FREE SHIPPING over $40
OVER 9000 FIVE-STAR REVIEWS
5% OFF ALL SUBSCRIPTIONS
100% HAPPINESS GUARANTEE
Analyze Diet
0
Home / Equine Research Bank / Animals (Basel) / Novel Equine Faecal Egg Diagnostics: Validation of the FECPA...
Animals : an open access journal from MDPI2020; 10(8); 1254; doi: 10.3390/ani10081254

Novel Equine Faecal Egg Diagnostics: Validation of the FECPAKG2.

Abstract: Faecal egg counts (FECs) are the standard method of diagnosing the level of parasitic helminth egg shedding in horses and other grazing animals. Testing before treatment is an important factor in slowing the appearance of anthelmintic resistance in nematode parasites. The FECPAK, optimised for livestock, is reported to allow owners to perform FECs on their own animals without the need for a separate microscope or any specialist knowledge by tapping into remote expertise. However, the performance of the FECPAK has yet to be assessed for equids. Therefore, a comparison of the FECPAK (G2) method with an accepted equine FEC method (FECPAK(G1)) was performed, using faecal samples from 57 horses in Wales and 22 horses in New Zealand. There was a significant correlation between the FECs obtained by the two methods ( < 0.001) and no effect of the country of origin on the data ( = 0.157). The mean percentage accuracy compared to the control values (mean G2 count as a percentage of the mean G1 count, ±SStandard Error (SE)) was 101 ± 4%. There was no significant interaction between the method applied and the country of origin of the data ( = 0.814). The relative accuracy of the G2 method compared to the control method (FECPAK) was not affected by the level of infection ( = 0.124) and it was concluded that the FECPAK method is a suitable method of performing FECs in horses. It is anticipated that the user-friendliness of the method will increase the uptake of FECs amongst horse owners, either by the direct use of the technology or through their veterinary practice, likely slowing the development of anthelmintic resistance.
Get Full Text
Publication Date: 2020-07-23 PubMed ID: 32717982PubMed Central: PMC7459939DOI: 10.3390/ani10081254Google Scholar: Lookup
The Equine Research Bank provides access to a large database of publicly available scientific literature. Inclusion in the Research Bank does not imply endorsement of study methods or findings by Mad Barn.
LinkedInCopy
  • Journal Article

Summary

This research summary has been generated with artificial intelligence and may contain errors and omissions. Refer to the original study to confirm details provided. Submit correction.

The researchers compared the FECPAKG2, a tool that allows horse owners to measure the level of worm eggs in their horse’s feces (known as Faecal Egg Count or FEC) at home, with an established method. The results showed a strong correlation between the two methods, suggesting the FECPACKG2 could be helpful in making this type of testing more widely adopted and possibly slow the development of resistance to de-worming medications.

Research Purpose and Methods

  • The main objective of this research was to test the performance of FECPAKG2, a system that horse owners can use to perform faecal egg counts (FECs) on their own horses. This system has been designed to return reliable results without the need for specialist knowledge or separate microscopic equipment.
  • The researchers tested the FECPAKG2 tool by comparing its results with those obtained from an accepted equine FEC method (FECPAKG1).
  • The test involved analysing faecal samples from a total of 79 horses across Wales and New Zealand.

Key Findings

  • The results showed a significant correlation between the FECs obtained using the FECPAKG2 method and those obtained using the FECPAKG1 method.
  • There was no significant impact from the country of origin on the data, meaning that the results were consistent whether they were derived from horses in Wales or New Zealand.
  • Additionally, the study found no significant interaction between the method applied and the country of origin of the data.
  • The average accuracy of the counts produced by the FECPAKG2 tool compared to the accepted standard was 101 ± 4%, indicating a high level of precision when used as instructed.

Conclusions and Implications

  • The researchers concluded that FECPAKG2 is a valid method for horse owners to perform FECs on their horses.
  • The simplicity of this tool could contribute to a higher level of uptake of FECs among horse owners. This increased usage, whether directly by horse owners or through their veterinary practices, could potentially slow down the development of resistance to anthelmintic (de-worming) medication.
  • This is significant as it allows horse owners to be proactive in the health management of their horses, while contributing to the overall aim of preserving the efficacy of anthelmintic treatment.

