Brasil
Brazilian Archives of Biology and Technology
Sumário Anterior Atual Seguinte
Sumário
Article - One Health • Braz. arch. biol. technol. 69 • 2026 • https://doi.org/10.1590/1678-4324-2026250646 linkcopy

Open-access Investigation of Control Practices for Rhipicephalus microplus in the Northwest Region of Paraná State, Brazil

AuthorshipSCIMAGO INSTITUTIONS RANKINGS

Abstract

Cattle farming is an important economic sector in Brazil, but it is impacted by the cattle tick, requiring necessary control measures by cattle farmers. This article presents the results of research carried out in three municipalities in the Northwest Region of the State of Paraná, Brazil, regarding the practices used by slaughter and dairy farmers to control Rhipicephalus microplus. The geographical delimitation of this research was the Local Agricultural Health Unit (ULSA) of the Paraná Agricultural Defense Agency - ADAPAR, Umuarama-PR Region, which includes the municipalities of Perobal, Umuarama, and Xambrê. 55 Slaughter and Dairy properties were selected, with data collected through a questionnaire that addresses questions about control practices, investigating the classes of acaricides used, their associations, dosages, and application intervals. The results indicated that the replacement of acaricides is practiced by 93% of livestock farmers, on average, every 184 days. The combination of acaricides in the same application is practiced by 33% of livestock farmers. The practice of additional dosage to the product dosages is carried out, in the order of 26% in Slaughter and 41% in Milk. Spearman's correlation demonstrated that the lineage of the breeds in each activity influences the amount of annual applications and is above that indicated by strategic control in both activities. The herds are not free of ticks, showing that the practices employed by livestock farmers do not promote effective control of R. microplus.

Keywords:
Cattle farming; Cattle tick; Management practices.

HIGHLIGHTS

Replacement of products in treatments is carried out by 93% of livestock farmers.

The combination of acaricides products in the same application is practiced by 33% of livestock farmers.

There is a practice of adding to the product dosages in 26% of the Slaughter activity and 41% of the Milk activity.

The lineage of the breeds used in each activity, Slaughter or Milk, influences the number of annual applications for controlling Rhipicephalus Microplus.

GRAPHIC ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION

Rhipicephalus microplus is the tick species of greatest interest to the scientific community due to its impacts on public health and the economy [1].

All cattle breeds can be infested by R. microplus, however, Bos indicus (zebu) of African origin has greater resistance, while Bos taurus (taurine) of European origin is more susceptible to infestations [2].

To minimize the impacts of R. microplus on herds, the most common form of control used by livestock farmers is through chemical acaricides, which have promoted the development of resistance to the mite regarding the active ingredients contained in the products [3]. One of the practices employed by livestock farmers to break the cycle of tick resistance is the replacement of products administered for control [3,4].

Resistance is an evolutionary response of the mite against its elimination [5]. Treatment eliminates susceptible individuals from the population, but at the same time, contributes to the maintenance of those who have become resistant [6]. The greater the number of applications with the same active ingredient, the more resistant individuals are selected, increasingly reducing its effectiveness, promoting infestations [7].

Research into the development of acaricides using active plant ingredients has been tested in the stages of the reproductive cycle of R. microplus, such as those developed by our research group with purple guava (Psidium rufum), Brazilian pepper tree (Schinus terebinthifolius), bay laurel (Laurus nobilis L.), pau-d´alho (Gallesia integrifolia) e ginger bush (Tetradenia riparia), thus proposing new bioinsecticides [8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15]. These studies have shown themselves to be an important hope for cattle farming through sustainable control of the cattle tick, with the potential to reduce the costs incurred by cattle farmers in treatments and minimize environmental impacts on human and animal health, in addition to highlighting the importance of scientific research for compliance with the United Nations 2030 Agenda regarding Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) 2, 3, 12 and 15.

Cattle farming is one of the economic pillars of the Northwest Region of the State of Paraná, with 2.71 million cattle and Paraná with 8.77 million [16, 17] and the municipalities covered in this research, Perobal, Umuarama and Xambrê, total 208,246 cattle, of which 176,853 are for slaughter and 31,393 for dairy production [17], which demonstrates the importance of cattle farming for these locations.

R. microplus has caused significant financial losses in cattle farming. The estimated annual cost of acaricides for controlling R. microplus in the municipalities of Perobal, Umuarama, and Xambrê alone is around US$1.54 million. In Paraná state, the estimate is US$62.305 million. Considering Brazil as a whole, the estimated annual cost is US$1.733 billion [18].

In addition to the financial losses caused by infestations, the importance of controlling this parasite for animal health and well-being is highlighted for One Health, which integrates public health in relation to acaricide residues in meat and milk, risks of human contamination in the handling of chemicals [19, 20], the environmental dimension in relation to the development of acaricide resistance, water and soil contamination [21] and health and animal welfare, from the perspective of new social concepts, such as Law No. 9,605, of February 12, 1998 (amended by Law No. 14,064, of September 29, 2020).

Given the increasing difficulties related to the effectiveness of cattle tick control methods, it is essential to understand the strategies adopted by rural producers in managing infestations. In this context, the present study aimed to investigate the control practices of R. microplus employed by livestock farmers in the municipalities of Perobal, Umuarama, and Xambrê, in the State of Paraná, Brazil, aiming to contribute to the improvement of control strategies and the sustainability of meat and milk production in the region.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The geographical delimitation of this research was the Local Agricultural Health Unit (ULSA) of the Paraná Agricultural Defense Agency - ADAPAR, Umuarama-PR Region, which encompasses three municipalities: Perobal, Umuarama and Xambrê, Paraná, Brazil. The municipalities include 2,257 properties with cattle farming activities, 419 in Perobal, 1,211 in Umuarama, and 627 in Xambrê [22].

