traits as indirect criteria in programs related to breeding. Mandonnet
8.4 Genetic and phenotypic parameters for production traits
Host live weight is a production trait that has been considered as an important parameter while assessing the genetic resistances of the host toward GI nematode parasites. The heritability estimates of live weight (LWT) varied widely ranging from 0.13 in Australian Angora goats to 0.50 in Texan Angora goats [91]. Likewise, heritability estimates have been reported in South Africa goats breed as 0.29 and 0.35 [92]. It has been shown that resistance to infection by nematode parasites may not necessarily equate to resistance to the effects of the parasite challenge in grazing animals [86]. The association between FEC and productivity varies in magnitude and direction depending on the breed and the environment in which the evaluation was done. The genetic correlations between packed cell volume (PCV) and packed cell volume decline (PCVD) and production (live weight and wool growth) are either negligible or favorable [93].
Several studies around the globe have been conducted to assess the genetic potential of sheep and goats breeds that are resistant to gastrointestinal nematodes in the last three to four decades [82, 83, 87, 93]. The selection of breeds that are resistant to gastrointestinal nematode parasites is assuming the most promising alternate control method of gastrointestinal nematodes. Improved resistance toward nematodes control leads to reduced cost of anthelmintic treatment and diminished production losses associated with worm burden. Australia and New Zealand initiate programs on breeding for resistance and adopt them successfully by utilizing phenotypic markers [94]. Approximately 96% of the world’s goat population is kept by smallholders in developing countries, and genetic improvement programs are rare [95].
8.5 Phenotypic traits as indicators of GI resistance
Host selection for resistance has based mostly on quantitative measurement of phenotypic traits. These traits have been measured to check the response of the host being evaluated for resistance, which are biochemical, immunological, parasitological, and pathological features [84]. For the development of high-resistant breeds, it is necessary to identify the high-resistant individuals. Criteria for the selection of parasitic resistance are commonly based on two traits, i.e., packed cell volume, which indicates anemia, and fecal egg count, which measures the amount of infection. There is variation in the development of resistance between the animals of different breeds and within the same breeds, which is because of their genetic makeup. The scientists are working to investigate the cause of the development of resistance, and up to some extent they succeeded in finding some reasons while the others are under investigation [84].
9. Conclusion
According to the best of our knowledge about different factors that are responsible for GI parasitism, it is hard to develop control measures. So, the epidemiology of each parasitic disease is needed to be studied at the regional level to recommend an effective strategy for the control of parasitic diseases, which is not completely dependent on anthelmintic therapy [11]. Keeping in mind the subtropical and tropical areas in which dry seasons are more might be grazing management, rational use of anthelmintics, and use of resistant breeds.
Acknowledgments
The author wishes to thank all other coauthors for providing guidance and support.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
References
- 1.
Taylor MA, Coop RL, Wall RL, editors. Veterinary Parasitology. 4th ed. London: Blackwell Publishing; 2007. pp. 356-447 - 2.
Einstein R, Jones RS, Knifton A, Starmer GA. Hypnotics and sedatives. In: Principles of veterinary therapeutics. England: Longman Scientific & Technical; 1994:121124 - 3.
Beech RN, Silvestre A. Mutations associated with anthelmintic drug resistance. Anti-Infective Agents Med Chem (Formerly Curr Med Chem Agents). 2010; 9 (3):105-112 - 4.
Soulsby EJL. Helminths. Arthropods and Protozoa of Domesticated Animals. 7th Ed., London, UK: Bailliere Tindall; 1982:1-430 - 5.
Friedman PA. The Molecular Mechanism of Action of Benzimidazole Drugs in Embryos of Ascaris Suum. Riverside: University of California; 1979 - 6.
Lacey E. The role of the cytoskeletal protein, tubulin, in the mode of action and mechanism of drug resistance to benzimidazoles. International Journal for Parasitology. 1988; 18 (7):885-936 - 7.
von Samson-Himmelstjerna G. Molecular diagnosis of anthelmintic resistance. Veterinary Parasitology. 2006; 136 (2):99-107 - 8.
Davidse LC. Benzimidazole fungicides: Mechanism of action and biological impact. Annual Review of Phytopathology. 1986; 24 (1):43-65 - 9.
Campbell WC, Fisher MH, Stapley EO, Albers-Schonberg G, Jacob TA. Ivermectin: A potent new antiparasitic agent. Science. 1983; 221 (4613):823-828 - 10.
