Acta Parasitologica

, Volume 64, Issue 3, pp 456–463 | Cite as

Evaluation and Correlation of Multiple Anthelmintic Resistances to Gastrointestinal Nematodes Using Different Fecal Egg Count Reduction Methods in Small Ruminants of Punjab, India

  • Prashant PawarEmail author
  • Lachhman Das SinglaEmail author
  • Paramjit Kaur
  • Mandeep Singh Bal
  • Mohamad Javed
Original Paper



Concordance of multiple anthelmintic resistances for gastrointestinal nematodes in small ruminants by three average-based and two individually based fecal egg count reduction (FECR) tests was evaluated and corrected.


Sheep and goats (≥ 8 weeks) from five farms were randomly assigned to three treatment groups (I, II, III; n = 10 per group) and one untreated control group (Group IV; n = 10). Group I received fenbendazole at the dose rate of 5 and 10 mg/kg, Group II received ivermectin at the dose rate of 0.2 and 0.4 mg/kg, and Group III received levamisole at the dose rate of 8 and 12 mg/kg body weight orally for sheep and goat, respectively. Three average-based methods of FECR (FECR1, FECR2 and FECR3) and two individually based methods of FECR (iFECR1 and iFECR2) were evaluated.


For fenbendazole resistance, Spearman correlation coefficient for FECR1 was non-significant with other formulae, but for FECR2 with FECR3, FECR3 with iFECR1 and iFECR1 with iFECR2 coincidence was significant at 1%, while for FECR2 with iFECR2 and FECR3 with iFECR2 it was significant at 5%. Spearman correlation coefficients for ivermectin resistance were significant at 1% level and for levamisole it showed significant coincidence at 1% for FECR1 with FECR2 and iFECR1, FECR2 with FECR3 and iFECR1, and iFECR1 with iFECR2, while for FECR1 with FECR3 and iFECR2 coincidence was significant at 5% level. Concordance of kappa values indicated that the coincidence of the prevalence of anthelmintic resistance (95% CI) among the five farms was non-significant.


Concordance between the standard average-based FECR and individually based methods suggests that either method could be applied to small ruminant farms.


Anthelmintic resistance FECR Goats Multiple anthelmintics Punjab Sheep 



Authors are thankful to the authorities of GADVASU, Ludhiana for providing funds under RKVY-7 D-I project. “Epidemiology of gastrointestinal parasitic infections in relation to anthelmintic resistance in sheep and goat in Punjab state” to carry out the research work. Thanks are due to Dr. Kiran Malhotra, Associate Professor English, for checking the manuscript to improve the quality of English language.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interests regarding the publication of this research paper.


