Evaluation of plant commercial feed additives for equine cyathostomin control.
- Journal Article
Summary
The research article depicts a study that tested three plant-based feed additives to see if they could control parasitic cyathostomins in ponies. The findings concluded that none of the three additives showed significant effect on the parasites, rendering them not entirely practical for use in equine farming.
Objective
The researchers undertook this study to determine whether three plant-based commercial feed additives could provide a natural alternative to chemical treatments for controlling equine cyathostomins, which are intestinal parasites in horses that have become increasingly resistant to antihelmintic drugs.
Methodology
- The study involved 18 Welsh female ponies, all naturally infected with cyathostomins, and divided into three groups of six. Each group received one of three treatments: mugwort (Artemisia vulgaris), echinacea (Echinacea purpurea), or curcumin (Curcuma longa). A control group of six untreated ponies was also observed.
- The researchers used practical farming conditions, aiming to mimic the real-world application of these plant-based treatments.
- The fecal egg count (FEC), the percentage of larval development and the number of specific types of blood cells (red blood cells, lymphocytes, monocytes, neutrophils, eosinophils, and basophils) were all measured on the first and last day of treatment. These measures were then compared with the control group.
Results
- The study revealed that none of the three plant-based treatments showed a significant effect on any of the parameters used to gauge the presence and development of the parasites.
- Furthermore, the efficacy of these treatments, as gauged by the reduction in the fecal egg count compared to the control group, was deemed weak (≤ 38.6 %).
Conclusion
The results don’t back the practical use of these plant-based feed additives in equine farming to control cyathostomin infection. There were minor impacts on the fecal egg count, blood immune cell counts, and larval development shown with mugwort treatment. However, the overall effect was not significant. Even though society gravitates toward environmentally-friendly and natural alternatives, this study warns against blindly resorting to plant-based treatments without scientific evidence to support their effectiveness.
Cite This Article
Publication
Researcher Affiliations
- INRAE, Université de Tours, UMR 1282 Infectiologie et Santé Publique, Nouzilly, France. Electronic address: joshua.malsa@inrae.fr.
- INRAE, Unité Expérimentale de Physiologie Animale de l'Orfrasière, Nouzilly, France.
- INRAE, Plate-Forme d'Infectiologie Expérimentale, Nouzilly, France.
- INRAE, Unité Expérimentale de Physiologie Animale de l'Orfrasière, Nouzilly, France.
- INRAE, Université de Tours, UMR 1282 Infectiologie et Santé Publique, Nouzilly, France.
- INRAE, Plate-Forme d'Infectiologie Expérimentale, Nouzilly, France.
- INRAE, Université de Tours, UMR 1282 Infectiologie et Santé Publique, Nouzilly, France.
- Institut français du cheval et de l'équitation, Pôle développement, innovation et recherche, Saint-Genès-Champanelle, France; INRAE, Université Clermont Auvergne, VetAgro Sup, UMR 1213 Herbivores, Saint-Genès-Champanelle, France.
- INRAE, Université de Tours, UMR 1282 Infectiologie et Santé Publique, Nouzilly, France.