↓ Skip to main content

A review of the history of research and control of Rhipicephalus (Boophilus) microplus, babesiosis and anaplasmosis in Uruguay

Overview of attention for article published in Experimental and Applied Acarology, August 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
25 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
73 Mendeley
Title
A review of the history of research and control of Rhipicephalus (Boophilus) microplus, babesiosis and anaplasmosis in Uruguay
Published in
Experimental and Applied Acarology, August 2018
DOI 10.1007/s10493-018-0278-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Cecilia Miraballes, Franklin Riet-Correa

Abstract

In Uruguay, control of Rhipicephalus microplus began in 1910. In 1941 the eradication of R. micoplus throughout the country was declared mandatory, although this attempt was unsuccessful. Since 2008 the country was divided into two regions: the south-western region, which is free of ticks; and a region of tick control that includes all departments to the north of the Rio Negro and five departments in the eastern region. In Uruguay, investigations on R. microplus, babesiosis and anaplasmosis started in 1921, and in the 1970s, studies of the epidemiology of R. microplus determined that from 2 to 3.5 generations can be produced annually and that the country is in an area of enzootic instability for babesiosis and anaplasmosis. Knowledge of tick epidemiology and of tick resistance to different acaricides led to the development of efficient methods of control or eradication, including integrated control and generational treatment. Although research results have led to a legal framework regarding R. microplus control, these measures have had variable results. This can be attributed to several factors, such as the discontinuation of the control measures, variable financial resources, changes in the dynamics of livestock movement, failure to adopt available technology for tick control by farmers, climate change, environmental alterations such as forestation and the increasing resistance of ticks to acaricides, which led to the development of multiresistant ticks. This paper reviews the history of R. microplus, babesiosis and anaplasmosis in Uruguay and proposes alternatives for their control.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 73 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 73 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 9 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 11%
Student > Bachelor 7 10%
Student > Master 6 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 7%
Other 11 15%
Unknown 27 37%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 12%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 7 10%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 7%
Immunology and Microbiology 5 7%
Environmental Science 3 4%
Other 12 16%
Unknown 32 44%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 08 August 2018.
All research outputs
#21,186,729
of 23,849,058 outputs
Outputs from Experimental and Applied Acarology
#718
of 914 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#290,720
of 332,285 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Experimental and Applied Acarology
#8
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,849,058 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 914 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.8. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 332,285 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 14 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.