  1. 1.
    Buttar BS, Rai HS, Singh NK, Jyoti Haque M, Rath SS (2012) Emergence of anthelmintic resistance in an organized sheep farm in Punjab. J Vet Parasitol 26:69–71Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Cabaret J, Berrag V (2004) Faecal egg count reduction test for assessing anthelmintic efficacy: average versus individually based estimations. Vet Parasitol 12:105–113CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Coles GC, Bauer C, Borgsteede FHM, Geerts S, Klei TR, Taylor MA, Waller PJ (1992) World association for the advancement of veterinary parasitology (WAAVP) methods for the detection of anthelmintic resistance in nematodes of veterinary importance. Vet Parasitol 44:35–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    DAHF (2012) 19 Livestock Census-2012 all India report available from: Accessed 23 Dec 2017
  5. 5.
    Das M, Singh S (2005) Anthelmintic resistance to nematodes in sheep and goat farms in Hissar. J Vet Parasitol 19:103–106Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Dash K, Hall K, Barger IA (1988) The role of arithmetic and geometric worm egg counts in faecal egg count reduction test and in monitoring strategic drenching programs in sheep. Aust Vet J 65:66–68CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Dhanalakshmi H, Jagannath MS, Placid ED (2003) Multiple anthelmintic resistance in gastrointestinal nematodes of sheep. J Vet Parasitol 17:89–91Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Easwaran C, Harikrishnan TJ, Raman M (2009) Multiple anthelmintic resistance in gastrointestinal nematodes in Southern India. Vet Arch 79:611–620Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Garg R, Yadav CL (2009) Diagnosis of benzimidazole resistance in Haemonchus contortus using allele-specific PCR technique. Indian J Anim Sci 79:982–985Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Gill BS (1996) Anthelmintic resistance in India. Vet Parasitol 63:173–176CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Gupta SK, Singla LD (2012) Diagnostic trends in parasitic diseases of animals. In: Gupta RP, Garg SR, Nehra V, Lather D (eds) Veterinary diagnostics: current trends. Satish Serial Publishing House, New Delhi, pp 81–112Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kettle PR, Vlassoff A, Reid TC, Horton CT (1983) A survey of nematode control measures used by milking goat farmers and of anthelmintic resistance on their farms. NZ Vet J 31:139–143CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kochapakdee S, Pandey VS, Pralomkarn W, Choldumrongkul S, Ngampongsai W, Lawpetchara A (1995) Anthelmintic resistance in goats in southern Thailand. Vet Res 137:124–125Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Makvana VN, Veer S (2009) Emergence of anthelmintic resistance in nematode parasites of sheep at an organized farm in Gujarat. J Vet Parasitol 23:171–173Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Martin SW, Meek AH, Willeberg P (1997) Epidemiologá Veterinaria. Principiosy Mètodos. Editorial Acribia, Zaragoza, Espanã, pp. 83–85Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    McLeod RS (2004) Economic impact of worm infections in small ruminants in South East Asia, India and Australia. In: Sani RA, Gray GD, Baker RL (eds) Worm control of small ruminants in tropical Asia, vol 113. ACIAR, Australia, pp 23–33Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Navarro Fierro R (1987) Introduccioǹ a la bioestadśtica. Ed.McGrawHill, Mèxico DF, Mèxico, pp. 30–37Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Presidente PJA (1985) Methods for detection of nematode resistance to anthelmintics. In: Anderson N, Waller PJ (eds) Resistance in nematodes to anthelmintic drugs. CSIRO, Melbourne, pp 13–28Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Roos MH, Kwa MSG, Grant WN (1995) New genetic and practical implications of selection for anthelmintic resistance in parasitic nematodes. Parasitol Today 11:148–150CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Sankar M (2003) Studies on benzimidazole resistance in Haemonchus contortus in sheep. M.V.Sc thesis submitted to Deemed University, Indian Veterinary Research Institute, Izatnagar, IndiaGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Sankar M (2007) Molecular characterization of β-Tubulin gene in benzimidazole resistant and susceptible populations of common gastrointestinal nematodes in small ruminants. Thesis Ph.D. Deemed University, Indian Veterinary Research Institute, IzatnagarGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Singh D, Swarnkar CP, Khan FA, Srivastava CP, Bhagwan PSK (1995) Resistance to albendazole in gastrointestinal nematodes of sheep. J Vet Parasitol 9:95–98Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Singh D, Swarnkar CP, Srivastava CP, Bhagwan PSK, Dimri U (1996) Haemonchus contortus resistance