Cite This Article

APA
Tyson F, Dalesman S, Brophy PM, Morphew RM. (2020). Novel Equine Faecal Egg Diagnostics: Validation of the FECPAKG2. Animals (Basel), 10(8), 1254. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani10081254

Publication

Animals : an open access journal from MDPI
ISSN: 2076-2615
NlmUniqueID: 101635614
Country: Switzerland
Language: English
Volume: 10
Issue: 8
PII: 1254

Researcher Affiliations

Tyson, Fiona
  • Institute of Biological, Environmental and Rural Sciences, Aberystwyth University, Aberystwyth SY23 3DA, UK.
Dalesman, Sarah
  • Institute of Biological, Environmental and Rural Sciences, Aberystwyth University, Aberystwyth SY23 3DA, UK.
Brophy, Peter M
  • Institute of Biological, Environmental and Rural Sciences, Aberystwyth University, Aberystwyth SY23 3DA, UK.
Morphew, Russell M
  • Institute of Biological, Environmental and Rural Sciences, Aberystwyth University, Aberystwyth SY23 3DA, UK.

Grant Funding

  • N/A (PhD funding body) / KESS2

Conflict of Interest Statement

The authors declare no conflict of interest. The study design and UK data collection were entirely independent of Techion Group Ltd. The New Zealand data were supplied by Techion Group Ltd.

