Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gbm5v Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T00:45:12.329Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Boophilus microplus: the effect of host resistance on larval attachments and growth

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 April 2009

D. H. Kemp
Affiliation:
Division of Animal Health, Private Bag No. 3, Indooroopilly, Queensland, Australia4068
D. Koudstaal
Affiliation:
Division of Animal Health, Private Bag No. 3, Indooroopilly, Queensland, Australia4068
J. A. Roberts
Affiliation:
Division of Animal Health, Private Bag No. 3, Indooroopilly, Queensland, Australia4068
J.D. Kerr
Affiliation:
Division of Mathematics and Statistics CSIRO, Long Pocket Laboratories, Private Bag No. 3, Indooroopilly, Queensland, Australia4068

Summary

Growth and behaviour of Boophilus microplus larvae on British breed cattle, with different resistance levels to the tick, were studied to elucidate the nature of resistance. On highly resistant animals, larval growth rate was slower for the first 3 days, but by day 4 they had attained the normal weight and the majority were subsequently able to moult.

Using phosphorus-32 labelled larvae, it was found that attachment times were shorter and more time was spent wandering on highly resistant animals during the first 16 h. On the second day, attachments had stabilized, but more detachments were still made from highly resistant animals. This was considered to impose an additional stress as the cattle skin environment can rapidly desiccate larvae. However, the larvae were able to compensate by uptake of fluid from the host.

Loss by repulsion of live larvae from the host or drowning in serous exudate were also not considered of major importance. The nature of rejection is discussed in a further paper.

The distribution of larvae after 24 h suggests that their early behaviour largely determines the areas favoured by adults. Movement to, and accumulation in, favoured areas is discussed.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1976

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Allen, J. R. (1973). Tick resistance: Basophils in skin reactions of resistant guinea pigs. International Journal for Parasitology 3, 195200.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Allen, R. E., Bennett, J. W., Donegan, S. M. & Hutchinson, J. C. D. (1970). Moisture, its accumulation and site of evaporation in the coats of sweating cattle. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 74, 247–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bennett, G. F. (1969). Boophilus microplus (Acarina: Ixodidae): experimental infestations on cattle restrained from grooming. Experimental Parasitology 26, 323–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bennett, G. F. (1974). Oviposition of Boophilus microplus (Canestrini) (Acarida: Ixodidae): I. Influence of tick size on egg production. Acarologia 16, 5261.Google ScholarPubMed
Bennett, G. F. (1975). Boophilus microplus (Canestrini) (Acarida: Ixodidae) on the bovine host. II. Distribution of stages during development. Acarologia 17, 4352.Google ScholarPubMed
Boese, J. L. (1974). Rabbit immunity to the rabbit tick, Haemaphysalis leporispalustris (Acari: Ixodidae). I. The development of resistance. Journal of Medical Entomology 11, 503–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Branagan, D. (1974). The feeding performance of the Ixodid Rhipicephalus appendiculatus Neum. on rabbits, cattle and other hosts. Bulletin of Entomological Research 64, 387400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gladney, W. J., Ernst, S. E. & Grabbe, R. R. (1974). The aggregation response of the Gulf Coast tick on cattle. Annals of the Entomological Society of America 67, 750–2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hewetson, R. W. (1971). Resistance by cattle to cattle tick, Boophilus microplus. III. The development of resistance to experimental infestations by purebred Sahiwal and Australian Illawarra Shorthorn cattle. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 22, 331–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kemp, D. H., Koudstaal, D. & Kerr, J. D. (1971). Labelling larvae of the cattle-tick Boophilus microplus, with 32P to follow their movements on the host. Parasitology 63, 323–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Musatov, V. A. (1973). Feeding of ticks on sensitized animals. Proceedings of the 3rd International Congress of Acarology, Prague 1971.Google Scholar
Riek, R. F. (1962). Studies on the reactions of animals to infestation with ticks. VI. Resistance of cattle to infestation with the tick Boophilus microplus (Canestrini). Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 13, 532–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roberts, J. A. (1968 a). Acquisition by the host of resistance to the cattle tick, Boophilus microplus (Canestrini). Journal of Parasitology 54, 657–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roberts, J. A. (1968 b). Resistance of cattle to the tick Boophilus microplus (Canestrini). I. Development of ticks on Bos taurus. Journal of Parasitology 54, 663–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roberts, J. A. (1968 c). Resistance of cattle to the tick Boophilus microplus (Canestrini). II. Stages of the life cycle of the parasite against which resistance is manifest. Journal of Parasitology 54, 667–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roberts, J. A. (1971). Behaviour of larvae of the cattle tick, Boophilus microplus (Canestrini), on cattle of differing degrees of resistance. Journal of Parasitology 57, 651–6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Snowball, G. J. (1956). The effect of self-licking by cattle on infestations of cattle tick, Boophilus microplus (Canestrini). Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 7, 227–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tatchell, R. J. & Moorhouse, D. E. (1968). The feeding processes of the cattle tick Boophilus microplus (Canestrini). II. The sequence of host-tissue changes. Parasitology 58, 441–59.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wilkinson, P. R. (1972). Sites of attachment of ‘prairie’ and ‘montane’ Dermacentor andersoni (Acarina: Ixodidae) on cattle. Journal of Medical Entomology 9, 133–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed