Article Text

Download PDFPDF
Reduced efficacy of ivermectin against Ostertagia in a Dutch cattle herd
  1. Menno Holzhauer, inititator, practical part of the study writing paper1,
  2. Coen Hegeman, laboratory activities2 and
  3. Deborah van Doorn, parasitology, set-up of study, statistics3
  1. 1 Ruminant Health Department, GD Animal Health, P.O. Box 9 7400 AA, Deventer, The Netherlands
  2. 2 Laboratory GD Animal Health, GD Animal Health, P.O. Box 9 7400 AA, Deventer, The Netherlands
  3. 3 Department Infectious Diseases, Vet Faculty, Utrecht University, Yalelaan 1, 3584 CL, Utrecht, The Netherlands
  1. Correspondence to DVM, PhD Menno Holzhauer SR, MH; m.holzhauer{at}


A pilot study on reduced ivermectin efficacy against Ostertagia ostertagi following the detection of a high number of strongyle-type eggs in a 1.5-year-old bull during the first part of the pasturing period in 2015 was conducted. This finding was remarkable because of the pasturing history, treatment history and time after turnout (June). The study involved one beef cattle herd and followed as far as possible the World Association for the Advancement of Veterinary Parasitology guidelines regarding the faecal egg count reduction test. We observed poor ivermectin efficacy (65%) compared with the expected efficacy of >95%. This also has consequences for practitioners, who should ensure the correct application of anthelmintics and perform repeated faecal examinations following the use of parasitical agents for persistent problems. Our finding also should have consequences for the pharmaceutical industry: the administration of registered anthelmintics via the most efficacious route is preferable.

  • Anthelmintics
  • Cattle
  • Clinical practice
  • Diagnostics
  • Drug administration
  • Endoparasites
View Full Text

Statistics from


  • Contributors This pilot-study has been performed with contributions of all authors (MH: clinical work, prep manuscript; CH: laboratorial work and manuscript; DD: upset study, statistical work and manuscript).

  • Competing interests None declared.

  • Ethics approval The study was approved by the internal GD Ethical Committee for Clinical studies

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.