The baseline variables for this study were the acaricides used by livestock farmers for tick control and the average market price per 100 kg of animal weight [18], totaling 135 acaricide products sold in the municipalities of Perobal, Umuarama, and Xambrê, Paraná, Brazil.

Seven outliers (products) with prices ≤ US$0.6139 per application per 100 kg and a distance greater than 1.5 x IQR (interquartile range) from the median were excluded from the sample calculation (Ciclorfós® Plus 200 mL, Exzolt® 250 mL, 1 L, and 5 L, Onix® 250 mL, Texvet Max 1 L, and Tick Gard 1 L). Of the 128 products in the sample, a normality test was performed (Kolmogorov-Smirnov and Shapiro-Wilk), resulting in a significance level of 0.000 (p>0.05), with abnormal and non-parametric distribution. The standard deviation was 0.1291989. With a 95% confidence interval and a 5% margin of error, the sample calculation [23] resulted in 26 samples (rural properties).

55 rural properties with cattle farming activities were surveyed, 11 properties in Perobal, 29 in Umuarama, and 15 in Xambrê, in a quantity proportional to the properties existing in each municipality.

For zoning, a radius of 40 km was delimited from the center of each municipality. Based on this georeferencing, visits to properties took place in different geographic regions, with a minimum of 1 property between those selected, thus avoiding cross-contamination and consequent interference in the treatments carried out by livestock farmers.

Data collection was carried out using a structured questionnaire (https://figshare.com/articles/dataset/Supplementary_Files_-_Article_-_Investigation_of_Control_Practices_for_i_Rhipicephalus_microplus_i_in_the_Northwest_Region_of_Paran_State_Brazil_-_Brazilian_Arquives_of_Biology_and_Technology_BABT_2026/31593124), containing questions that address cattle tick control practices employed by cattle farmers, investigating the classes of acaricides used, whether product associations are used, the dosages used, application intervals, resistance, and incidence of ticks in herds. The questionnaire was applied in person by the researchers to the cattle farmers on the selected rural properties. The data are non-parametric and were analyzed using descriptive statistics and Spearman Correlation to verify whether there are correlations between the variables analyzed.

This research was approved by the Research Ethics Committee Involving Human Beings (CEPEH) of Paranaense University (Unipar), Protocol 70889323.9.0000.0190. All livestock farmers surveyed signed a Free and Informed Consent Form - TCLE.

Given the increasing difficulties related to the effectiveness of cattle tick control methods, it becomes essential to understand the strategies adopted by rural producers in managing infestations. In this context, the present study aimed to investigate the control practices of R. microplus employed by livestock farmers in the municipalities of Perobal, Umuarama, and Xambrê, in the state of Paraná, Brazil, aiming to contribute to the improvement of control strategies and the sustainability of meat and milk production in the region.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

Of the 55 properties surveyed, 27 Slaughter properties and 28 Dairy properties were identified, with effective activity carried out in the order of 50.1% for Slaughter and 49.9% for Dairy, avoiding bias in the results. Properties with slaughter activities have an average of 146.6 hectares, and dairy activities 18.7 hectares. Livestock farmers have an average of 30 years of professional experience, which suggests that they have practical knowledge and lend credibility to the information provided in this research.

Four lineages of bovine breeds used in Slaughter and Milk activities were identified in the municipalities of Perobal, Umuarama, and Xambrê (Table 1).

Thumbnail
Table 1
Lineage of cattle breeds used in Slaughter and Milk activities in the municipalities of Perobal, Umuarama, and Xambrê, Paraná, Brazil (%).

The zebu lineage is more resistant to R. microplus but has lower milk production; the taurine lineage has higher milk production but is more susceptible to tick infestation [24]. It was identified in the municipalities surveyed that the Slaughter activity has a preference for the zebu lineage and the Milk activity for taurine, even though this activity experiences greater infestations in the herds (Table 1).

To control R. microplus in Brazil, there are 18 most common active ingredients used [25]. In the municipalities of Perobal, Umuarama, and Xambrê, Paraná, Brazil, 35 types of chemical acaricides products used by livestock farmers were identified, which contain 17 active ingredients, 20 products with only one active ingredient, and 15 products with combinations ranging from two to five active ingredients (https://figshare.com/articles/dataset/Supplementary_Files_-_Article_-_Investigation_of_Control_Practices_for_i_Rhipicephalus_microplus_i_in_the_Northwest_Region_of_Paran_State_Brazil_-_Brazilian_Arquives_of_Biology_and_Technology_BABT_2026/31593124).

The frequency of active ingredients contained in products used in the treatment of slaughter and dairy cattle was calculated based on the number of farmers using each type of product (Table 2).

Thumbnail
Table 2
Frequency of active ingredients used in the municipalities of Perobal, Umuarama, and Xambrê-Paraná, Brazil, according to the number of livestock farmers who apply the products (in quantity).

