Progress 06/04/15 to 05/13/20
Outputs
Target Audience:Target audience for these projects are livestock operators, beef cattle producers, cow/calf owners, dairy barns, 4H students and county agents. Changes/Problems:
Nothing Reported
What opportunities for training and professional development has the project provided?These projects provide opportunity for cattlemen, agents and 4H studies to test, evaluate and conduct fly demonstrations. Undergraduate students gained valuable skills & knowledge working closely with PI on this project. How have the results been disseminated to communities of interest?The agents are provided written reports that they share with their cooperators and others in the county. Presentations are given around the state providing updated information on the products tested. What do you plan to do during the next reporting period to accomplish the goals?
Nothing Reported
Impacts
What was accomplished under these goals?
Horn fly demonstration - Years of analysis show that there is statistical significance in every county when insecticide ear tags are used to control for horn flies. Some counties are showing optimal results with several of the ear tags but then other counties have very little efficacy when using the same ear tags. The horn fly lifecycle occurs in direct contact with cattle, adults utilize cattle for food and drink (blood) and the eggs are laid in fresh manure which is always moist despite the amount of rain. Horn fly larvae are capable of increasing developmental time when needed and can grow from egg to adult in 7 days when temperatures are above 85°F. Even if horn fly numbers are similar during a wet year when compared to a drought year, it is typically harder to control the number of horn flies with insecticides when there is optimal rain. In instances where ear tags were put in after a horn fly population have developed above threshold, it will take several weeks before the insecticide tags impact the population numbers. The data tabulated for the 7 counties in Texas completing the demonstration this year (Bowie, Cherokee, Fort Bend, Houston, Liberty, San Augustine, and Trinity) show effective horn fly control achieved with all the insecticide ear tags used, organophosphates, pyrethroids and abamectin products, and the pyrethroid and abamectin VetCaps and a pyrethroid spray. In previous years, the pyrethroids and organophosphates would lose their effectiveness around the 14-15th week on average but this year only the pyrethroid spray lost their effectiveness at that time. The GardStar, Python Strips and Optimizer ear tags started to show loss of effectiveness around week 16 and the CyLence ear tags at week 20. Loss of effectiveness is recorded when horn fly numbers average over 100 per side in a week. Horn fly averages per side stayed below 100 for all the ear tags and VetCap treatments from June until October 31 but the permethrin spray averaged at just over with 104 horn flies per side. The spray results are typical to show more variation due to the need to be reapplied throughout the fly season, generally speaking the results were well below the threshold of 100 per side every week except for weeks 6, 16, 17, 18 and 19 (which was the final week of counting). This year's results were very good for almost all the treatments in each county for the whole 21-week study period and fly numbers stayed below 200 for all of the study period for all the herds, except for the permethrin spray and GardStar plus herds (which were both from the same county). Overall average percent control by insecticide treatment showed good to excellent results, minus the permethrin spray which ended up with fair results due to no longer controlling the population after week 16. Control percentages ranged from 94% with Warrior to 45% with the permethrin spray. The one tag per animal Python Magnum showed excellent results with 91% control. The VetCap treatments had varying results, with the lambda-cy showing great results with 86% control but the new abamectin product only produced 67% average control rate. The overall sample size for this year's project was much less than previously due to unprecedented rainfall in much of the eastern part of Texas. Hurricane Harvey impacted many producers and agents that had signed up for the project this year and their data was not recordable. House fly demonstration - The total number of dead house flies collected from the twenty-two counties that participated in the house fly project equaled an estimated 635,120 dead house flies. The three baits tested collected 18,413 total flies with QuickBayt, 12,909 total flies with Golden Malrin and 18,803 flies with QuikStrike. The pheromone traps collected 360,865 house flies with the Fly Terminator traps, 185,975 flies with the Fly Relief traps and 38,155 flies with the Captivator traps. The three traps used were Fly Terminator, Captivator, and Fly Relief. The traps are designed to attract house flies with a pheromone and cause the flies to be trapped within the device upon entering. Therefore, total house fly collections always surpass the baits. This year the baits were placed out in small plastic tubs instead of the milk jug bait stations and results show the collects to be higher but there is no way to tell if that was from the collecting containers. This year the number of fly catches varied from the previous year with QuikStrike bringing in the highest number of dead flies but only beating QuickBayt by less than 400 flies. This year all the counties were given each of the baits, QuickBayt, QuikStrike and Golden Malrin to test in a single barn just like last year. The bait collections were higher this year when compared to 2016's numbers but the pheromone traps collected roughly 100,000 more flies. Collective state results show all of the trap options to be effective, this year the Golden Malrin had the lowest numbers when compared to the other baits, same as last year. The most successful bait used was QuikStrike but only just barely. The non-insecticidal traps showed excellent numbers (584,996) again and accurate results when changed monthly. In practical settings, these traps are not changed as frequently as they should be and their effectiveness diminishes when the water and pheromone attractant run dry.
