title: Evaluating the resistance of eimeria spp. Field isolates to anticoccidial drugs using three different indices.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  In this study, the presence of resistance to diclazuril, amprolium+ethopabate and salinomycin, representing some of the commonest anticoccidials in Iran's poultry industry, against three mixed Eimeria field isolates were investigated.
  
  
  METHODS
  Three Eimeria field isolates, collected from typical broiler farms in Iran, were propagated once, inoculated to 480 broilers, comprising 30 chicks in each treatment. The non-medicated or medicated diets containing one of the above mentioned anticoccidials were provided ad-lib. Drug efficacy was determined using the Global index (GI), Anticoccidial Sensitivity Test (AST) and Optimum Anticoccidial Activity (OAA).
  
  
  RESULTS
  None of the field isolates were fully sensitive to the selected anticoccidials. All isolates showed reduced sensitivity/partial resistance to salinomycin. Resistance to amprolium+ethopabate was evident and partial to complete resistance was recorded for diclazuril.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Limited efficacy of the selected anticoccidials is obvious. Considering the cost of continuous use of anticoccidials in the field, altering the prevention strategy and rotation of the anticoccidials with better efficacy, would prevent further economic losses induced by coccidiosis.
authors.affiliation: Department of Pathobiology, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Tehran, Iran.
authors.forename: F
authors.initials: F
authors.lastname: Arabkhazaeli
authors.forename: M
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Modrisanei
authors.forename: S
authors.initials: S
authors.lastname: Nabian
authors.forename: B
authors.initials: B
authors.lastname: Mansoori
authors.forename: A
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Madani
keywords: Anticoccidial Sensitivity Test; Drug resistance; Eimeria; Global Index; Optimum Anticoccidial Activity
references.citation: Vet Parasitol. 2004 Feb 6;119(4):261-76
references.pmid: 15154593
references.citation: Avian Dis. 1994 Jul-Sep;38(3):483-93
references.pmid: 7832701
references.citation: Vet Parasitol. 1998 Apr 15;76(3):163-71
references.pmid: 9615950
references.citation: Clin Microbiol Rev. 2002 Jan;15(1):58-65
references.pmid: 11781266
references.citation: Vet Parasitol. 2004 May 26;121(3-4):189-212
references.pmid: 15135859
references.citation: Int J Parasitol. 1998 Jul;28(7):1141-4
references.pmid: 9724885
references.citation: Vet Parasitol. 1997 Apr;69(1-2):19-29
references.pmid: 9187026
references.citation: Vet Parasitol. 1982 Feb;9(3-4):179-83
references.pmid: 7201192
references.citation: Vet Parasitol. 1994 Oct;55(1-2):29-55
references.pmid: 7886919
references.citation: Exp Parasitol. 2011 Jan;127(1):322-5
references.pmid: 20723543
references.citation: Res Vet Sci. 1989 Jul;47(1):125-8
references.pmid: 2549593
references.citation: Parasitol Res. 2010 Aug;107(3):601-4
references.pmid: 20499099
references.citation: Poult Sci. 1999 Apr;78(4):529-35
references.pmid: 10230905
references.citation: Avian Dis. 2009 Sep;53(3):405-8
references.pmid: 19848080
references.citation: J Parasitol. 1992 Dec;78(6):1067-73
references.pmid: 1491300
references.citation: Int J Parasitol. 1995 Jun;25(6):753-6
references.pmid: 7657461
references.citation: Res Vet Sci. 1997 Mar-Apr;62(2):175-8
references.pmid: 9243719
references.citation: Avian Pathol. 1990 Jul;19(3):489-96
references.pmid: 18679960
references.citation: Avian Pathol. 1997;26(2):221-44
references.pmid: 18483904
references.citation: Iran J Parasitol. 2011 Dec;6(4):23-32
references.pmid: 22347310
references.citation: Vet Parasitol. 2007 Jul 20;147(3-4):239-45
references.pmid: 17485176
references.citation: Vet Parasitol. 1983 Feb;12(1):45-50
references.pmid: 6683036
references.citation: Avian Pathol. 2003 Aug;32(4):391-401
references.pmid: 17585463
references.citation: Nihon Juigaku Zasshi. 1975 Aug;37(4):357-62
references.pmid: 811914
references.citation: Avian Dis. 1987 Apr-Jun;31(2):287-92
references.pmid: 3619821
references.citation: Vet Parasitol. 2001 Dec 3;102(1-2):69-75
references.pmid: 11705653