According to Table 2, the most used active ingredients in the municipalities surveyed are Cypermethrin and Chlorpyrifos. The Abate activity uses 11 active ingredients, with emphasis on Cypermethrin, Chlorpyrifos, and Fipronil. The Milk activity uses the 17 identified, indicating that in this activity, by practicing taurine lineage breeds and less resistance to R. microplus [26], producers use a greater variability of active ingredients, intending to control infestations.

Cypermethrin and Chlorpyrifos are also the most used in the Milk activity, but the data show that Fluazuron is one of the preferences of these cattle farmers, which is not observed in the Slaughter activity (Table 2). One possibility is that this characteristic is related to the types of breeds used, and this fact could be the target of future research, especially in the Northwest Region of the State of Paraná.

The replacement of acaricides products is a consolidated practice in livestock farming to break the cycle of resistance of R. microplus to the active ingredients administered in controls [1,4]. This practice was also identified in the municipalities surveyed (Table 3).

Thumbnail
Table 3
Practice of replacing acaricide in the municipalities of Perobal, Umuarama, and Xambrê, Paraná, Brazil.

All dairy farmers have a replacement practice. The highlight is the Slaughter activity, with 15% of livestock farmers not practicing it (Table 3). It was identified that this characteristic has two foundations: first, due to the zebu breeds that are more resistant to infestation by R. microplus used in the Slaughter activity; and second, some Slaughter activities operate in specific phases of the bovine life cycle, which may be breeding, rearing or finishing, with a shorter time for the animal to remain on the property.

It was observed (Table 3) that replacements generally occur every 184 days. Because they experience more frequent infestations, Milk producers have a shorter replacement interval (163 days) compared to Slaughter producers (207 days). A milk producer was identified who practices replacement in all applications at an average interval of 3 days, which demonstrates the difficulty in controlling R. microplus by this producer.

By alternating the active ingredients applied in treatments, livestock farmers aim to interfere with the development of resistance of R. microplus to the acaricides used and to achieve greater effectiveness in the treatments of their herds. The replacement practice must be based on Tick Susceptibility Test for its effectiveness, at the risk of promoting resistance to R. microplus [4], including cross-resistance, when there is a failure of effectiveness of more than one active ingredient in the same population, a factor observed in Brazil since 1950 [27].

Of the egg, larva, nymph, and adult stages of R. microplus, the last three are parasitic [28]. The life stages of the tick were identified, and the cattle ranchers from Perobal, Umuarama, and Xambrê apply acaricides (Table 4).

Thumbnail
Table 4
Application of acaricide by tick life stage in the municipalities of Perobal, Umuarama, and Xambrê, Paraná, Brazil (in %).

In general, cattle farmers perform applications more frequently in the Adult (100%) and Nymph (96%) phases, popularly known as micuim, phases in which they are visible to the naked eye on the cow's leather. In the Larva phase, which is difficult to see, only 5% of farmers apply the product. In the Egg phase, when ticks are mainly found in pastures, there are no applications (Table 4). It is estimated that 95% of ticks are found in the environment (mostly in pastures) and only 5% in cattle [1]. Given this scenario, an alternative is the development of acaricides for application in pastures, avoiding infestations in cattle and minimizing contamination of meat and milk through the use of acaricides in herds, as was verified in the region of the municipality of Castro-PR, the largest producer of bovine milk in Brazil [16].

In addition to carrying out treatments only when ticks are visible on cattle, according to the questionnaire applied to cattle farmers, 98% of them only apply treatments when there is an infestation in the cattle; that is, when there are few observable ticks, it is not applied (Table 4). This practice may promote the increase of R. microplus populations and the development of resistance in future generations [29]. The recommendation through strategic control is that treatments in Brazil, due to the tropical climate, be administered in six annual applications, with five applications between the months of September and December with intervals of 21 days and, if necessary, a booster application in April of the following year, before entering the winter period [3]. However, it was observed that in the researched region, applications occur in greater quantities than protocols, as shown in Table 7.

Thumbnail
Table 5
Association of acaricides for the control of Rhipicephalus microplus in the municipalities of Perobal, Umuarama, and Xambrê, Paraná, Brazil (in %).
Thumbnail
Table 6
Additional dosage of product by practicing producer for the control of Rhipicephalus microplus in the municipalities of Perobal, Umuarama, and Xambrê, Paraná, Brazil (in %).
Thumbnail
Table 7
Number of annual applications by application method for the control of Rhipicephalus microplus in the municipalities of Perobal, Umuarama, and Xambrê, Paraná, Brazil.

Only one cattle rancher (Slaughter) reported that even though he does not observe ticks on the cattle, he performs preventive applications at 18-day intervals, using the three forms of application alternately (injectable, pour-on, and spraying) and that he has obtained good results in controlling R. microplus. There was no direct relationship between this practice and the results in tick control, as 67% of slaughter producers reported obtaining the same result (Table 8).

Thumbnail
Table 8
Results of tick control treatments and situation regarding the incidence of ticks in cattle in the municipalities of Perobal, Umuarama, and Xambrê, Paraná, Brazil (in %)

Associations of active ingredients with chlorpyrifos/cypermethrin, chlorpyrifos/citronellal, and amitraz/detamethrin have been the target of researchers for laboratory tests with R. microplus, indicating good in vitro results [30, 31, 32, 33, 34]. However, even though the combination of active ingredients at home is not recommended by the producer, as it is not possible to identify their effects [35], this research identified the practice of combining acaricides in the same application by livestock farmers in the municipalities of Perobal, Umuarama, and Xambrê (Table 5).

