A cross-sectional survey to establish Theileria parva prevalence and vector control at the wildlife-livestock interface, Northern Tanzania

East Coast fever (ECF) in cattle is caused by the protozoan parasite Theileria parva, transmitted by Rhipicephalus appendiculatus ticks. In cattle ECF is often fatal, causing annual losses >$500 million across its range. The African buffalo (Syncerus caffer) is the natural host for T. parva but the transmission dynamics between wild hosts and livestock are poorly understood. This study aimed to determine the prevalence of T. parva in cattle, in a 30 km zone adjacent to the Serengeti National Park, Tanzania where livestock and buffalo co-exist, and to ascertain how livestock keepers controlled ECF and other vector-borne diseases of cattle. A randomised cross-sectional cattle survey and questionnaire of vector control practices were conducted. Blood samples were collected from 770 cattle from 48 herds and analysed by PCR to establish T. parva prevalence. Half body tick counts were recorded on every animal. Farmers were interviewed (n = 120; including the blood sampled herds) using a standardised questionnaire to obtain data on vector control practices. Local workshops were held to discuss findings and validate results. Overall prevalence of T. parva in cattle was 5.07% (CI: 3.70−7.00%), with significantly higher prevalence in older animals. Although all farmers reported seeing ticks on their cattle, tick counts were very low with 78% cattle having none. Questionnaire analysis indicated significant acaricide use with 79% and 41% of farmers reporting spraying or dipping with cypermethrin-based insecticides, respectively. Some farmers reported very frequent spraying, as often as every four days. However, doses per animal were often insufficient. These data indicate high levels of acaricide use, which may be responsible for the low observed tick burdens and low ECF prevalence. This vector control is farmer-led and aimed at both tick- and tsetse-borne diseases of livestock. The levels of acaricide use raise concerns regarding sustainability; resistance development is a risk, particularly in ticks. Integrating vaccination as part of this community-based disease control may alleviate acaricide dependence, but increased understanding of the Theileria strains circulating in wildlife-livestock interface areas is required to establish the potential benefits of vaccination

Assessing the effect of insecticide-treated cattle on tsetse abundance and trypanosome transmission at the wildlife-livestock interface in Serengeti, Tanzania

In the absence of national control programmes against Rhodesian human African trypanosomiasis, farmer-led treatment of cattle with pyrethroid-based insecticides may be an effective strategy for foci at the edges of wildlife areas, but there is limited evidence to support this. We combined data on insecticide use by farmers, tsetse abundance and trypanosome prevalence, with mathematical models, to quantify the likely impact of insecticide-treated cattle. Sixteen percent of farmers reported treating cattle with a pyrethroid, and chemical analysis indicated 18% of individual cattle had been treated, in the previous week. Treatment of cattle was estimated to increase daily mortality of tsetse by 5–14%. Trypanosome prevalence in tsetse, predominantly from wildlife areas, was 1.25% for T. brucei s.l. and 0.03% for T. b. rhodesiense. For 750 cattle sampled from 48 herds, 2.3% were PCR positive for T. brucei s.l. and none for T. b. rhodesiense. Using mathematical models, we estimated there was 8–29% increase in mortality of tsetse in farming areas and this increase can explain the relatively low prevalence of T. brucei s.l. in cattle. Farmer-led treatment of cattle with pyrethroids is likely, in part, to be limiting the spill-over of human-infective trypanosomes from wildlife areas

Standardizing visual control devices for tsetse flies: East African species Glossina swynnertoni.

BACKGROUND: Here we set out to standardize long-lasting, visually-attractive devices for Glossina swynnertoni, a vector of both human and animal trypanosomiasis in open savannah in Tanzania and Kenya, and in neighbouring conservation areas used by pastoralists. The goal was to determine the most practical device/material that would induce the strongest landing response in G. swynnertoni for use in area-wide population suppression of this fly with insecticide-impregnated devices. METHODS AND FINDINGS: Trials were conducted in wet and dry seasons in the Serengeti and Maasai Mara to measure the performance of traps and targets of different sizes and colours, with and without chemical baits, at different population densities and under different environmental conditions. Adhesive film was used as a simple enumerator at these remote locations to compare trapping efficiencies of devices. Independent of season or presence of chemical baits, targets in phthalogen blue or turquoise blue cloth with adhesive film were the best devices for capturing G. swynnertoni in all situations, catching up to 19 times more flies than pyramidal traps. Baiting with chemicals did not affect the relative performance of devices. Fly landings were two times higher on 1 m(2) blue-black targets as on pyramidal traps when equivalent areas of both were covered with adhesive film. Landings on 1 m(2) blue-black targets were compared to those on smaller phthalogen blue 0.5 m(2) all-blue or blue-black-blue cloth targets, and to landings on all-blue plastic 0.32-0.47 m(2) leg panels painted in phthalogen blue. These smaller targets and leg panels captured equivalent numbers of G. swynnertoni per unit area as bigger targets. CONCLUSIONS: Leg panels and 0.5 m(2) cloth targets show promise as cost effective devices for management of G. swynnertoni as they can be used for both control (insecticide-impregnated cloth) and for sampling (rigid plastic with insect glue or adhesive film) of populations