Qa M, Benchaoui HA. Avermectins and milbemycins. Journal of Veterinary Pharmacology and Therapeutics. 1996; 19 :331-351 - 11.
Arundel JH, Gay CC, Radostits OM. Veterinary Medicine: A Textbook of the Diseases of Cattle, Sheep, Pigs, Goats, and Horses. London; Toronto: Baillière Tindall; 1989 - 12.
Feng X, Hayashi J, Beech RN, Prichard RK. Study of the nematode putative GABA type-a receptor subunits: Evidence for modulation by ivermectin. Journal of Neurochemistry. 2002; 83 (4):870-878 - 13.
TmG G, SIMs SM, Thomas EM, Vanover L, Davis JP, Winterrowd CA, et al. Haemonchus contortus: Ivermectin-induced paralysis of the pharynx. Experimental Parasitology. 1993; 77 (1):88-96 - 14.
Calvete C, Calavia R, Ferrer LM, Ramos JJ, Lacasta D, Uriarte J. Management and environmental factors related to benzimidazole resistance in sheep nematodes in Northeast Spain. Veterinary Parasitology. 2012; 184 (2-4):193-203 - 15.
Good B, Hanrahan JP, de Waal DT, Patten T, Kinsella A, Lynch CO. Anthelmintic-resistant nematodes in Irish commercial sheep flocks-the state of play. Irish Veterinary Journal. 2012; 65 (1):1-5 - 16.
George N, Persad K, Sagam R, Offiah VN, Adesiyun AA, Harewood W, et al. Efficacy of commonly used anthelmintics: First report of multiple drug resistance in gastrointestinal nematodes of sheep in Trinidad. Veterinary Parasitology. 2011; 183 (1-2):194-197 - 17.
Chagas ACS, Katiki LM, Silva IC, Gigliotti R, Esteves SN, Oliveira MCS, et al. Haemonchus contortus: A multiple-resistant Brazilian isolate and the costs for its characterization and maintenance for research use. Parasitology International. 2013; 62 (1):1-6 - 18.
McKenna PB, Badger SB, McKinley RL, Taylor DE. Simultaneous resistance to two or more broad-spectrum anthelmintics by gastrointestinal nematode parasites of sheep and goats. New Zealand Veterinary Journal. 1990; 38 (3):114-117 - 19.
Webb RF, Ottaway SJ. The prevalence of anthelmintic resistance in sheep nematodes on the central tablelands of New South Wales. Australian Veterinary Journal. 1986; 63 (1):13-16 - 20.
Love SC, Johns WH, Coverdale OR. Anthelmintic resistance in sheep nematodes in the New England region of New South Wales. Australian Veterinary Journal. 1992; 69 (8):196-197 - 21.
Coles GC, Bauer C, Borgsteede FHM, Geerts S, Klei TR, Taylor MA, et al. World Association for the Advancement of veterinary parasitology (WAAVP) methods for the detection of anthelmintic resistance in nematodes of veterinary importance. Veterinary Parasitology. 1992; 44 (1-2):35-44 - 22.
Sangster NC, Riley FL, Wiley LJ. Binding of [3H] m-aminolevamisole to receptors in levamisole-susceptible and-resistant Haemonchus contortus. International Journal for Parasitology. 1998; 28 (5):707-717 - 23.
Waller DA. The role of surgery in diagnosis and treatment of malignant pleural mesothelioma. Current Opinion in Oncology. 2003; 15 (2):139-143 - 24.
Waller PJ, Echevarria F, Eddi C, Maciel S, Nari A, Hansen JW. The prevalence of anthelmintic resistance in nematode parasites of sheep in Southern Latin America: General overview. Veterinary Parasitology. 1996; 62 (3-4):181-187 - 25.
Sivaraj S, Dorny P, Vercruysse J, Pandey VS. Multiple and multigeneric anthelmintic resistance on a sheep farm in Malaysia. Veterinary Parasitology. 1994; 55 (1-2):159-165 - 26.
Kerboeuf D, Beaumont-Schwartz C, Hubert J, Maillon M. Resistance des strongles gastrointestinaux aux anthelminthiques chez les petits ruminants. Resultats d’une enquete dans le Val de Loire. Recueil de Medecine Veterinaire. 1988; 164 (12):1001-1006 - 27.