Publications
|
Progress 10/01/15 to 09/30/16
Outputs
Target Audience:The target audience for my projects consist of livestock owners, beef cattle producers, cow/calf producers, and 4-H students and the county extension agents. Changes/Problems:
Nothing Reported
What opportunities for training and professional development has the project provided?Producers get hands on experience with horn fly products and house fly baits. 4-H students get an understanding of the need to control for house flies in a barn setting and various products. How have the results been disseminated to communities of interest?Results are written up for the county agent and they distribute as needed. One hour presentaitons are provided on fly control and the results of these projects are presented and discussed. What do you plan to do during the next reporting period to accomplish the goals?Conduct state-wide demonstrations.
Impacts
What was accomplished under these goals?
Horn fly demonstration - Years of analysis show that there is statistical significance in every county when insecticide ear tags are used to control for horn flies. Some counties are showing optimal results with several of the ear tags but then other counties have very little efficacy when using the same ear tags. The horn fly lifecycle occurs in direct contact with cattle, adults utilize cattle for food and drink (blood) and the eggs are laid in fresh manure which is always moist despite the amount of rain. Horn fly larvae are capable of increasing developmental time when needed and can grow from egg to adult in 7 days when temperatures are above 85°F. Even if horn fly numbers are similar during a wet year when compared to a drought year, it is typically harder to control the number of horn flies with insecticides when there is rain. In instances where ear tags were put in after a horn fly population have developed above threshold, it will take several weeks before the insecticide tags impact the population numbers. The data tabulated for all 14 counties in Texas partaking in the demonstration this year (Anderson, Cherokee, Fannin, Fayette, Houston, Liberty, Milam, Montgomery, Palo Pinto, Panola, Shelby, Smith, Trinity, and Williamson) show similar horn fly control achieved with all the insecticide ear tags used, organophosphates, pyrethroids and abamectin products, and the pyrethroid VetCaps and a pyrethroid pour on. In previous years, the pyrethroids and organophosphates would lose their effectiveness around the 14-15th week on average but this year only the pour on and VetCaps lost their effectiveness. But do to the multiple application methods, these herds were retreated and brought back under control. This year's horn fly numbers were respectively lower when compared to last year and all three insecticide classes kept horn fly numbers below 150 per side except for the GardStar Plus tag which averaged over 171 horn flies. This year's results were very good for almost all the treatments in each county for the whole 24-week study period and fly numbers stayed below 200 for most of the study period for most the herds. At about week 16 the populations start to increase but at week 14 the CyLence tags were no longer doing an effective job and were removed by week 16. At week 16 the XP820 strips started to lose their effectiveness until week 20. This year the majority of the pyrethroid tags and the organophosphate tags held up very well for the whole 24 weeks, except for the Corathon and Python Strips. The GardStar, CyLence and Warrior tags had high readings (above 150) for the first 9 weeks but the GardStar and Warrior tags were able to reclaim control after that and CyLence did for a few weeks. The VetGun treatment was reapplied every 6-7 weeks but reached above threshold a few times throughout the study period and usually right before the next scheduled treatment but this was pretty much only in Houston County. The control horn fly numbers ranged between 2.2 and 765 per side. The overall average was 182.88 horn flies per side with