The use of acaricide is practiced by 33% of livestock farmers in the municipalities surveyed. Dairy activity has the highest percentage, at 36%.

In the Slaughter activity, the association practiced by 30% of livestock farmers is injectable/pour on (Table 5). These ranchers report that this association occurs when they herd cattle for pour-on application and then apply injectable ivermectin as a dewormer and not for tick control purposes. Ivermectin is an active ingredient in tick control, which is why it was considered in association with pour-on to control R. microplus.

In the Milk activity, there is practice of the four types of association, with greater frequency in injectable/spray (18%) (Table 5). In this activity, according to practicing livestock farmers, the objective is to expand the range of active ingredients available in the same application, due to the resistance of R. microplus to the acaricides available on the market.

Increasing doses in the same application have shown hope for livestock farmers to control infestations, but suppressive treatments are not a sustainable practice and have not shown relief in the tick challenge [27].

It was found that 42% of livestock farmers in the municipalities of Perobal, Umuarama, and Xambrê use additional dosages to those recommended in the product dosages. Among practicing livestock farmers (Table 6), the additions express a worrying scenario for the development of resistance to R. microplus.

Among practicing producers, the general average is 38% addition, that is, on average, the cattle of these producers receive 138% of the dosages stipulated in the product dosages (Table 6).

In the Slaughter activity, the average is 26.3%, with a worrying 43.3% in injectable form, and one producer was found to have added 100% in this form. Injectable has subcutaneous action, which can pose risks to the health and life of the animal [21] and humans through the consumption of meat and milk [19,20].

In the Milk activity, the average addition is 41.5%, considering the three forms of application. The highlight is spraying, with 72.5% additional dosage; thus, the cattle of these producers receive almost double the dosage indicated in the posologies of these products (Table 6). In this form of application, a producer was found to be using a 350% addition, that is, his cattle receive 450% of the dosage indicated in the posology.

Mainly in the dairy industry, these numbers bring to light the worrying scenario of resistance to acaricides by R. microplus, a situation bordering on chaos for some producers who, because they believe it is necessary to maintain their activity, impose dosages beyond the recommended dosages, assuming sanitary risks, animal health and consequent increases in application costs, yet experiencing little success in treating their herds.

In addition to the practices adopted by livestock farmers not based on economic and environmental sustainability, a serious problem is the contamination of meat and milk through residues of the active ingredients used in treatments [36, 37].

The strategic control of R. microplus indicated for cattle treatments is six annual applications [3]. In the municipalities surveyed, the practice of applications was above recommended (Table 7).

Slaughter producers reported that they use injectable ivermectin as a dewormer and not as a acaricide, however, this active ingredient is also a acaricide, and its use was quantified in the research.

There are 15.1 annual applications per bovine in the municipalities. In the Milk activity, there are 19.1 annual applications. Even in the Slaughter activity, which has characteristics of zebu cattle, 11.5 applications were found (Table 7). These numbers far exceed the six applications indicated for strategic control [3] and indicate that there is a significant incidence of infestations by R. microplus in the herds of the municipalities, especially in the Milk activity.

In the Milk activity, a farmer was identified with an average of 127.8 annual applications per bovine, applying acaricides on average every 2.8 days, demonstrating that in addition to the incidence of infestations, he experiences resistance of R. microplus to the acaricides used in treatments.

In the Slaughter activity, 22% of livestock farmers serve the Chinese market (export). It was found that due to more stringent animal health standards required in this market, these producers apply, on average, 14% less acaricides to their herds, when compared to other producers in the same activity. The Milk activity does not operate in the export market [38].

The results of tick control treatments carried out by livestock farmers and the situation of cattle regarding the incidence of ticks were collected (Table 8).

Even considering the zebu lineage breeds used in the slaughter activity, it cannot be stated that these cattle ranchers are obtaining satisfactory results in controlling R. microplus through the chemical acaricides used, considering that 34% of the herds are in a regular to poor situation concerning infestations. This scenario is more worrying in the Milk activity, with 64% (Table 8).

Even with the number of annual applications 2.5 times higher than that indicated by strategic control [3], the situation of cattle is not desirable, since only 5% of them are free of ticks and, even more frequently, in the Slaughter activity (7%) that uses zebu lineage breeds, naturally more resistant to R. microplus, [2], which makes it clear that this mite has developed resistance to the acaricides used, a fact also observed in other studies [5, 39, 40, 41]. It was observed that the strategic control with six annual applications proposed by Embrapa in 2009 no longer effectively controls R. microplus in cattle herds, and this variable could be the target of future research.

The perception of livestock farmers regarding the incidence and resistance of ticks between 2014 and 2023 was surveyed (Table 9).

Thumbnail
Table 9
Perception of livestock farmers regarding the incidence and resistance of ticks between 2014 and 2023 in the municipalities of Perobal, Umuarama, and Xambrê, Paraná, Brazil (in %).

There are no reports of a lower incidence of ticks between 2014 and 2023, indicating that the treatments used by livestock farmers were not able to reduce infestations in their herds. Also, 94% noticed a greater infestation in the herds during this period (Table 9), that is, in addition to not reducing the infestations, the treatments and acaricides products used did not contain the increase in the R. microplus population in cattle farming in the municipalities of Perobal, Umuarama, and Xambrê, Paraná, Brazil.