Düwel D, Schmid K, Bechmann G. Benzimidazole-resistant Haemonchus contortus in sheep in West Germany. Berliner und Münchener Tierärztliche Wochenschrift. 1987; 100 (4):120-123 - 28.
Uppal RP, Yadav CL, Godara P, Rana ZS. Multiple anthelmintic resistance in a field strain of Haemonchus contortus in goats. Veterinary Research Communications. 1992; 16 (3):195-198 - 29.
Waruiru RM, Kogi JK, Weda EH, Ngotho JW. Multiple anthelmintic resistance on a goat farm in Kenya. Veterinary Parasitology. 1998; 75 (2-3):191-197 - 30.
Borgsteede FHM, Pekelder JJ, Dercksen DP, Sol J, Vellema P, Gaasenbeek CPH, et al. A survey of anthelmintic resistance in nematodes of sheep in the Netherlands. The Veterinary Quarterly. 1997; 19 (4):167-171 - 31.
Kettle PR, Vlassoff A, Ayling JM, McMurtry LW, Smith SJ, Watson AJ. A survey of nematode control measures used by sheep farmers and of anthelmintic resistance on their farms Part 2: South Island excluding the Nelson region. New Zealand Veterinary Journal. 1982; 30 (6):79-81 - 32.
Afaq M. Parasite control practices and anthelmintic resistance against gastrointestinal nematodes of sheep. Ph.D. thesis, Department of Veterinary Parasitology, University of Agriculture; 2003 - 33.
Jabbar A, Zaman MA, Iqbal Z, Yaseen M, Shamim A. Anthelmintic activity of Chenopodium album (L.) and Caesalpinia crista (L.) against trichostrongylid nematodes of sheep. Journal of Ethnopharmacology. 2007; 114 (1):86-91 - 34.
Maciel S, Giménez AM, Gaona C, Waller PJ, Hansen JW. The prevalence of anthelmintic resistance in nematode parasites of sheep in Southern Latin America: Paraguay. Veterinary Parasitology. 1996; 62 (3-4):207-212 - 35.
Van Wyk JA, Malan FS, Randles JL. How long before resistance makes it impossible to control some field strains of Haemonchus contortus in South Africa with any of the modern anthelmintics? Veterinary Parasitology. 1997; 70 (1-3):111-122 - 36.
Nari A, Salles J, Gil A, Waller PJ, Hansen JW. The prevalence of anthelmintic resistance in nematode parasites of sheep in Southern Latin America: Uruguay. Veterinary Parasitology. 1996; 62 (3-4):213-222 - 37.
Miller JE, Baker NF. Thiabendazole-resistant strains of Haemonchus and Ostertagia in California lambs. American Journal of Veterinary Research. 1980; 41 (10):1674-1676 - 38.
Uhlinger C, Fleming S, Moncol D. Survey for drug-resistant gastrointestinal nematodes in 13 commercial sheep flocks. Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association. 1992; 201 (1):77-80 - 39.
Boersema JH, Pandey VS. Anthelmintic resistance of trichostrongylids in sheep in the highveld of Zimbabwe. Veterinary Parasitology. 1997; 68 (4):383-388 - 40.
Soli F, Terrill TH, Shaik SA, Getz WR, Miller JE, Vanguru M, et al. Efficacy of copper oxide wire particles against gastrointestinal nematodes in sheep and goats. Veterinary Parasitology. 2010; 168 (1-2):93-96 - 41.
Wooster MJ, Woodgate RG, Chick BF. Reduced efficacy of ivermectin, abamectin, and moxidectin against field isolates of Haemonchus contortus. Australian Veterinary Journal. 2001; 79 (12):840-842 - 42.
Chandrawathani P, Brelin D, Nor Fasihah S, Adnan M, Jamnah O, Sani RA, et al. Evaluation of the neem tree (Azadirachta indica) as a herbal anthelmintic for nematode parasite control in small ruminants in Malaysia. Tropical Biomedicine. 2002; 19 (1&2):41-48 - 43.
Burke JM, Miller JE, Larsen M, Terrill TH. Interaction between copper oxide wire particles and Duddingtonia flagrans in lambs. Veterinary Parasitology. 2005; 134 (1-2):141-146 - 44.