Standardising visual control devices for Tsetse: East and Central African Savannah species Glossina swynnertoni, Glossina morsitans centralis and Glossina pallidipes.

BACKGROUND:This study focused on the savannah tsetse species Glossina swynnertoni and G. morsitans centralis, both efficient vectors of human and animal trypanosomiasis in, respectively, East and Central Africa. The aim was to develop long-lasting, practical and cost-effective visually attractive devices that induce the strongest landing responses in these two species for use as insecticide-impregnated tools in population suppression. METHODS AND FINDINGS:Trials were conducted in different seasons and years in Tanzania (G. swynnertoni) and in Angola and the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC, G. m. centralis) to measure the performance of traps (pyramidal and epsilon) and targets of different sizes, shapes and colours, with and without chemical baits, at different population densities and under different environmental conditions. Adhesive film was used to catch flies landing on devices at the remote locations to compare tsetse-landing efficiencies. Landing rates by G. m. centralis in both Angola and the DRC were highest on blue-black 1 m2 oblong and 0.5 m2 square and oblong targets but were not significantly different from landings on the pyramidal trap. Landings by G. swynnertoni on 0.5 m2 blue-black oblong targets were likewise not significantly lower than on equivalent 1 m2 square targets. The length of target horizontal edge was closely correlated with landing rate. Blue-black 0.5 m2 targets performed better than equivalents in all-blue for both G. swynnertoni and G. m. centralis, although not consistently. Baiting with chemicals increased the proportion of G. m. centralis entering pyramidal traps. CONCLUSIONS:This study confirms earlier findings on G. swynnertoni that smaller visual targets, down to 0.5 m2, would be as efficient as using 1 m2 targets for population management of this species. This is also the case for G. m. centralis. An insecticide-impregnated pyramidal trap would also constitute an effective control device for G. m. centralis

Trapping devices used in experiments and their surface areas.

#<p>Only the lower 60 cm of the Tanzanian targets was covered with adhesive film.</p>**<p>Referred to in the text as local target (standard phthalogen blue cotton).</p

Blue cotton target with adhesive film and adjoining adhesive film target in Serengeti tsetse habitat.

<p>Blue cotton target with adhesive film and adjoining adhesive film target in Serengeti tsetse habitat.</p

Catches^* of <i>G. swynnertoni</i> with unbaited and POCA-baited trapping devices made of different blue materials.

*<p>Detransformed mean daily catches. ANOVA indicates significant differences between treatments within each column; means followed by different letters are significantly different (Tukey post hoc test, P<0.05).</p

Catches^* and catch indices^** for <i>G. swynnertoni</i> normalized to an equal area for each device.

*<p>Detransformed mean daily catches.</p>**<p>Catch indices are relative to the performance of a conventional blue-black cloth targets (left column).</p><p><b>STD</b> Standard phthalogen blue cotton.</p><p><b>TURQ</b> Turquoise blue viscose/polyester.</p

Daily catches of <i>G. swynnertoni</i> and <i>G. pallidipes</i> by devices with and without adhesive film.

<p><b>pyramidal</b> pyramidal trap; <b>target</b> blue-black 1 m² target. The target and the cloth portions of traps were covered with adhesive film to compare the propensity of flies to land on the different devices. Catch rates of traps are divided into fly catches on the cloth part and those trapped in the cage of the trap. The limits of the boxes indicate the twenty-fifth and seventy-fifth percentiles, the solid line in the box is the median, the capped bars indicate the tenth and the ninetieth percentiles, and data points outside these limits are plotted as circles.</p

Daily catches of <i>G. swynnertoni</i> and <i>G. pallidipes</i> with different target types.

<p>Targets were all blue, or of equal vertical rectangles of blue and black or blue-black-blue material. Devices were covered with adhesive film to compare the propensity of flies to land on the different target types. The limits of the boxes indicate the twenty-fifth and seventy-fifth percentiles; the solid line in the box is the median; the capped bars indicate the tenth and the ninetieth percentiles, and data points outside these limits are plotted as circles.</p