title: Productivity and health effects of anaplasmosis and babesiosis on Bos indicus cattle and their crosses, and the effects of differing intensity of tick control in Australia.
abstract: Tick fever is an important disease of cattle where Rhipicephalus (Boophilus) microplus acts as a vector for the three causal organisms Babesia bovis, Babesia bigemina and Anaplasma marginale. Bos indicus cattle and their crosses are more resistant to the clinical effects of infection with B. bovis and B. bigemina than are Bos taurus cattle. Resistance is not complete, however, and herds of B. indicus-cross cattle are still at risk of babesiosis in environments where exposure to B. bovis is light in most years but occasionally high. The susceptibility of B. indicus cattle and their crosses to infection with A. marginale is similar to that of B. taurus cattle. In herds of B. indicus cattle and their crosses the infection rate of Babesia spp. and A. marginale is lowered because fewer ticks are likely to attach per day due to reduced numbers of ticks in the field (long-term effect on population, arising from high host resistance) and because a smaller proportion of ticks that do develop to feed on infected cattle will in turn be infected (due to lower parasitaemia). As a consequence, herds of B. indicus cattle are less likely than herds of B. taurus cattle to have high levels of population immunity to babesiosis or anaplasmosis. The effects of acaricide application on the probability of clinical disease due to anaplasmosis and babesiosis are unpredictable and dependent on the prevalence of infection in ticks and in cattle at the time of application. Attempting to manipulate population immunity through the toleration of specific threshold numbers of ticks with the aim of controlling tick fever is not reliable and the justification for acaricide application should be for the control of ticks rather than for tick fever. Vaccination of B. indicus cattle and their crosses is advisable in all areas where ticks exist, although vaccination against B. bigemina is probably not essential in pure B. indicus animals.
authors.affiliation: University of Queensland, Faculty of Natural Resources, Agriculture and Veterinary Science, St. Lucia 4072, Australia. n.jonsson@uq.edu.au
authors.forename: N N
authors.initials: NN
authors.lastname: Jonsson
authors.forename: R E
authors.initials: RE
authors.lastname: Bock
authors.forename: W K
authors.initials: WK
authors.lastname: Jorgensen
mesh_terms: D000712:Anaplasmosis / Q000453:epidemiology*; D000818:Animals; D001315:Australia / Q000453:epidemiology; D001404:Babesiosis / Q000453:epidemiology / Q000662:veterinary*; D002417:Cattle; D002418:Cattle Diseases / Q000453:epidemiology* / Q000382:microbiology / Q000469:parasitology; D007300:Insect Control / Q000379:methods*; D013987:Ticks / Q000382:microbiology / Q000502:physiology*