Reducing anthelmintic inputs in organic farming: Are small ruminant farmers integrating alternative strategies to control gastrointestinal nematodes?

To counter the global spread of anthelmintic resistance (AR), considerable efforts have been invested in the development and dissemination of sustainable alternatives to control gastrointestinal nematode (GIN) infections in small ruminants. The degree to which these have been accepted and integrated by farmers, particularly in organic systems, where the drive to reduce chemical inputs is arguably even more pressing, has been little studied. To identify whether more comprehensive actions are needed to support the uptake of alternative GIN controls amongst organic farmers, this study conducted a survey in five European countries on organic dairy goat and meat sheep farmers to gain insight into current GIN control strategies and farmer attitudes towards AR and alternative measures in these countries. The structured survey was disseminated in the five European countries Switzerland, France, Netherlands, Lithuania and United Kingdom, receiving a total of 425 responses, 106 from organic dairy goat farmers and 319 from organic meat sheep farmers. Regression analyses were carried out to identify factors impacting anthelmintic drenching on meat sheep production systems, whereas all data were analysed descriptively. Four key findings emerged: i) The frequency of anthelmintic treatments averaged less than two per animal a year in all production systems; ii) Overall, organic farmers seemed well informed on the availability of alternative GIN control methods, but fewer stated to put them into practice; iii) Targeted selective treatment (TST) strategies of anthelmintics appears to be not commonly incorporated by organic farmers; iv) Despite operating under national and EU organic regulations, each of the organic dairy goat (Switzerland, France and Netherlands) and meat sheep (Switzerland, Lithuania and United Kingdom) production systems developed distinct approaches for GIN control. To increase uptake of alternatives to GIN control and optimise anthelmintic use, initiatives that promote research dissemination, farmer participatory and knowledge transfer activities at national level would be desirable.

Parasite control in organic cattle farming: Management and farmers' perspectives from six European countries.

Organic ruminant production is expanding in the EU, but parasite management remains a constant challenge. Mandatory outdoor access for all age groups can increase exposure to pasture borne parasites, whilst restrictions in the prophylactic use of anthelmintics can limit parasite control. The scientific community has been working to deliver effective parasite control strategies and alternative approaches in order to slow down the development of anthelmintic resistance (AR). However, the current parasite control practices and overall awareness with regards to AR and alternative approaches on farms are largely unknown and may be causing a knowledge gap between the scientific and farming communities. Therefore, a structured survey was conducted in six European countries (Switzerland, Germany, Denmark, Netherlands, Lithuania, Sweden) to provide basic data on practices, management and farmers' perspectives for grazing and parasite control (gastrointestinal worms and liver flukes) on organic cattle farms. Overall, 375 surveys were collected (282 dairy and 93 beef farms) in 2015-2016, and analysed descriptively. Additionally, surveys from the 228 dairy farms were assessed using a double-hurdle adoption model to identify the factors involved in the decision to drench against gastrointestinal parasites. Generally, there are prominent differences between countries, with monitoring methods differing especially, which has important implications in terms of knowledge transfer. For example, media warning was the most common method in DE, while antibody testing in bulk tank milk was the common method in NL. In other countries, clinical signs (diarrhoea, hair coat quality, and reduced weight or yield) and liver condemnation data were used frequently. In general, organic farmers from the six participating countries indicated that they would accept alternative approaches despite greater cost and labour. The likelihood of drenching were higher on farms with smaller farm areas, higher number of young stock and total livestock units and farms where faecal egg counts were used to monitor the parasites. In conclusion, it was evident that grazing and parasite management varied between the countries even though they operate under the same basic principles. Parasite management strategies must therefore be country specific and disseminated with appropriate methods.

[How widespread is resistance to invermectin among gastrointestinal nematodes in sheep in The Netherlands?]. / Hoe wijd verspreid is resistentie tegen ivermectine van maagdarmwormen bij het schaap in Nederland?

In Autumn 2009, a faecal egg count reduction test (FERCT) was carried out on three sheep farms. Groups of 8-11 lambs were treated with ivermectin or moxidectin, with a 14-day interval between treatment and sampling. Ivermectin resistance was present on all three farms. Treatment with ivermectin resulted in a reduction in faecal egg numbers of 94.6%, 63%, and 59%. On two farms, 14 days after treatment pooled faecal samples yielded predominantly larvae of Hamonchus contortus (100% and 98%, respectively). On the third farm, H. contortus and (probably) Teladorsagia circumcincta were resistant to ivermectin (64% and 36% of the larvae, respectively). Treatment with moxidectin resulted in a 100% reduction in egg output in sheep on all three farms. More sensitive culture techniques failed to detect any larvae in samples taken from two farms, but a few Ostertagia-type larvae, probably of T. circumcincta, were detected in samples from the third farm. It can be concluded that gastrointestinal nematodes in sheep from these three farms were resistant to ivermectin, whereas resistance to moxidectin was not detected.