ABSTRACT
The impact of three treatment strategies for Trypanosoma evansi control on horse mortality in the Brazilian Pantanal based on four size categories of cattle ranches is explored. The region's 49,000 horses are indispensable to traditional extensive cattle ranching and T. evansi kills horses. About 13% of these horses would be lost, annually, due to T. evansi if no control were undertaken. One preventive and two curative treatment strategies are financially justifiable in the Pantanal. The best available technology for the treatment of T. evansi from a horse mortality perspective is the preventive strategy, which spares 6,462 horses, annually. The year-round cure spares 5,783 horses, and the seasonal cure saves 5,204 horses on a regional basis relative to no control strategy. Regardless of the strategy adopted, 39% of the costs or benefits fall to the largest ranches, while 18% fall to the smallest ranches.
Subject(s)
Horse Diseases/prevention & control , Trypanosoma/isolation & purification , Trypanosomiasis/veterinary , Animals , Brazil/epidemiology , Horse Diseases/economics , Horse Diseases/mortality , Horses , Risk Factors , Seasons , Trypanosomiasis/mortality , Trypanosomiasis/prevention & controlABSTRACT
The impact of three treatment strategies for Trypanosoma evansi control on horse mortality in the Brazilian Pantanal based on four size categories of cattle ranches is explored. The region's 49,000 horses are indispensable to traditional extensive cattle ranching and T. evansi kills horses. About 13 percent of these horses would be lost, annually, due to T. evansi if no control were undertaken. One preventive and two curative treatment strategies are financially justifiable in the Pantanal. The best available technology for the treatment of T. evansi from a horse mortality perspective is the preventive strategy, which spares 6,462 horses, annually. The year-round cure spares 5,783 horses, and the seasonal cure saves 5,204 horses on a regional basis relative to no control strategy. Regardless of the strategy adopted, 39 percent of the costs or benefits fall to the largest ranches, while 18 percent fall to the smallest ranches