Chemical containment and eradication of screw− worm incursions in Australia

Screwworms are obligate, invasive parasites of warm-blooded animals. The female flies lay batches of eggs at the edge of wounds or other lesions. These eggs hatch to larvae or screw-worms which feed on affected animals for 6-7 days, burrowing deeply into subcutaneous tissues and causing severe trauma to animals, production loss and potentially death. Susceptible sites include wounds resulting from management practices such as castration, de-horning and ear tagging and lesions caused by the activities of other parasites such as buffalo flies and ticks. The navels of the new born and the vulval region of their mothers following parturition are highly susceptible and body orifices such as nose and ears are also frequent targets for ovipositing screwworm flies. The Old World screw-worm, Chrysomya bezziana (OWS) is considered one of the most serious exotic insect pest threatening Australia's livestock industries and is endemic in a number of our closest neighbouring countries. New World screwworm (NWS), Cochliomyia hominivorax, endemic to South America, has also entered Australia on at least 2 occasions. Many tropical and subtropical areas of Australia are suitable for the establishment of OWS and the potential range is expected to increase with climate change. The Australian screwworm preparedness strategy indicates a program of containment with chemical treatments followed by eradication of OWS using sterile male release and parasiticides. However, there is no longer an operational OWS sterile insect screw-worm facility anywhere in the world and establishing a large scale production facility would most optimistically take at least 2 years. In the interim, containment would be almost totally dependent on the availability of effective chemical controls. A review of chemical formulations available for potential use against OWS in Australia found that currently only one chemical, ivermectin administered by subcutaneous injection (s.c.) is registered for use against OWS and that many of the chemicals previously shown to be effective against OWS were no longer registered for animal use in Australia.18 From this review a number of Australian-registered chemicals were recommended as a priority for testing against OWS. The Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority (APVMA) can issue an emergency use permit for use of pesticides if they are registered in Australia for other animal uses and shown to be effective against OWS. This project tested the therapeutic and prophylactic efficacy of chemicals with potential for use in the treatment and control of OWS.

On-farm Campylobacter and Escherichia coli in commercial broiler chickens: Re-used bedding does not influence Campylobacter emergence and levels across sequential farming cycles

Limitations in quality bedding material have resulted in the growing need to re-use litter during broiler farming in some countries, which can be of concern from a food-safety perspective. The aim of this study was to compare the Campylobacter levels in ceca and litter across three litter treatments under commercial farming conditions. The litter treatments were (a) the use of new litter after each farming cycle; (b) an Australian partial litter re-use practice; and (c) a full litter re-use practice. The study was carried out on two farms over two years (Farm 1, from 2009–2010 and Farm 2, from 2010–2011), across three sheds (35,000 to 40,000 chickens/shed) on each farm, adopting three different litter treatments across six commercial cycles. A random sampling design was adopted to test litter and ceca for Campylobacter and Escherichia coli, prior to commercial first thin-out and final pick-up. Campylobacter levels varied little across litter practices and farming cycles on each farm and were in the range of log 8.0–9.0 CFU/g in ceca and log 4.0–6.0 MPN/g for litter. Similarly the E. coli in ceca were ∼log 7.0 CFU/g. At first thin-out and final pick-up, the statistical analysis for both litter and ceca showed that the three-way interaction (treatments by farms by times) was highly significant (P < 0.01), indicating that the patterns of Campylobacter emergence/presence across time vary between the farms, cycles and pickups. The emergence and levels of both organisms were not influenced by litter treatments across the six farming cycles on both farms. Either C. jejuni or C. coli could be the dominant species across litter and ceca, and this phenomenon could not be attributed to specific litter treatments. Irrespective of the litter treatments in place, cycle 2 on Farm 2 remained campylobacter-free. These outcomes suggest that litter treatments did not directly influence the time of emergence and levels of Campylobacter and E. coli during commercial farming.