Ticks are more prevalent during periods of hot weather [42]. In the Northwest Region of the State of Paraná, where the research was conducted, the climate is subtropical. Only in the municipality of Umuarama is there a meteorological station of the Paraná Environmental Technology and Monitoring System - SIMEPAR, used as a parameter for its region by the Paraná Rural Development Institute - IDR. Historical meteorological data from the IDR between the years 1972-2024 record an average annual temperature of 22.30C, summer with 280C and winter with 17.90C, relative humidity of 67.5% and average monthly precipitation of 138mm [43], an environmental condition conducive to tick development. In this sense, the perception of livestock farmers regarding the incidence of ticks in cattle in the winter period between 2014 and 2023 was raised. Overall, livestock farmers indicated that even in this season the incidence has increased over the years and in 2023 it was in the order of 63%, when compared to the summer season of the same year.

Specifically for the period considered in this research (2014-2023), the average temperature of the region of the municipality of Umuarama in the winter period (June, July and August) varied by 0.7ºC between 2014 (19.50°C) and 2023 (20.2ºC) [44]. This variation appears to be significant, as the climate, which previously appeared as an important natural mechanism for controlling infestations, has not proven to be as effective.

For 96% of livestock farmers, tick resistance to chemical acaricides also increased between 2014-2023 (Table 9), which corroborates the studies by Furlong; Martins and Prata [45], who demonstrated in their studies the increase in resistance of R. microplus to the active ingredients contained in chemical acaricides.

An influencing factor in the resistance of R. microplus is the continued use of the active ingredient [7]. The last molecule introduced to the Brazilian market occurred in 2022 and is Fluralaner, contained in the product Exzolt©, from the MSD laboratory. A cattle rancher who participated in this research and has been using the product for approximately 1 year reported that ticks are not resistant to the active ingredient and his herd is free of these ectoparasites. The effectiveness of this active ingredient was also identified in another study in the municipality of São José do Rio Pardo, São Paulo [46].

The report of a milk producer participating in the research, regarding the time taken to develop resistance to R. microplus deserves to be highlighted. This producer reported that he used a product based on Neem (Azadirachta indica A. Juss) and Garlic (Allium sativum L.) for exactly two years with good control results, with its effectiveness declining abruptly after this period, in which he resumed the use of chemical acaricides to control ticks in his herd. This report is a relevant indicator for studies on tick resistance to the use of herbal medicines, as observed in other scientific studies [11, 14, 47].

Two important actions in controlling R. microplus are the Tick Susceptibility Test (which analyzes the degree of resistance to acaricides) and Technical Assistance (Table 10).

Thumbnail
Table 10
Tick Susceptibility Test and technical assistance used by livestock farmers in the municipalities of Perobal, Umuarama, and Xambrê, Paraná, Brazil (in %).

Only in the Milk activity was it observed that a Tick Susceptibility Test was performed and technical assistance was provided for tick control, although the occurrence was low. Both procedures are important for identifying and monitoring the effectiveness of acaricides used to control R. microplus [27].

Even among producers who have already carried out a Tick Susceptibility Test or had technical assistance, 91% of them reported that these actions occurred only once over the years of activity (Table 10), which demonstrates little effectiveness in the face of the evolutionary resistance capacity of R. microplus to the chemical acaricides used. The recommendation is to carry out the test annually to determine the product to be used [48].

This scenario demonstrates that the control of R. microplus in the municipalities of Perobal, Umuarama, and Xambrê is based almost exclusively on the professional experience of livestock farmers, even with the best intentions, they lack specialized technical knowledge.

Spearman correlation analyses were performed for the breed lineage variable concerning the product replacement interval, combination of acaricides, number of annual applications, and additional dosage to the posology variables (Table 11).

Thumbnail
Table 11
Correlations of selected variables with lineage of breeds used in slaughter and milk activities in the municipalities of Perobal, Umuarama, and Xambrê, Paraná, Brazil.

Spearman's correlation demonstrated that there is a weak and negative correlation (ρ= -0.140) between Breed Lineage and Interval at which product substitution occurs, indicating a very slight association between the two variables and statistically non-significant (p=0.308) at 5% (Table 11). Thus, the time for replacing acaricides used by livestock farmers is not related to the breeds used, but, as observed (Table 3), the objective of the replacements is to break the cycle of resistance development of R. microplus regardless of the livestock activity practiced.

Regarding the association of acaricides (Table 11), the correlation was weak and negative (ρ=-0.020) concerning the Lineage of the breeds used in Slaughter and Milk activities. The significance associated with this correlation (p=0.884) indicates that it is not significant at 1%. Therefore, statistically there is no real correlation between the two variables, since both activities carry out associations with different objectives (Table 3).

There is a moderate to strong and positive relationship between the lineage of the breeds and the number of annual applications (ρ=0.609). This means that as the lineage of the breeds used varies from Zebu to Taurine, there is a tendency for 60.9% of cattle farmers to increase the number of annual applications performed and that this correlation is highly significant at the 1% level (p < 0.000) with strong evidence that this correlation does not occur by chance (Table 11).

Spearman's correlation coefficient (ρ=0.468) shows that there is a moderate and positive correlation between the addition to the dosage and the lineage of the breeds used, with significance at the 1% level (p=0.028), indicating an unlikely relationship to chance. As the lineage of the breeds used varies from Zebuine to Taurine, there is a tendency for 46.8% of livestock farmers to increase the doses of acaricides in applications (Table 11).

