ArticleParasitology research2017
In vivo efficacy of a biotherapic and eugenol formulation against Rhipicephalus microplus.
Article in Parasitology research, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Efficacy of a formulation of chlorfenvinphos and dichlorvos on Rhipicephalus microplus in vivo test in Bahia, Brazil.Tropical animal health and production · 2025Article
- Essential oils and isolated compounds for tick control: advances beyond the laboratory.Parasites & vectors · 2023Review
- Acaricidal and repellent activities of ethanol extracts of nine chinese medicinal herbs against Rhipicephalus microplus (Acari: Ixodidae).Experimental & applied acarology · 2023Article
- Acaricide resistance of Rhipicephalus decoloratus ticks collected from communal grazing cattle in South Africa.Journal of advanced veterinary and animal research · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The control of Rhipicephalus microplus is essential to prevent cattle discomfort and economic losses. However, increased resistance and acaricides inefficiency lead producers to adopt strategies that could result in the accumulation of chemical residues in meat and milk with possibilities of poisoning in animals and people. This scenario demonstrates the necessity of research into the identification of novel, effective and environmentally safe therapeutic options for cattle tick control. The objectives of this study were to develop and assess the efficacy of R. microplus biotherapic and of 5% eugenol for the control of R. microplus in artificially infested calves. Eighteen male 6-month-old Holstein calves were divided into three groups of six animals. In Group 1, the animals did not receive medication (control group); in Group 2, the animals received 1 mL of R. microplus biotherapic at dilution 6CH (centesimal Hahnemannian), orally administered twice daily. And in Group 3, they received a single application of eugenol 5% in the pour-on formulation. The median efficacy for biotherapy and eugenol 5% was respectively 10.13 and 13.97%; however, upon analyzing reproductive efficiency, it is noteworthy that the biotherapic had 45.86% efficiency and was superior to the action of eugenol (12.03%) after 37 days of treatment. The ultrastructural study provided information about the effects of R. microplus biotherapic on the ovaries of engorged females and showed disorganization in the deposition of the oocyte exochorion. The results suggest hatchability inhibition of larvae, interference in R. microplus reproduction and future possibilities for eco-friendly control of R. microplus with biotherapic 6CH.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.