a minimum of 67.99 at week 1 and a maximum of 313.96 at week 19. House fly demonstration - The total number of dead house flies collected from Cherokee County equaled an estimated 3,333. The three baits tested collected low amounts with QuikStrike bait collecting the most at 140. A total of 105 dead house flies were collected with QuickBayt and 88 house flies were collected with the Golden Malrin. The Captivator traps collected 3000 dead house flies. The results have shown that the baits were not that effective, especially since many times the spot cards had more spots than flies in the baits. QuikStrike had the most but I would not say any of the baits really did a good job. In addition to the baits, non-insecticidal traps were used. The three traps used were Fly Terminator, Captivator, and Fly Relief. The traps are designed to attract house flies with a pheromone and cause the flies to be trapped within the device upon entering. This year the number of fly catches varied from the previous year with QuickBayt bringing in the highest number of dead flies but only beating QuikStrike by 1,061 flies. This year all the counties were given each of the baits, QuickBayt, QuikStrike and Golden Malrin to test in a single barn. Overall QuickBayt collected 14,457 house flies from 20 counties, QuikStrike collected 13,396 house flies from 20 counties, Golden Malrin collected 9,291 house flies from 20 counties and the alternative pheromone traps collected 489,036 house flies from 16 counties. The bait collections were lower this year when compared to 2015's numbers but the pheromone traps collected roughly 3 times as many flies! Collective state results show all of the trap options to be effective, this year the Golden Malrin had the lowest numbers when compared to the other baits, same as last year. The most successful bait used was QuickBayt. The QuickBayt, which is the newest chemical for house fly baits but resistance has been noted in laboratory testing and will be seen in natural populations with the overuse of the bait, worked effectively on average this years. The non-insecticidal traps showed excellent numbers (489,036) again and accurate results when changed monthly. In practical settings, these traps are not changed as frequently as they should be and their effectiveness diminishes when the water and pheromone attractant run dry. One major down fall to using the baits is the possibility of losing fly carcasses that are blown out of the traps or flies that have built up tolerance to the baits and take longer to die or come back to life. This will be examined further in the laboratory in the upcoming months. In addition, traps with top openings instead of bottom openings will be utilized this year to help maintain the fly carcasses within the traps. Laboratory tests conducted this year show QuickBayt to not be as effective on local Erath house fly populations and we could be seeing this around the state. Although they recorded the largest number of house flies, the numbers were lower than in 2015. Laboratory results show QuikStrike to be fast acting but recovery from the product has been observed.
Publications
|
Progress 06/04/15 to 09/30/15
Outputs
Target Audience:Target audience includes Texas cattlemen, Texas dairyment and livestock barn owners. Changes/Problems:
Nothing Reported
What opportunities for training and professional development has the project provided?Training cattlemen, dairymen and livestock owners on the proper and best management practices needed for filth flies that effect livestock and humans associated with livestock. How have the results been disseminated to communities of interest?Deomonstration projects are conducted with conjunction with the county agent and in addition to presentations I conduct throughout the state of Texas, the agent will present information from their county and the state as a whole. What do you plan to do during the next reporting period to accomplish the goals?
Nothing Reported
Impacts
What was accomplished under these goals?