Vatta AF, Waller PJ, Githiori JB, Medley GF. The potential to control Haemonchus contortus in indigenous South African goats with copper oxide wire particles. Veterinary Parasitology. 2009; 162 (3-4):306-313 - 45.
Fontenot ME, Miller JE, Peña MT, Larsen M, Gillespie A. Efficiency of feeding Duddingtonia flagrans chlamydospores to grazing ewes on reducing availability of parasitic nematode larvae on pasture. Veterinary Parasitology. 2003; 118 (3-4):203-213 - 46.
Coffey L, Hale M, Terrill T, Mosjidis J, Miller J, Burke J. Tools for managing internal parasites in small ruminants: Sericea Lespedeza. ATTRA. 2007 - 47.
Grønvold J, Henriksen SA, Larsen M, Nansen P, Wolstrup J. Biological control aspects of biological control—With special reference to arthropods, protozoans, and helminths of domesticated animals. Veterinary Parasitology. 1996; 64 (1-2):47-64 - 48.
Waghorn TS, Leathwick DM, Chen L-Y, Skipp RA. Efficacy of the nematode-trapping fungus Duddingtonia flagrans against three species of gastro-intestinal nematodes in laboratory faecal cultures from sheep and goats. Veterinary Parasitology. 2003; 118 (3-4):227-234 - 49.
Wolstrup J, Grønvold J, Henriksen SA, Nansen P, Larsen M, Bøgh HO, et al. An attempt to implement the nematode-trapping fungus Duddingtonia flagrans in biological control of trichostrongyle infections of first-year grazing calves. Journal of Helminthology. 1994; 68 (2):175-180 - 50.
Nansen P, Larsen M, Grønvold J, Wolstrup J, Zorn A, Henriksen SA. Prevention of clinical trichostrongylidosis in calves by strategic feeding with the predacious fungus Duddingtonia flagrans. Parasitology Research. 1995; 81 (5):371-374 - 51.
Larsen M. Prospects for controlling animal parasitic nematodes by predacious micro fungi. Parasitology. 2000; 120 (7):121-131 - 52.
Fernandez AS, Henningsen E, Larsen M, Nansen R, Grønvold J, Søndergaard J. A new isolate of the nematophagous fungus Duddingtonia flagrans as a biological control agent against free-living larvae of horse strongyles. Equine Veterinary Journal. 1999; 31 (6):488-491 - 53.
Peloille M. Selection of nematode-trapping fungi for use in biological control. Bulletin OILB SROP. 1991; 14 (2):13-17 - 54.
Knox MR, Faedo M. Biological control of field infections of nematode parasites of young sheep with Duddingtonia flagrans and effects of spore intake on efficacy. Veterinary Parasitology. 2001; 101 (2):155-160 - 55.
Sanyal PK. Mycological control of nematode parasites of livestock: From academic interest to reality. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, India Section B. 2005; 75 :263-271 - 56.
de Oliveira VV, Furlong J, de Freitas GM, Dolinski C, Aguillera MM, Rodrigues RCD, et al. Steinernema glaseri Santa Rosa strain (Rhabditida: Steinernematidae) and Heterorhabditis bacteriophora CCA strain (Rhabditida: Heterorhabditidae) as biological control agents of Boophilus microplus (Acari: Ixodidae). Parasitology Research. 2004; 94 (3):201-206 - 57.
Kaplan RM. Drug resistance in nematodes of veterinary importance: A status report. Trends in Parasitology. 2004; 20 (10):477-481 - 58.
Burke JM, Miller JE. Use of FAMACHA system to evaluate gastrointestinal nematode resistance/resilience in offspring of stud rams. Veterinary Parasitology. 2008; 153 (1-2):85-92 - 59.
Morley FHW, Donald AD. Farm management, and systems of helminth control. Veterinary Parasitology. 1980; 6 (1-3):105-134 - 60.
Bricarello PA, Amarante AFT, Rocha RA, Cabral Filho SL, Huntley JF, Houdijk JGM, et al. Influence of dietary protein supply on resistance to experimental infections with Haemonchus contortus in Ile de France and Santa Ines lambs. Veterinary Parasitology. 2005; 134 (1-2):99-109 - 61.
Torres-Acosta JFJ, Aguilar-Caballero AJ. Epidemiología, prevención y control de nematodos gastrointestinales en rumiantes. Enfermedades importancia económica en Prod Anim McGraw-Hill-UADY. México: DF México; 2005. pp. 145-173 - 62.
