|
Registro Completo |
|
Biblioteca(s): |
Embrapa Pecuária Sudeste. |
|
Data corrente: |
13/03/2008 |
|
Data da última atualização: |
27/02/2023 |
|
Tipo da produção científica: |
Artigo em Periódico Indexado |
|
Autoria: |
SILVA, A. M.; ALENCAR, M. M. de; REGITANO, L. C. de A.; OLIVEIRA, M. C. de S.; BARIONI JUNIOR, W. |
|
Afiliação: |
ANA MARY DA SILVA, UFSCAR; MAURICIO MELLO DE ALENCAR, CPPSE; LUCIANA CORREIA DE ALMEIDA REGITANO, CPPSE; MARCIA CRISTINA DE SENA OLIVEIRA, CPPSE; WALDOMIRO BARIONI JUNIOR, CPPSE. |
|
Título: |
Artificial infestation of Boophilus microplus in beef cattle heifers of four genetic groups. |
|
Ano de publicação: |
2007 |
|
Fonte/Imprenta: |
Genetics and Molecular Biology, v. 30, n. 4, p. 1150- 1155, 2007. |
|
DOI: |
https://doi.org/10.1590/S1415-47572007000600020 |
|
Idioma: |
Inglês |
|
Conteúdo: |
Resistance of beef cattle heifers to the cattle tick Boophilus microplus was evaluated by artificial infestation of 66 beef cattle heifers of the following genetic groups: 16 Nelore (NE), 18 Canchim x Nelore (CN), 16 Angus x Nelore (AN) and 16 Simmental x Nelore (SN). The animals, with a mean age of 16.5 months, were maintained with no chemical tick control in a Brachiaria decumbens pasture. Four artificial infestations with 20,000 B. microplus larvae were carried out 14 days apart and from day 18 to day 22 of each infestation the number of engorged female ticks (> 4.5 mm) was counted on the left side of each heifer. Data were analyzed as the percentage of return (PR = percentage of ticks counted relative to the number infested), transformed to (PR)¼, and as log10 (Cij + 1), in which Cij is the number of ticks in each infestation, using the least squares method with a model that included the effects of genetic group (GG), animal within GG (error a), infestation number (I), GG x I and the residual (error b). Results indicated a significant GG x I interaction, because AN and SN heifers had a higher percentage of return than CN and NE heifers, while CN heifers showed a higher percentage of return than the NE heifers only in infestations 3 and 4. Transformed percentages of return were NE = 0.35 ± 0.06, AN = 0.89 ± 0.06, CN = 0.54 ± 0.05 and SN = 0.85 ± 0.06. |
|
Palavras-Chave: |
Tick resistance. |
|
Thesagro: |
Carrapato; Cruzamento; Gado de Corte; Resistência. |
|
Thesaurus Nal: |
Beef cattle; Crossbreds. |
|
Categoria do assunto: |
G Melhoramento Genético |
|
URL: |
https://ainfo.cnptia.embrapa.br/digital/bitstream/CPPSE/17548/1/PROCIMMA2007.00425.pdf
|
|
Marc: |
LEADER 02199naa a2200265 a 4500
001 1038036
005 2023-02-27
008 2007 bl uuuu u00u1 u #d
024 7 $ahttps://doi.org/10.1590/S1415-47572007000600020$2DOI
100 1 $aSILVA, A. M.
245 $aArtificial infestation of Boophilus microplus in beef cattle heifers of four genetic groups.$h[electronic resource]
260 $c2007
520 $aResistance of beef cattle heifers to the cattle tick Boophilus microplus was evaluated by artificial infestation of 66 beef cattle heifers of the following genetic groups: 16 Nelore (NE), 18 Canchim x Nelore (CN), 16 Angus x Nelore (AN) and 16 Simmental x Nelore (SN). The animals, with a mean age of 16.5 months, were maintained with no chemical tick control in a Brachiaria decumbens pasture. Four artificial infestations with 20,000 B. microplus larvae were carried out 14 days apart and from day 18 to day 22 of each infestation the number of engorged female ticks (> 4.5 mm) was counted on the left side of each heifer. Data were analyzed as the percentage of return (PR = percentage of ticks counted relative to the number infested), transformed to (PR)¼, and as log10 (Cij + 1), in which Cij is the number of ticks in each infestation, using the least squares method with a model that included the effects of genetic group (GG), animal within GG (error a), infestation number (I), GG x I and the residual (error b). Results indicated a significant GG x I interaction, because AN and SN heifers had a higher percentage of return than CN and NE heifers, while CN heifers showed a higher percentage of return than the NE heifers only in infestations 3 and 4. Transformed percentages of return were NE = 0.35 ± 0.06, AN = 0.89 ± 0.06, CN = 0.54 ± 0.05 and SN = 0.85 ± 0.06.
650 $aBeef cattle
650 $aCrossbreds
650 $aCarrapato
650 $aCruzamento
650 $aGado de Corte
650 $aResistência
653 $aTick resistance
700 1 $aALENCAR, M. M. de
700 1 $aREGITANO, L. C. de A.
700 1 $aOLIVEIRA, M. C. de S.
700 1 $aBARIONI JUNIOR, W.
773 $tGenetics and Molecular Biology$gv. 30, n. 4, p. 1150- 1155, 2007.
Download
Esconder MarcMostrar Marc Completo |
|
Registro original: |
Embrapa Pecuária Sudeste (CPPSE) |
|