Horn Flies The results show some of the ear tags being much more effective than others, while some of the ear tags did not give complete control for the entire summer months when horn fly densities are very high. The highest number of horn flies on average encountered by the control herds was 1070 per one side at week 17 with the lowest number being 15 during week 1. The highest recorded number of horn flies was in Houston County at 1000 horn flies per side on multiple animals. When all the control herds are combined and averaged for the 24 week study period, the highest on average number of horn flies per side is 310 and the lowest is 51 horn flies per side. The tagged herds recorded an average high number of 385 horn flies with Python at week 24, 785 with Magnum at week 16 before removal, 212 with Python strips at week 21 72.6 with XP820 at week 24, 369 with Optimizer at week 24, 155 with the VetGun at week 18, 106.7 with Warrior at week 20, and 455 with Gardstar at week 24 91. This all varies by county as well and some counties will get better results with the same tags. Data is presented below in a graph showing the average number of horn flies present per side of cattle by ear tag and by insecticidal class. The highest recorded number of horn flies (785 per side) on a tagged herd was in Houston County with the Magnum tag. This indicates the tags were clearly not effective. These results indicate that horn fly control is necessary throughout Texas during the fly season to ensure proper growth and milk production and economic prosperity. The average threshold for economic loss due to horn fly feeding is 200 horn flies / animal. This study involves counting the number of horn flies present on one side of the animal, therefore even at the lowest week the horn fly population was averaging 100 horn flies / animal, not over the threshold but enough to upset and aggravate the animals. The tagged animals recorded lower numbers of horn flies throughout the majority of the fly season. The ear tags are only labeled to be effect against horn flies for five months, the tags were left in for 24 weeks in most counties and many times the tags were no longer controlling the population. All of the classes of insecticide tags provided effective control throughout the majority of the treatment range. When combined, the pyrethroid tags recorded a maximum of 342 horn flies, a minimum of 5 horn flies and an average of 122 horn flies per side throughout the study period. The organophosphate tags recorded a maximum of 206 horn flies, a minimum of 11 horn flies and an average of 90 horn flies per side throughout the study period. The newer class of insecticide available in ear tags, abamectin, had an average maximum number of 72.6 that was recorded on the last day of the study period and a minimum 3. In addition the average number of horn flies recorded per one side of the animal was 28. The VetGun recorded a maximum number of 155 horn flies, a minimum of 14 horn flies and an average of 58.8 horn flies per side. The recorded results were a bit higher this year in some counties and I am sure this is attributed to the precipitation observed throughout most of Texas. The highest numbers were being recorded in September and October, again. Most of the ear tags were able to control the horn fly populations through September but after that the organophosphate and pyrethroid tags were no longer effective. On average the ear tags percentage of control ranged from 91% with the XP820 abamectin tags to 45% with the Magnum tags. The other tags were recorded at 85.24% for Warrior, 72.96% for PYthon, 71.8% for Python Strips, 59.9% for Optimizer, 58.8% for the VetGun, and 50.8% for GardStar. A few of the tags did not show as effective results as in previous years and I am curious to see if this trend continues in counties that have been a part of the project for a few years. House Flies The results have shown some of the baits to be more effective than others, with QuickBayt being the most consistent but all of the baits work respectively the same. In addition to the baits, non-insecticidal traps were used. The three traps used were Fly Terminator, Captivator, and Fly Relief. The traps are designed to attract house flies with a pheromone and cause the flies to be trapped within the device upon entering. This year the number of fly catches varied from the previous year with QuikStrike bringing in the highest number of dead flies but only beating QuickBayt by 1,600 flies. This year all the counties were given each of the baits, QuickBayt, QuikStike and Golden Malrin to test in a single barn. Overall QuikStrike collected 16,859 house flies from 21 counties, QuickBayt collected 15,208 house flies from 21 counties, Golden Malrin collected 10,198 house flies from 21 counties and the alternative pheromone traps collected 178,377 house flies from 18 counties. Results show all of the trap options to be effective, this year the Golden Malrin had the lowest numbers when compared to the other baits but previously QuikStrike was getting the lowest collections. The most successful bait used was QuikStrike. The QuickBayt, which is the newest chemical for house fly baits but resistance has been noted in laboratory testing and will be seen in natural populations with the overuse of the bait, worked well but not as effectively on average as previous years. The non-insecticidal traps showed excellent numbers (178,377) again and accurate results when changed on a monthly basis. In practical settings these traps are not changed as frequently as they should be and their effectiveness diminishes when the water and pheromone attractant run dry. One major down fall to using the baits is the possibility of losing fly carcasses that are blown out of the traps or flies that have built up tolerance to the baits and take longer to die or come back to life. This will be examined further in the laboratory in the upcoming months. In addition, traps with top openings instead of bottom openings will be utilized this year to help maintain the fly carcasses within the traps.
Publications
|
|