Waruiru RM, Kyvsgaard NC, Thamsborg SM, Nansen P, Bøgh HO, Munyua WK, et al. The prevalence and intensity of helminth and coccidial infections in dairy cattle in Central Kenya. Veterinary Research Communications. 2000; 24 (1):39-53 - 63.
Hoste H, Gaillard L, Le Frileux Y. Consequences of the regular distribution of sainfoin hay on gastrointestinal parasitism with nematodes and milk production in dairy goats. Small Ruminant Research. 2005; 59 (2-3):265-271 - 64.
Iqbal Z, Lateef M, Jabbar A, Ghayur MN, Gilani AH. In vitro and in vivo anthelmintic activity of Nicotiana tabacum L. leaves against gastrointestinal nematodes of sheep. Phytotherapy Research: An International Journal Devoted to Pharmacological and Toxicological Evaluation of Natural Product Derivatives. 2006; 20 (1):46-48 - 65.
Alawa CBI, Adamu AM, Gefu JO, Ajanusi OJ, Abdu PA, Chiezey NP, et al. In vitro screening of two Nigerian medicinal plants (Vernonia amygdalina and Annona senegalensis) for anthelmintic activity. Veterinary Parasitology. 2003; 113 (1):73-81 - 66.
Costa ES, Hiruma-Lima CA, Lima EO, Sucupira GC, Bertolin AO, Lolis SF, et al. Antimicrobial activity of some medicinal plants of the Cerrado, Brazil. Phytotherapy Research: An International Journal Devoted to Pharmacological and Toxicological Evaluation of Natural Product Derivatives. 2008; 22 (5):705-707 - 67.
Githiori JB, Höglund J, Waller PJ, Baker RL. Evaluation of anthelmintic properties of some plants used as livestock dewormers against Haemonchus contortus infections in sheep. Parasitology. 2004; 129 (2):245-253 - 68.
Athanasiadou S, Githiori J, Kyriazakis I. Medicinal plants for helminth parasite control: Facts and fiction. Animal. 2007; 1 (9):1392-1400 - 69.
Tariq KA, Chishti MZ, Ahmad F, Shawl AS. Anthelmintic activity of extracts of Artemisia absinthium against ovine nematodes. Veterinary Parasitology. 2009; 160 (1-2):83-88 - 70.
Githiori JB, Athanasiadou S, Thamsborg SM. Use of plants in novel approaches for control of gastrointestinal helminths in livestock with emphasis on small ruminants. Veterinary Parasitology. 2006; 139 (4):308-320 - 71.
Fomum WS, Nsahlai VI. In vitro evaluation of anthelmintic efficacy of some plant species possessing proteinases and/or other Nitroge-nous compounds in small ruminants. Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine. 2017; 3 :38 - 72.
Surya S, Salam AD, Tomy DV, Carla B, Kumar RA, Sunil C. Diabetes mellitus and medicinal plants-a review. Asian Pacific Journal of Tropical Disease. 2014; 4 (5):337-347 - 73.
Tiwari P, Kumar B, Kaur M, Kaur G, Kaur H. Phytochemical screening and extraction: A review. Internationale pharmaceutica sciencia. 2011; 1 (1):98-106 - 74.
Terrill TH, Dykes GS, Shaik SA, Miller JE, Kouakou B, Kannan G, et al. Efficacy of sericea lespedeza hay as a natural dewormer in goats: Dose titration study. Veterinary Parasitology. 2009; 163 (1-2):52-56 - 75.
Terrill TH, Mosjidis JA, Moore DA, Shaik SA, Miller JE, Burke JM, et al. Effect of pelleting on efficacy of sericea lespedeza hay as a natural dewormer in goats. Veterinary Parasitology. 2007; 146 (1-2):117-122 - 76.
Secoy DM, Smith AE. Use of plants in the control of agricultural and domestic pests. Economic Botany. 1983; 37 (1):28-57 - 77.
Kabagambe EK, Wells SJ, Garber LP, Salman MD, Wagner B, Fedorka-Cray PJ. Risk factors for fecal shedding of Salmonella in 91 US dairy herds in 1996. Preventive Veterinary Medicine. 2000; 43 (3):177-194 - 78.
