Efficacy of RESURRECT
Before explaining the graphs in this section, I would like to briefly explain the type of test that was used – called a fecal egg count reduction test, or FECRT. The test involves identifying groups of 10 sheep – one group for each active you would like to test, plus an additional “undrenched” or “control” group. The sheep are marked in a way that makes it easy to identify the active which those sheep were drenched with. On the day of drenching, fecal egg counts are taken from each individual sheep. 10 – 14 days later, fecal egg counts are again taken for each sheep. Reductions in fecal egg count are recorded and drench efficacies are calculated as a percentage fecal egg count reduction compared with initial fecal egg count results. This fecal egg count reduction is averaged across all animals within a treatment which gives the efficacy of each particular drench active. The control or “untreated” group is used to observe any change in the fecal egg counts had the sheep not been drenched. These is also a large degree of variability between animals using this type of test. In some cases a 95% confidence interval (CI) is given to show how variable the records were for a particular treatment.
Now, I would like to direct your attention to Trial 1. This data represents the average worm egg counts 10 – 14 days after drenching with Levamizole as compared with the undrenched group. The graph shows that there is little apparent difference between the Levamizole treated sheep and the untreated sheep. In fact the worm egg counts had increased to almost 400% of what they were when the sheep were drenched 2 weeks prior.
After identifying that Levamizole didn’t work, the sheep were treated with “Resurrect” according to recommendations. Some months passed, the sheep were drenched several times with Napthalaphos (Rametin). Another resistance test, or FECRT, was performed, using Levamizole. The results are presented in Figure 1. Again the data shown is the average fecal egg count 10 – 14 days after drenching. The control group FEC had increased to over 900% of what it was measured at the time of drenching. The Levamizole group however showed only 2.5% of the initial FEC, demonstrating over 97% efficacy of Levamizole.
I’ll now draw your attention to Trial 2. These are the results from another trial conducted in the same way as the previous trial. First we established the drench efficacy of Moxidectin, Albendazole and Levamizole. The Resurrect product was then applied according to instructions. Some months passed and the sheep were drenched with a Closantel, Abamectin, Albendazole and Levamizole combination (available as Q Drench) to kill the artificial infection. Once worm egg counts had increased again, drench efficacies were re-evaluated using an FECRT. As can be seen in Trial 2, the drenches reduced the FEC by a greater amount after the treatment had been applied.
I would now like to draw your attention to Trial 3. In this trial the efficacies of three drenches were evaluated, they were Levamizole, Closantel and a combination of Levamizole and Albendazole. Initially the Levamizole worked at 78%, the Closantel worked at 88% and the Levamizole Albendazole combination worked at 95.9%. After applying the resurrect treatment, the Levamizole worked at 99.78%, the Closantel worked at 99.69% and the Levamizole and Albendazole combination worked at 99.9%. It is also important to note that when undertaking the larval differentiation only 6 Haemonchus contortus (barbers pole worm) larvae were retrieved from approximately 15g of dung culture from the combination drench treatment.
As this data shows, the Resurrect product is highly effective in restoring on farm drench susceptibility to Haemonchus contortus.
|95% CI||95% CI|
|Drench Active||Before Resurrect||lower||upper||After Resurrect||lower||upper|
|Lev. + Alb.||95.90%||81.02%||110.79%||99.91%||99.72%||100.09%|