to rafoxanide in sheep. Indian J Vet Parasitol 10:53–156Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Singh E, Kaur P, Singla LD, Bal MS (2017) Prevalence of gastrointestinal parasitism in small ruminants in western zone of Punjab, India. Vet World 10:61–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Singh R. 2015. Epidemiology of gastrointestinal parasites of sheep and goats in central plane zone of Punjab. M.V.Sc. thesis submitted to the Guru Angad Dev Veterinary and Animal Sciences University, Ludhiana. pp 1–72Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Singh R, Bal MS, Singla LD, Kaur P (2017) Detection of anthelmintic resistance in sheep and goat against fenbendazole by faecal egg count reduction test. J Parasit Dis 41:463–466CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Soulsby EJL (1982) Helminths, arthropods and protozoa of domesticated animals, 7th edn. The english language book society, Bailliere, Tindall, London, pp 763–777Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Srivastava VK, Kumar PN, Khanna PN, Singh M (1995) Gastrointestinal nematodiasis and drug-resistance in sheep. Indian Vet J 72:14–16Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Swarnkar CP, Khan FA, Singh D, Bhagwan PSK (1999) Further studies on anthelmintic resistance in sheep at an organized farm in arid region of Rajasthan. Vet Parasitol 82:81–84CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Swarnkar CP, Sanyal PK, Singh D, Khan FA, Bhagwan PSK (2001) Anthelmintic resistance on an organized sheep farm in India. Trop Anim Health Prod 33:305–312CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Tiwari J, Kumar S, Kolte AP, Swarnkar CP, Singh D, Pathak KML (2006) Detection of benzimidazole resistance in Haemonchus contortus using RFLP-PCR technique. Vet Parasitol 138:301–307CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Torgerson PR, Schnyder M, Hertzberg H (2005) Detection of anthelmintic resistance: a comparison of mathematical techniques. Vet Parasitol 128:291–298CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Torres-Acosta JFJ, Aguilar-Caballero AJ, Bigot C, Le Hoste H, Canul-Ku HL, Santos-Ricalde R, Gutiérrez-Segura I (2005) Comparing different formulae to test for gastrointestinal nematode resistance to benzimidazoles in small holder goat farms in Mexico. Vet Parasitol 134:241–248CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Uppal RP, Yadav CL, Godara P, Rana ZS (1992) Multiple anthelmintic resistance in a field strain of Haemonchus contortus in goats. Vet Res Commun 16:195–198CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Varshney TR, Singh YP (1976) A note on development of resistance of Haemonchus contortus worms against phenothiazine and thiabendazole in sheep. Indian J Anim Sci 46:666–668Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Waller PJ (1997) Anthelmintic resistance. Vet Parasitol 72:391–412CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Waller PJ, Chandrawathani P (2005) Haemonchus contortus: parasite problem No. 1 from Tropics - Polar Circle: Problems and prospects for control based on epidemiology. Trop Biomed 22:131–137Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Wood IB, Amaral NK, Bairden K, Duncan JL, Kassai Y, Malone JB Jr., Pankavich JA, Reinecke RK, Slocombe O, Taylor SM, Vercruysse J (1995) World association for the advancement of veterinary parasitology (W.A.A.V.P.) second edition of guidelines for evaluating the efficacy of anthelmintics in ruminants (bovine, ovine, caprine) Vet Parasitol 58:181–213Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Yadav CL (1990) Fenbendazole resistance in Haemonchus contortus of sheep. Vet Rec 126:586PubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Yadav CL, Ghorui SK, Singh BP, Sharma MC (1996) Benzimidazole resistance in Haemonchus contortus of sheep and goats in Uttar Pradesh. J Vet Parasitol 10:47–51Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Yadav CL, Kumar R, Uppal RP, Verma SP (1995) Multiple anthelmintic resistance in Haemonchus contortus on a sheep farm in India. Vet Parasitol 60:355–360CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Yadav CL, Uppal RP, Kalra S (1993) An outbreak of haemonchosis associated with anthelmintic resistance in sheep. Int J Parasitol 23:411–413CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Witold Stefański Institute of Parasitology, Polish Academy of Sciences 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Veterinary Parasitology, College of Veterinary ScienceGuru Angad Dev Veterinary and Animal Sciences UniversityLudhianaIndia
  2. 2.Animal Disease Research CenterCollege of Veterinary Science Guru Angad Dev Veterinary and Animal Sciences UniversityLudhianaIndia
  3. 3.Department of Mathematics, Statistics and PhysicsPunjab Agricultural UniversityLudhianaIndia

Personalised recommendations