References

This article includes 31 references
  1. Kaplan R, Nielsen MK. An evidence-based approach to equine parasite control—It ain’t the 60s anymore.. Equine Vet. Educ. 2010;22:306–316.
    doi: 10.1111/j.2042-3292.2010.00084.xgoogle scholar: lookup
  2. Kaplan RM. Drug resistance in nematodes of veterinary importance: a status report.. Trends Parasitol 2004 Oct;20(10):477-81.
    doi: 10.1016/j.pt.2004.08.001pubmed: 15363441google scholar: lookup
  3. Drudge JH, Lyons ET. Control of internal parasites of the horse.. J Am Vet Med Assoc 1966 Feb 15;148(4):378-83.
    pubmed: 5950040
  4. Herd RP, Miller TB, Gabel AA. A field evaluation of pro-benzimidazole, benzimidazole, and non-benzimidazole anthelmintics in horses.. J Am Vet Med Assoc 1981 Oct 1;179(7):686-91.
    pubmed: 7341582
  5. Lyons ET, Tolliver SC, Drudge JH. Historical perspective of cyathostomes: prevalence, treatment and control programs.. Vet Parasitol 1999 Aug 31;85(2-3):97-111; discussion 111-2, 215-25.
    doi: 10.1016/S0304-4017(99)00091-6pubmed: 10485357google scholar: lookup
  6. Laugier C, Sevin C, Ménard S, Maillard K. Prevalence of Parascaris equorum infection in foals on French stud farms and first report of ivermectin-resistant P. equorum populations in France.. Vet Parasitol 2012 Aug 13;188(1-2):185-9.
    doi: 10.1016/j.vetpar.2012.02.022pubmed: 22494940google scholar: lookup
  7. Nielsen MK, Branan MA, Wiedenheft AM, Digianantonio R, Scare JA, Bellaw JL, Garber LP, Kopral CA, Phillippi-Taylor AM, Traub-Dargatz JL. Risk factors associated with strongylid egg count prevalence and abundance in the United States equine population.. Vet Parasitol 2018 Jun 15;257:58-68.
    doi: 10.1016/j.vetpar.2018.05.006pubmed: 29773232google scholar: lookup
  8. Relf VE, Morgan ER, Hodgkinson JE, Matthews JB. Helminth egg excretion with regard to age, gender and management practices on UK Thoroughbred studs.. Parasitology 2013 Apr;140(5):641-52.
    doi: 10.1017/S0031182012001941pubmed: 23351718google scholar: lookup
  9. Slater J. National Equine Horse Survey. [(accessed on 28 April 2020)]; Available online: https://www.bluecross.org.uk/sites/default/files/downloads/NEHS%202017%20results.pdf.
  10. von Samson-Himmelstjerna G. Anthelmintic resistance in equine parasites - detection, potential clinical relevance and implications for control.. Vet Parasitol 2012 Apr 19;185(1):2-8.
    doi: 10.1016/j.vetpar.2011.10.010pubmed: 22100141google scholar: lookup
  11. Tamzali Y. Chronic weight loss syndrome in the horse—A 60 case retrospective study.. Equine Vet. Educ. 2006;18:289–296.
    doi: 10.1111/j.2042-3292.2006.tb00465.xgoogle scholar: lookup
  12. Abbott E. Larval cyathostomosis-Part 1-The disease, its diagnosis and treatment.. Equine Pract. 1998;20:6–7.
  13. Corning S. Equine cyathostomins: a review of biology, clinical significance and therapy.. Parasit Vectors 2009 Sep 25;2 Suppl 2(Suppl 2):S1.
    doi: 10.1186/1756-3305-2-S2-S1pmc: PMC2751837pubmed: 19778462google scholar: lookup
  14. Tzelos T, Matthews J. Anthelmintic resistance in equine helminths and mitigating its effects.. Practice 2016;38:489–499.
    doi: 10.1136/inp.i5287google scholar: lookup
  15. Traversa D, von Samson-Himmelstjerna G, Demeler J, Milillo P, Schürmann S, Barnes H, Otranto D, Perrucci S, di Regalbono AF, Beraldo P, Boeckh A, Cobb R. Anthelmintic resistance in cyathostomin populations from horse yards in Italy, United Kingdom and Germany.. Parasit Vectors 2009 Sep 25;2 Suppl 2(Suppl 2):S2.
    doi: 10.1186/1756-3305-2-S2-S2pmc: PMC2751838pubmed: 19778463google scholar: lookup
  16. Sangster NC. Managing parasiticide resistance.. Vet Parasitol 2001 Jul 12;98(1-3):89-109.
    doi: 10.1016/S0304-4017(01)00425-3pubmed: 11516581google scholar: lookup
  17. Rendle D, Austin C, Bowen M, Cameron I, Furtado T, Hodgkinson J, McGorum B, Matthews J. Equine de-worming: A consensus on current best practice.. UK-Vet Equine 2019;3:2–14.
    doi: 10.12968/ukve.2019.3.S.3google scholar: lookup
  18. MAFF. Manual of Veterinary Parasitological Laboratory Techniques.. Her Majesty’s Stationery Office; London, UK: 1986.
  19. Egwang TG, Slocombe JO. Evaluation of the Cornell-Wisconsin centrifugal flotation technique for recovering trichostrongylid eggs from bovine feces.. Can J Comp Med 1982 Apr;46(2):133-7.
    pmc: PMC1320267pubmed: 7093809
  20. Cringoli G, Rinaldi L, Maurelli MP, Utzinger J. FLOTAC: new multivalent techniques for qualitative and quantitative copromicroscopic diagnosis of parasites in animals and humans.. Nat Protoc 2010 Mar;5(3):503-15.