Evaluation of chlorothalonil and paraffinic oil alone and in combinations with registered fungicides for the control of yellow Sigatoka (Mycosphaerella musicola) of bananas in Northern Queensland, Australia

The efficacy of chlorothalonil and paraffinic oil alone and in combinations with the registered fungicides propiconazole, tebuconazole, difenoconazole, epoxiconazole and pyrimethanil was evaluated in a field experiment over two cropping cycles in 2013 and 2014 in Northern Queensland, Australia, for control of yellow Sigatoka (caused by Mycosphaerella musicola) of banana. The predominantly applied by the banana industry treatment mancozeb with paraffinic oil was included for comparison. The results from the two cropping cycles suggested that all chemicals used with paraffinic oil were as effective or more effective than when applied with chlorothalonil, and chlorothalonil alone. Difenoconazole and epoxiconazole with paraffinic oil followed by propiconazole with paraffinic oil were the most effective treatments. Pyrimethanil and tebuconazole plus chlorothalonil were the least effective treatments. None of the chemical treatments was phytotoxic or reduced yield.

Low-dose methyl bromide fumigation as a quarantine disinfestation treatment for nectarines against Queensland fruit fly (Diptera:Tephritidae)

White nectarines (Prunus persica var. nucipersica) were fumigated with methyl bromide (MB) at a nominal treatment dose of 18 g m-3 at 18°C for 5 h and 30 min as a quarantine disinfestation treatment against Bactrocera tryoni, the Queensland fruit fly. Three large scale trials were conducted against each of the four immature lifestages, eggs and first, second and third instars. There were no survivors from the estimated 43,614 eggs, 41,873 first instars, 41,345 second instars and 33,549 third instars treated, thereby resulting in an efficacy of GROTERDAN99.99% mortality at the 95% confidence level for each lifestage. Of the 12 trials reported herein, the highest concentration of MB, sampled from the chamber headspace analysed by gas chromatography, was 18.7 g m-3. The maximum chamber temperature from 5 min readings was 19.7°C and the maximum fruit core temperature was 19.5°C. The treatment time for all trials was exactly 5.5 h. Thus the recommended treatment dose to disinfest nectarines from B. tryoni is 19.0 g m-3 MB at 20.0°C for 5.5 h. Fruit quality trials were conducted on white nectarines at three combinations of treatment parameters: 15 g m-3 MB at 19°C for 5.25 h; 18 g m-3 MB at 19°C for 5.5 h and 21 g m-3 MB at 19°C for 5.5 h. The fruit were stored at 0, 4 and 8 days at 4°C and 8 days at 4°C followed by 4 d at 22°C. They were then were assessed for skin colour, flesh colour, skin defects, flesh defects, fruit weight loss, flesh firmness, total soluble solids, titratable acidity and rots. There was no significant difference between untreated control and MB treated fruits in any of the parameters measured. Thus the treatments did not have adverse effects on fruit quality.

Comparison of the impact of six heat-load management strategies on thermal responses and milk production of feed-pad and pasture fed dairy cows in a subtropical environment

Exposure to hot environments affects milk yield (MY) and milk composition of pasture and feed-pad fed dairy cows in subtropical regions. This study was undertaken during summer to compare MY and physiology of cows exposed to six heat-load management treatments. Seventy-eight Holstein-Friesian cows were blocked by season of calving, parity, milk yield, BW, and milk protein (%) and milk fat (%) measured in 2 weeks prior to the start of the study. Within blocks, cows were randomly allocated to one of the following treatments: open-sided iron roofed day pen adjacent to dairy (CID) + sprinklers (SP); CID only; non-shaded pen adjacent to dairy + SP (NSD + SP); open-sided shade cloth roofed day pen adjacent to dairy (SCD); NSD + sprinkler (sprinkler on for 45 min at 1100 h if mean respiration rate >80 breaths per minute (NSD + WSP)); open-sided shade cloth roofed structure over feed bunk in paddock + 1 km walk to and from the dairy (SCP + WLK). Sprinklers for CID + SP and NSD + SP cycled 2 min on, 12 min off when ambient temperature >26°C. The highest milk yields were in the CID + SP and CID treatments (23.9 L cow−1 day−1), intermediate for NSD + SP, SCD and SCP + WLK (22.4 L cow−1 day−1), and lowest for NSD + WSP (21.3 L cow−1 day−1) (P < 0.05). The highest (P < 0.05) feed intakes occurred in the CID + SP and CID treatments while intake was lowest (P < 0.05) for NSD + WSP and SCP + WLK. Weather data were collected on site at 10-min intervals, and from these, THI was calculated. Nonlinear regression modelling of MY × THI and heat-load management treatment demonstrated that cows in CID + SP showed no decline in MY out to a THI break point value of 83.2, whereas the pooled MY of the other treatments declined when THI >80.7. A combination of iron roof shade plus water sprinkling throughout the day provided the most effective control of heat load.