↓ Skip to main content

Experiences in Tick Control by Acaricide in the Traditional Cattle Sector in Zambia and Burkina Faso: Possible Environmental and Public Health Implications

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Public Health, November 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
88 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
248 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Experiences in Tick Control by Acaricide in the Traditional Cattle Sector in Zambia and Burkina Faso: Possible Environmental and Public Health Implications
Published in
Frontiers in Public Health, November 2016
DOI 10.3389/fpubh.2016.00239
Pubmed ID
Authors

Daniele De Meneghi, Frédéric Stachurski, Hassane Adakal

Abstract

Livestock, especially cattle, play a paramount role in agriculture production systems, particularly in poor countries throughout the world. Ticks and tick-borne diseases (TBDs) have an important impact on livestock and agriculture production in sub-Saharan Africa. The authors review the most common methods used for the control of ticks and TBDs. Special emphasis is given to the direct application of acaricides to the host animals. The possible environmental and public health adverse effects (i.e., risks for the workers, residues in the environment and in food products of animal origin) are mentioned. The authors present two case studies, describing different field experiences in controlling ticks in two African countries. In Zambia (Southern Africa), a strategic dipping regime was used to control Rhipicephalus appendiculatus ticks, vectors of theileriosis, a deadly disease affecting cattle in the traditional livestock sector in Southern Province. The dipping regime adopted allowed to reduce the tick challenge and cattle mortally rate and, at the same time, to employ less acaricide as compared to the intensive dipping used so far, without disrupting the building-up of enzootic stability. In Burkina Faso (West Africa), where dipping was never used for tick control, an acaricide footbath was employed as an alternative method to the traditional technique used locally (portable manual sprayers). This was developed from field observations on the invasion/attachment process of the Amblyomma variegatum ticks - vector of cowdriosis - on the animal hosts, leading to a control method aimed to kill ticks temporarily attached to the interdigital areas before their permanent attachment to the predilection sites. This innovative method has been overall accepted by the local farmers. It has the advantage of greatly reducing costs of treatments and has a minimal environmental impact, making footbath a sustainable and replicable method, adoptable also in other West African countries. Although the two methods described, developed in very different contexts, are not comparable - if public health and environmental implications are taken into account, if a balance among efficacy of the control method(s), cost-effectiveness and sustainability is reached - a way forward for the implementation of a One Health strategy can be set.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 248 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 248 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 36 15%
Student > Bachelor 34 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 30 12%
Researcher 17 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 11 4%
Other 32 13%
Unknown 88 35%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 49 20%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 43 17%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 16 6%
Medicine and Dentistry 10 4%
Immunology and Microbiology 6 2%
Other 27 11%
Unknown 97 39%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 26 November 2016.
All research outputs
#18,482,034
of 22,901,818 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Public Health
#5,779
of 10,055 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#237,038
of 313,012 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Public Health
#56
of 73 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,901,818 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,055 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.0. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 313,012 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 73 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.