    doi: 10.1038/nprot.2009.235pubmed: 20203667google scholar: lookup
  21. Godber OF, Phythian CJ, Bosco A, Ianniello D, Coles G, Rinaldi L, Cringoli G. A comparison of the FECPAK and Mini-FLOTAC faecal egg counting techniques.. Vet Parasitol 2015 Jan 30;207(3-4):342-5.
    doi: 10.1016/j.vetpar.2014.12.029pubmed: 25579397google scholar: lookup
  22. Presland SL, Morgan ER, Coles GC. Counting nematode eggs in equine faecal samples.. Vet Rec 2005 Feb 12;156(7):208-10.
    doi: 10.1136/vr.156.7.208pubmed: 15747658google scholar: lookup
  23. Rashid MH, Stevenson MA, Waenga S, Mirams G, Campbell AJD, Vaughan JL, Jabbar A. Comparison of McMaster and FECPAK(G2) methods for counting nematode eggs in the faeces of alpacas.. Parasit Vectors 2018 May 2;11(1):278.
    doi: 10.1186/s13071-018-2861-1pmc: PMC5930814pubmed: 29716657google scholar: lookup
  24. Upjohn MM, Shipton K, Lerotholi T, Attwood G, Verheyen KL. Coprological prevalence and intensity of helminth infection in working horses in Lesotho.. Trop Anim Health Prod 2010 Dec;42(8):1655-61.
    doi: 10.1007/s11250-010-9617-zpubmed: 20574819google scholar: lookup
  25. Ayana M, Vlaminck J, Cools P, Ame S, Albonico M, Dana D, Keiser J, Manly H, Matoso LF, Mekonnen Z, Montresor A, Correa-Oliveira R, Rinaldi L, Sayasone S, Sowersby SJ, Tesfaye L, Vercruysse J, Mirams G, Levecke B. Modification and optimization of the FECPAKG2 protocol for the detection and quantification of soil-transmitted helminth eggs in human stool.. PLoS Negl Trop Dis 2018 Oct;12(10):e0006655.
    doi: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0006655pmc: PMC6224113pubmed: 30321180google scholar: lookup
  26. Moser W, Bärenbold O, Mirams GJ, Cools P, Vlaminck J, Ali SM, Ame SM, Hattendorf J, Vounatsou P, Levecke B, Keiser J. Diagnostic comparison between FECPAKG2 and the Kato-Katz method for analyzing soil-transmitted helminth eggs in stool.. PLoS Negl Trop Dis 2018 Jun;12(6):e0006562.
    doi: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0006562pmc: PMC6002127pubmed: 29864132google scholar: lookup
  27. Cools P, Vlaminck J, Albonico M, Ame S, Ayana M, José Antonio BP, Cringoli G, Dana D, Keiser J, Maurelli MP, Maya C, Matoso LF, Montresor A, Mekonnen Z, Mirams G, Corrêa-Oliveira R, Pinto SA, Rinaldi L, Sayasone S, Thomas E, Verweij JJ, Vercruysse J, Levecke B. Diagnostic performance of a single and duplicate Kato-Katz, Mini-FLOTAC, FECPAKG2 and qPCR for the detection and quantification of soil-transmitted helminths in three endemic countries.. PLoS Negl Trop Dis 2019 Aug;13(8):e0007446.
    doi: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0007446pmc: PMC6675048pubmed: 31369558google scholar: lookup
  28. Cooke IR, Laing CJ, White LV, Wakes SJ, Sowerby SJ. Analysis of menisci formed on cones for single field of view parasite egg microscopy.. J Microsc 2015 Feb;257(2):133-41.
    doi: 10.1111/jmi.12192pubmed: 25384843google scholar: lookup
  29. McCoy MA, Edgar HW, Kenny J, Gordon AW, Dawson LE, Carson AF. Evaluation of on-farm faecal worm egg counting in sheep.. Vet Rec 2005 Jan 1;156(1):21-3.
    doi: 10.1136/vr.156.1.21pubmed: 15658564google scholar: lookup
  30. Coles GC. Anthelmintic Resistance in Equine Worms.. Vet. Times 2009;39:4–5.
  31. Nielsen MK, Vidyashankar AN, Andersen UV, Delisi K, Pilegaard K, Kaplan RM. Effects of fecal collection and storage factors on strongylid egg counts in horses.. Vet Parasitol 2010 Jan 20;167(1):55-61.
    doi: 10.1016/j.vetpar.2009.09.043pubmed: 19850412google scholar: lookup

Citations

This article has been cited 2 times.
  1. Papaiakovou M, Littlewood DTJ, Doyle SR, Gasser RB, Cantacessi C. Worms and bugs of the gut: the search for diagnostic signatures using barcoding, and metagenomics-metabolomics.. Parasit Vectors 2022 Apr 1;15(1):118.
    doi: 10.1186/s13071-022-05225-7pubmed: 35365192google scholar: lookup
  2. Ghafar A, Abbas G, King J, Jacobson C, Hughes KJ, El-Hage C, Beasley A, Bauquier J, Wilkes EJA, Hurley J, Cudmore L, Carrigan P, Tennent-Brown B, Nielsen MK, Gauci CG, Beveridge I, Jabbar A. Comparative studies on faecal egg counting techniques used for the detection of gastrointestinal parasites of equines: A systematic review.. Curr Res Parasitol Vector Borne Dis 2021;1:100046.
    doi: 10.1016/j.crpvbd.2021.100046pubmed: 35284858google scholar: lookup
Subscribe to our newsletter
Join 99,359 horse owners like you who receive our email updates on horse health and nutrition.