Combination of synthetic acaricides with (E)-cinnamaldehyde to control Rhipicephalus microplus.

This work had the objectives to (1) evaluate the susceptibility of various Rhipicephalus microplus populations to commercial acaricides, and (2) select commercial acaricides (50-80% effective) and evaluate the effects of binary combinations of the phenylpropanoid (E)-cinnamaldehyde with selected commercial acaricides to control R. microplus under laboratory and field conditions. Using adult immersion tests with 116 populations and 14 commercial acaricides, products showing 50-80% effectiveness (percent control) with the lowest number of active ingredients were selected. Acaricides containing amitraz or chlorfenvinphos were tested in combination with (E)-cinnamaldehyde on a field population (strain CM). We found that (E)-cinnamaldehyde enhanced the activity of both commercial acaricides against R. microplus larvae; however, the enhancement was more accentuated when using amitraz. Experiments combining (E)-cinnamaldehyde + amitraz on unfed larvae and engorged females from another population (strain Gyn) were performed, verifying (E)-cinnamaldehyde enhanced the activity of amitraz. In the field experiment, the application of (E)-cinnamaldehyde appeared toxic to the tick hosts (cattle). We concluded that (E)-cinnamaldehyde enhanced the activity of amitraz against unfed larvae and engorged females of R. microplus; however, in the field test this phenylpropanoid caused intoxication in the cattle. Studies searching for new combinations of compounds from essential oils with amitraz deserve attention, as well as studies to develop formulations using amitraz + (E)-cinnamaldehyde that will be efficient and will not have toxic effects in cattle.

Comparison of the efficacy of different methods to apply acaricides for control of Rhipicephalus (Boophilus) microplus.

The present study compared the efficacy of different methods to apply an acaricide formulation to control Rhipicephalus (Boophilus) microplus. To compare the methods, an acaricide blend containing three active ingredients (a pyrethroid and two organophosphates) was used. In experiment 1 (farm 1: Goiânia, GO, Brazil), three methods were tested: a backpack sprayer (BS), power sprayer (PS) and spray race (SR). In experiment 2 (farm 2: São José do Rio Pardo, SP, Brazil), two methods were tested: BS and PS. In both experiments, 10 cattle with similar tick burdens were used. On day 0 in both experiments, the animals were treated with the acaricide. On day +1 (only in experiment 1), +3, +7, +14, +21, +28 and +35 (only in experiment 2), tick counts were performed to determine the control efficacy. The time application, pressure (KPa), volume applied (L) and ergonomic aspects of each spraying system were also evaluated. The adult immersion test (AIT) using three different acaricide blends (combinations of pyrethroid + organophosphate) was performed to compare the susceptibility of strains of each farm. In experiment 1, all treatments significantly reduced (p < 0.05) the number of ticks on the animals, and PS resulted in the greatest acaricide efficacy since day +1. In experiment 2, both treatments (PS and BS) reduced (p < 0.05) the tick burden, and as observed in experiment 1, PS resulted in the best reduction. The application times were 4.5, 150 and 330 s, while pressures were 306.8, 4,826.3 and 220.6 KPa for SR, PS and BS, respectively. In the AIT, the efficacy values were between 99.8 and 100% for the tick strain form farm 1 (Goiânia), while for tick strain from farm 2 (São José do Rio Pardo), the efficacy was between 67.2 and 80.9%. We conclude that the sprayer methods chosen influences the efficacy of the acaricide. All sprayer methods were efficient for acaricide application; the best efficacy was obtained using the PS, while the SR resulted in good efficacy and lower application time. The strain from farm 2 was less susceptible to all acaricides tested.