As demonstrated in the Milk activity, there is a predominance of the taurine lineage (Table 1), and this activity presents a higher percentage of additional dosage (Table 6) and number of annual applications (Table 7), which confirms the results of Spearman's correlations.

The results found in this research demonstrate the lack of technical knowledge on the part of livestock farmers in control practices, suggesting that public policies be implemented by federal, state, and municipal governments, as well as by regional bodies related to agriculture, monitoring, and supporting livestock farmers in this biological warfare. Universities and other research bodies also need to be closer to socio-environmental problems, seeking to propose scientifically sustainable solutions.

This study has some limitations that should be considered. Because it is a cross-sectional study, the results represent a stratification of the phenomenon under study. Longitudinal research could investigate variables over time, deepening the understanding of the factors involved. It also did not conduct laboratory analyses of the products and their modes of action (MoA), which could shed light on the development of tick resistance to the active ingredients used in treatments. The research focused on a specific region, which may not reflect the reality in other geographic contexts. Future studies could expand the geographic area to increase the external validity of the results.

CONCLUSION

The results obtained demonstrate that, in the municipalities of Perobal, Umuarama, and Xambrê, belonging to ULSA/ADAPAR, the control of cattle ticks is predominantly carried out through the intensive use of chemical acaricides, with 100% of the participating properties using these products in quantities exceeding those recommended for strategic control. It was also observed that a significant portion of livestock farmers adopt potentially inadequate practices, such as the use of acaricide combinations (33%) and the application of additional dosages beyond those indicated by the manufacturers (42%). Although 93% of producers report the periodic substitution of products in order to reduce the resistance of Rhipicephalus microplus, such practices are not always based on adequate technical criteria, which may compromise their effectiveness. In this context, the findings highlight gaps in the technical knowledge of livestock farmers regarding the rational management of ticks, as well as the absence or insufficiency of public policies, training programs, and continuous technical assistance that promote integrated and sustainable control strategies. Thus, the need for educational and institutional actions that contribute to the rational use of acaricides, the mitigation of parasite resistance, and the improvement of the health and productivity of cattle herds in the studied region is reinforced.

  • Funding:
    This research was funded by Universidade Paranaense, grant number 41366/2024; Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior (CAPES)-finance code 001; and Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq), grant number 310105/2021-8.
  • Institutional Review Board Statement:
    The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and approved by the Research Ethics Committee of the Paranaense University (Unipar) (Protocol No. 70889323.9.0000.0109, Date: 06/28/2023).
  • Informed Consent Statement:
    Written informed consent has been obtained from the patient(s) to publish this paper.

Acknowledgments:

The authors thank the Paranaense University, the Coordination for the Improvement of Higher Education Personnel - Brazil (CAPES) (funding code 001), the National Council for Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq) (funding code 310105/2021-8), the Araucária Foundation, and the Paraná Rural Development Institute (IDR) for their financial support and scholarships.

Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence

The authors declare that large language models and other generative artificial intelligence (AI) or AI-assisted technologies cannot be credited as authors and have not been listed as authors of this paper.

The author declare that did not use the artificial intelligence.

Supplementary Material

https://figshare.com/articles/dataset/Supplementary_Files_-_Article_-_Investigation_of_Control_Practices_for_i_Rhipicephalus_microplus_i_in_the_Northwest_Region_of_Paran_State_Brazil_-_Brazilian_Arquives_of_Biology_and_Technology_BABT_2026/31593124

Data Availability Statement:

Research data are available in the body of the manuscript.

