Analyze Diet
Veterinary parasitology2024; 327; 110116; doi: 10.1016/j.vetpar.2024.110116

Worm control practices used by Thoroughbred horse managers in Australia: A national survey.

Abstract: This study assessed worm control practices used by Australian Thoroughbred farm managers with an online questionnaire survey. The questionnaire comprised 52 questions (close-ended: 44; open-ended: 8) about farm demography and general husbandry practices, farm managers' knowledge of gastrointestinal nematodes (GIN) and their importance, diagnosis, worm control strategies and anthelmintics, anthelmintic resistance (AR) and grazing management. Following the pilot survey, the link for the questionnaire survey was sent to all (n = 657) registered members of the Thoroughbred Breeders Australia on 12th April 2020. The response rate for the questionnaire was 18.5% (122 of 675). The farm managers reported a good understanding of GIN and their importance in different age groups of horses as most respondents (70% of 122) perceived worm-related illness to be more important in young (i.e., foals, weanlings and yearlings) than adult (> 3 years old) horses. Although most respondents (93%, 113 of 122) used anthelmintics prophylactically to control GIN, only 15% (18 of 122) observed worm-related illness in their horses. Just under 40% of respondents were performing faecal egg counts, with less than 20% using the results of faecal egg counts to guide deworming decisions. The interval-based deworming strategy was the most common method (≥55% of 122 respondents) to control GIN in all age groups of horses. Macrocyclic lactones were the first choice of anthelmintics for all age groups of horses. Although the majority of respondents (88%, 107 of 122) perceived resistance in GIN against commonly used anthelmintics as an important issue in managing worms in horses, only 29% assessed the efficacy of anthelmintics and 91% (111 of 122) were unaware of AR on their properties. Grazing management practices, such as manure removal, were more frequently performed on smaller paddocks (<0.20 ha: 58%) than on larger paddocks (>0.20 ha: 18%). Multiple correspondence analyses showed that the likelihood of suboptimal worm control practices on small farms (n = ≤50 horses) was greater than that of medium (n = 51-100) and large (n = >100) farms. This study provides insights into the demography of Thoroughbred farms in Australia, husbandry practices used by stud managers and their knowledge about worms, control options and AR concerns, thereby paving the way for taking any initiatives to address the problem of AR in GIN of Australian Thoroughbred horses.
Publication Date: 2024-01-12 PubMed ID: 38244523DOI: 10.1016/j.vetpar.2024.110116Google 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.
  • 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 research paper discusses the results of a survey on worm control practices used by managers of Thoroughbred horse farms in Australia, highlighting the strategies employed, knowledge about worms, and concerns about anthelmintic resistance.

Methods and Survey Participants

  • The researchers conducted an online questionnaire survey comprising 52 questions related to general practices, knowledge of gastrointestinal nematodes (GIN), control measures, and other concerns.
  • The survey was sent to all registered members of the Thoroughbred Breeders Australia (total 657 members), with a response rate of 18.5%.

Understanding and Importance of GIN

  • The majority of farm managers (70%) understood GIN’s importance, particularly in young horses such as foals, weanlings, and yearlings.
  • Most managers (93%) applied anthelmintic treatment to control GIN, despite only 15% having observed worm-related illnesses in horses.

Deworming Practices

  • Approximately 40% of the respondents carried out faecal egg counts, but less than 20% used the results to inform deworming decisions.
  • The survey found that interval-based deworming was the most common method for controlling GIN in all age groups.

Anthelmintics Use and Resistance

  • Macrocyclic lactones were the most prevalent first-choice anthelmintic for all horse age groups.
  • Around 88% of farm managers considered resistance to commonly used anthelmintics a significant issue, although only 29% evaluated the efficacy of anthelmintics.
  • A substantial proportion of respondents (91%) were not aware of any anthelmintic resistance on their properties.

Grazing Management and Farm Size

  • Grazing management practices, such as manure removal, were more common in smaller paddocks, with 58% of farmers taking these actions in paddocks smaller than 0.2 hectares.
  • The research found a higher likelihood of substandard worm control practices on smaller farms with 50 or fewer horses compared to medium (51-100 horses) and large-sized farms (more than 100 horses).

Conclusion

  • The findings provide a clearer picture of the demographics, husbandry practices, understanding of worms, control measures, and concerns about resistance of Thoroughbred farms in Australia.
  • This information is crucial for creating initiatives to address the problem of anthelmintic resistance in GIN in Australian Thoroughbred horses.

Cite This Article

APA
Abbas G, Bauquier J, Beasley A, Jacobson C, El-Hage C, Wilkes EJA, Carrigan P, Cudmore L, Hurley J, Beveridge I, Nielsen MK, Hughes KJ, Stevenson MA, Jabbar A. (2024). Worm control practices used by Thoroughbred horse managers in Australia: A national survey. Vet Parasitol, 327, 110116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vetpar.2024.110116

Publication

ISSN: 1873-2550
NlmUniqueID: 7602745
Country: Netherlands
Language: English
Volume: 327
Pages: 110116

Researcher Affiliations

Abbas, Ghazanfar
  • Melbourne Veterinary School, The University of Melbourne, Werribee, Victoria 3030, Australia.
Bauquier, Jenni
  • Melbourne Veterinary School, The University of Melbourne, Werribee, Victoria 3030, Australia.
Beasley, Anne
  • School of Agriculture and Food Sustainability, University of Queensland, Gatton, Queensland, Australia.
Jacobson, Caroline
  • Centre for Animal Production and Health, Murdoch University, Murdoch, Western Australia, Australia.
El-Hage, Charles
  • Melbourne Veterinary School, The University of Melbourne, Werribee, Victoria 3030, Australia.
Wilkes, Edwina J A
  • Racing Victoria, Flemington, Victoria, Australia.
Carrigan, Peter
  • Scone Equine Hospital, Scone, New South Wales, Australia.
Cudmore, Lucy
  • Scone Equine Hospital, Scone, New South Wales, Australia.
Hurley, John
  • Swettenham Stud, Nagambie, Victoria, Australia.
Beveridge, Ian
  • Melbourne Veterinary School, The University of Melbourne, Werribee, Victoria 3030, Australia.
Nielsen, Martin K
  • M.H. Gluck Equine Research Center, Department of Veterinary Science, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY, USA.
Hughes, Kristopher J
  • School of Agricultural, Environmental and Veterinary Sciences, Charles Sturt University, Wagga Wagga, New South Wales, Australia.
Stevenson, Mark A
  • Melbourne Veterinary School, The University of Melbourne, Werribee, Victoria 3030, Australia.
Jabbar, Abdul
  • Melbourne Veterinary School, The University of Melbourne, Werribee, Victoria 3030, Australia. Electronic address: jabbara@unimelb.edu.au.

MeSH Terms

  • Animals
  • Horses
  • Horse Diseases / prevention & control
  • Horse Diseases / drug therapy
  • Australia
  • Animal Husbandry / methods
  • Parasite Egg Count / veterinary
  • Nematoda
  • Anthelmintics / therapeutic use

Conflict of Interest Statement

Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work stated in this report.