Schallig H, Van Leeuwen MAW. Protective immunity to the blood-feeding nematode Haemonchus contortus induced by vaccination with parasite low molecular weight antigens. Parasitology. 1997; 114 (3):293-299 - 79.
Newton SE, Meeusen ENT. Progress and new technologies for developing vaccines against gastrointestinal nematode parasites of sheep. Parasite Immunology. 2003; 25 (5):283-296 - 80.
Fraser D, Bernon DE, Ball RO. Enhanced attraction to blood by pigs with inadequate dietary protein supplementation. Canadian Journal of Animal Science. 1991; 71 (3):611-619 - 81.
O’Brien DJ. Anthelmintics and other measures to control helminth parasites of livestock. Veterinary Surgery. 1993; 15 :25 - 82.
Gray GD. The use of genetically resistant sheep to control nematode parasitism. Veterinary Parasitology. 1997; 72 (3-4):345-366 - 83.
Kemper KE, Elwin RL, Bishop SC, Goddard ME, Woolaston RR. Haemonchus contortus and Trichostrongylus colubriformis did not adapt to long-term exposure to sheep that were genetically resistant or susceptible to nematode infections. International Journal for Parasitology. 2009; 39 (5):607-614 - 84.
Beh KJ, Maddox JF. Prospects for the development of genetic markers for resistance to gastrointestinal parasite infection in sheep. International Journal for Parasitology. 1996; 26 (8-9):879-897 - 85.
Canales M, Enriquez A, Ramos E, Cabrera D, Dandie H, Soto A, et al. Large-scale production in Pichia pastoris of the recombinant vaccine Gavac™ against cattle tick. Vaccine. 1997; 15 (4):414-422 - 86.
Morris CA, Vlassoff A, Bisset SA, Baker RL, Watson TG. Direct responses to selection for divergence in fecal nematode egg count in young Romney and Perendale sheep. In: Proc Assoc Adv Anim Breed Genet. Hamilton, New Zealand: Ruakura Agricultural Research Centre; 1997. pp. 413-416 - 87.
Woolaston RR, Elwin RL, Barger IA. No adaptation of Haemonchus contortus to genetically resistant sheep. International Journal for Parasitology. 1992; 22 (3):377-380 - 88.
Mandonnet N, Aumont G, Fleury J, Arquet R, Varo H, Gruner L, et al. Assessment of genetic variability of resistance to gastrointestinal nematode parasites in creole goats in the humid tropics. Journal of Animal Science. 2001; 79 (7):1706-1712 - 89.
Vagenas D, Jackson F, Russel AJF, Merchant M, Wright IA, Bishop SC. Genetic control of resistance to gastro-intestinal parasites in crossbred cashmere-producing goats: Responses to selection, genetic parameters, and relationships with production traits. Animal Science. 2002; 74 (2):199-208 - 90.
de Monteiro CMO, da Matos RS, Araújo LX, de Perinotto WMS, Bittencourt VREP, Dolinski C, et al. First report of pathogenicity of entomopathogenic nematodes of the genus Heterorhabditis on partially engorged females of Dermacentor nitens (Acari: Ixodidae). Biological Control. 2014; 69 :78-81 - 91.
Shelton M, Bassett JW. Estimate of certain genetic parameters relating to angora goats. Texas Agricultural Station Research Reports. 1970:38-41 - 92.
Georges K, Ezeokoli CD, Newaj-Fyzul A, Campbell M, Mootoo N, Mutani A, et al. The application of PCR and reverse line blot hybridization to detect arthropod-borne hemopathogens of dogs and cats in Trinidad. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences. 2008; 1149 (1):196-199 - 93.
Albers GAA, Gray GD, Piper LR, Barker JSF, Le Jambre LF, Barger IA. The genetics of resistance and resilience to Haemonchus contortus infection in young merino sheep. International Journal for Parasitology. 1987; 17 (7):1355-1363 - 94.
Gray GD. Genetic resistance to haemonchosis in sheep. Parasitology Today. 1987; 3 (8):253-255 - 95.
Opara MN, Nwaobasi JK, Okoli IC. Occurrence of parasitic helminths among small ruminants reared under traditional husbandry system in Owerri, South East NigeriaPresence des helminthes chez les petits ruminants en elevage traditionnel a Owerri dans le Sud-Est du Nigeria. Bulletin of Animal Health Production Africa. 2005; 53 (4):226-233