REFERENCES

  • 1 Garcia M, Rodrigues VS, Koller WW, Andreotti R. [Biology and importance of the tick Rhipicephalus (Boophilus) microplus]. In: Andreotti, R.; Garcia, MV.; Koller, WW. (Ed.). [Ticks in the beef production chain]. Brasília, DF: Embrapa Publishing House; 2019. 240 p,
  • 2 Neto CSM, Freitas APG, Milagres DCR. [Frequency of Babesia spp. in Holstein calves in the municipality of Patos de Minas-MG]. Braz J Anim Environ Res. 2021; 4(4):5782-91.
  • 3 Andreotti R, Garcia M, Koller WW. [Strategic control of ticks in cattle]. In: Andreotti R, Garcia M, Koller WW. (Ed.). Ticks in the beef production chain]. Brasília, DF: Embrapa; 2019. 240 p.
  • 4 Santos SFA, Paulino VT, Katiki LM, Veríssimo CJ. [Profile of dairy farmers in the Joanópolis/SP region: how they deal with the control of the tick Rhipicephalus microplus and other diseases of veterinary importance]. Pesq. Vet Bras. 2018; 38(01):77-88.
  • 5 Torres-Santos PT, Farias IF, Passos GS, Almeida MD, Horta MC. [In vitro evaluation of the resistance of the tick Rhipicephalus microplus to different acaricides]. Vet Zootec. 2021; 28:1-9.
  • 6 Koller WW, Higa LOS, Zimmermann NP, Oshiro LM, Andreotti R. [Tick resistance to acaricides]. In: Andreotti, R.; Garcia, MV.; Koller, WW. (Ed.). [Ticks in the beef production chain]. Brasília, DF: Embrapa; 2019. 240 p.
  • 7 De Moura Mendes T, Balbino JNF, Silva NCT, De Farias LA. [Rhipicephalus (Boophilus) microplus and Rhipicephalus sanguineus: a review of perspectives, distribution, and resistance]. Pubvet. 2019; 13:127.
  • 8 De Campos Bortolucci W, De Oliveira HLM, Silva ES, Vilas Boas MR, De Carvalho TM, De Araújo ACCF, et al. Acaricidal and larvicidal activity of leaves and fractions of rose pepper (Schinus terebinthifolius Raddi(Anacardiaceae) essential oil against Rhipicephalus (Boophilus) microplus Austr J Crop Sci. 2018;12(10):1645-52.
  • 9 Fernandez CMM, Rosa MF, Fernandez ACAM, De Campos Bortolucci W, Ferreira FBP, Linde GA, et al. Essential oil and fractions isolated of Laurel to control adults and larvae of cattle ticks. Nat Prod Res. 2018; 34(5):731-5.
  • 10 Bondezan MAD, Zaniolo MM, Dos Santos IC, Guaitolini CRF, Barbosa LN, Gonçalves DD. Negative results for Borrelia burdgorferi in cows and ticks from a border region between Brazil and Paraguay: A case report. Acta Vet Bras. 2019; 13(4):182-85.
  • 11 Medeiros JP, De Campos Bortolucci W, Silva ES, Oliveira HLM, Campo CFAA, Gonçalves JE, et al. Biocidal potential of Eugenia pyriformis essential oil in the control of Rhipicephalus (Boophilus) microplus in the free-living cycle. Pesqui Vet Bras. 2019; 39:879-88.
  • 12 Branco LA, Oliveira HLM, De Campos Bortolucci W, Fernandes CMM, Gonçalves JE, Gazim ZC. Control of bovine tick (Rhipicephalus microplus) with essential oil from Psidium rufum DC leaves Res Soc Dev. 2020; 9(11): e409119550.
  • 13 De Campos Bortolucci W, Oliveira H, Oliva LR, Gonçalves JE, Júnior RP, Colauto NB, et al. Crude ethanolic extracts of different parts of Gallesia integrifolia (Phytolaccaceae) for the control of Rhipicephalus microplus Int J Acarol. 2020; 46(6):414-23.
  • 14 Cella W, Rahal IL, Silva GCC, Jacomassi E, Junior RP, Gonçalves JE, et al. Activity of essential oils from leaves, flower buds and stems of Tetradenia riparia on Rhipicephalus (Boophilus) microplus larvae. Rev Bras Parasitol Vet. 2023; 32:e013522.
  • 15 Ferarrese L, Oliveira HLM, Oliveira GS, Mendonça JA, Cella W, Neto ML, et al. Potential of Tetradenia riparia leaf essential oil and its fractions in controlling Aedes aegypti and Rhipicephalus microplus larvae. Biosci J. 2023; 39: e39026.
  • 16 Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistics (IBGE) (a). [Municipal livestock production 2022 - PPM, 2023]. 2023 Jan [cited 2024 Feb 28]. Available from: https://www.ibge.gov.br/estatisticas/economicas/agricultura-e-pecuaria/9107-producao-da-pecuaria-municipal.html
    » https://www.ibge.gov.br/estatisticas/economicas/agricultura-e-pecuaria/9107-producao-da-pecuaria-municipal.html
  • 17 Department of Rural Economy (DERAL). Umuarama Regional Center. [Gross Production Value (V.B.P.) 2021]. Available from: https://www.agricultura.pr.gov.br/sites/default/arquivos_restritos/files/documento/2021-09/Boletim%20_Semanal_35_Deral_02_setembro_2021.pdf
    » https://www.agricultura.pr.gov.br/sites/default/arquivos_restritos/files/documento/2021-09/Boletim%20_Semanal_35_Deral_02_setembro_2021.pdf
  • 18 Miloca L. M, Teixeira TM, Machado MA, Gazim ZC. [Market research on commercial acaricides for the treatment of cattle in the municipalities of Perobal, Umuarama and Xambrê-Paraná, Brazil]. Informe Gepec. 2024; 28(2):516-36.
  • 19 Pawar RP, Durgbanshi A, Bose D, Peris-Vicente J, Albiol-Chiva J, Esteve-Romero J, et al. Determination of albendazole and ivermectin residues in cattle and poultry-derived samples from India by micellar liquid chromatography. J Food Compos Anal. 2021;103:104111.
  • 20 Brossi C, Gotardo AT, Górniak SL, Kindlein G, Akl Akl BS, Rosa AF, et al. Distribution of ivermectin residues in different Zebu cattle tissues and its stability in thermally processed canned meat. J Food Sci Technol. 2024; 62(1):56-64.
  • 21 Nava S, Rossner MV, Ballent M, Mangold AJ, Lanusse C, Lifschitz A. Relationship between pharmacokinetics of ivermectin (3.15%) and its efficacy to control the infestation with the tick Rhipicephalus (Boophilus) microplus in cattle. Vet Parasitol. 2019; 268:81-6.
  • 22 Paraná Agricultural Defense Agency (Adapar). [Quantitative data on cattle producers, Umuarama, Perobal and Xambrê, 2023]. Available from: https://www.adapar.pr.gov.br
    » https://www.adapar.pr.gov.br
  • 23 Barbetta PA. [Statistics applied to Social Sciences]. 5 ed. Florianópolis: Ed. UFSC; 2002. 315p.
  • 24 Brazilian Agricultural Research Corporation (Embrapa). [Breeds and types of crossbreeding for milk production. Technical Circular]. 2009 (a); 98:1-12 ISSN 1678-07X. Available from: https://www.infoteca.cnptia.embrapa.br/infoteca/bitstream/doc/737102/1/CT98Racasetiposdecruzamentos.pdf
    » https://www.infoteca.cnptia.embrapa.br/infoteca/bitstream/doc/737102/1/CT98Racasetiposdecruzamentos.pdf
  • 25 Desidério Finamor Veterinary Research Institute (Ipdvf). [State program for the control of ticks and bovine parasitic sadness]. 2023 Jun [cited 2023 Aug 08]. Available from: http://www.ipvdf.rs.gov.br/lista/546/o-ipvdf
    » http://www.ipvdf.rs.gov.br/lista/546/o-ipvdf
  • 26 Pérez-Otáñez X, Vanwambeke SO, Orozco-Alvarez G, Arciniegas-Ortega S, Ron-Garrido L, Rodríguez-Hidalgo R. Widespread acaricide resistance and multi-resistance in Rhipicephalus microplus in Ecuador and associated environmental and management risk factors. Ticks Tick-Borne Dis. 2024; 15(1):102274.
  • 27 Brazil. Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock and Supply (Mapa). [Selective evaluation of cattle for the control of the tick Rhipicephalus microplus Secretariat of Innovation, Rural Development and Irrigation]. Brasília, 2020. Available from: https://www.gov.br/agricultura/pt-br/assuntos/producao-animal/arquivos-publicacoes-bem-estar-animal/CARRAPATOS2.pdf
    » https://www.gov.br/agricultura/pt-br/assuntos/producao-animal/arquivos-publicacoes-bem-estar-animal/CARRAPATOS2.pdf
  • 28 De Almeida MA, De Oliveira DS, Backes GT, Grando RO, Rogotti C, De Moura JF, et al. Biocontrol of the cattle tick Rhipicephalus (Boophilus) microplus “in vitro” with dehydrated garlic. Res Soc Dev. 2021;10(8):e44910816681.
  • 29 Felippelli G, Teixeira WFP, Gomes LVC, Maciel WGM, Cruz BC, Buzzulini C, et al. Tick infestation level interferes with spray formulation (organophosphate+ pyrethroid) efficacy against Rhipicephalus microplus Ticks Tick-Borne Dis. 2022;13(2):101903.
  • 30 Gasparotto PHG, Santos CAF, Filho JVD, Ferraz RCS, Silva FRC, Daudt C. Resistance of Rhipicephalus (Boophilus) microplus (Canestrini, 1888) to acaricides used in dairy cattle of Teixeirópolis, Rondônia, Brazil. Acta Vet Bras. 2020;14(2):99-105.
  • 31 Bogo MC, Alves CS, Silva MHD, Nascimento MP, Pereira V, Martinez AC, et al. [In vitro evaluation of different acaricidal formulations on the reproductive parameters of engorged female Rhipicephalus (Boophilus) Microplus]. Braz J Dev. 2021; 7(9):87922-35.
  • 32 Novato TP, Milhomem MN, Marchesini PBC, Coutinho AL, Silva IS, Perinotto WMS, et al. Acaricidal activity of carvacrol and thymol on acaricide-resistant Rhipicephalus microplus (Acari: Ixodidae) populations and combination with cypermethrin: Is there cross-resistance and synergism? Vet Parasitol. 2022; 310:109787.
  • 33 Sarli M, Torrents J, Taffaletti JR, Morel N, Nava S. Evaluation of the impact of successive acaricide treatments on resistance evolution in Rhipicephalus microplus populations: Monodrugs versus drug combinations. Res Vet Sci. 2023; 164:105040.
  • 34 Vangchhia L, Singh H, Dumka VK, Singh NK. Assessment of synergism in combinations of essential oils against cattle tick Rhipicephalus microplus (Acari: Ixodidae). Exp Appl Acarol. 2024; 93(2): 473-84.
  • 35 Brazilian Agricultural Research Corporation (Embrapa). [The cattle tick and the management of acaricide resistance]. Technical Circular. 2009 (b); 70: 1-5, ISSN 1982-5382. https://www.infoteca.cnptia.embrapa.br/infoteca/bitstream/doc/662578/4/CO70.pdf
    » https://www.infoteca.cnptia.embrapa.br/infoteca/bitstream/doc/662578/4/CO70.pdf
  • 36 Adum AN, Gibson G, Chimbevo LM, Oshule PS, Essuman S, Asamba MN. Detection and quantification of chlorpyrifos in soil, milk, dip wash, spray race residues using high performance liquid chromatography in selected dairy farms in Kenya. Science. 2021; 9(4):88-95.
  • 37 Laguna LF, Ananias F. Chlorpyrifos residues evaluation in bovine milk and their implication for human health. Braz J Anim Environ Res. 2023; 6(2): 1853-65.
  • 38 Miloca LM, Teixeira TM, Da Silva EG, Oliveira SRB, Ferreira YP, Gazim ZC. Survey of the costs of chemical acaricides used to control Rhipicephalus microplus in the Northwest Region of the State of Paraná, Brazil. Acta Vet Bras. ISSN 1981-5484 [in press].
  • 39 Diaz-Rivera E, Holguín CG, Urrea Montes DA. New polymorphism in the sodium channel gene of Rhipicephalus microplus tick (Ixodida: Ixodidae) resistant to pyrethroids. Rev Biol Trop. 2019; 67(4):935-44.
  • 40 Ferreira PT, Bidone NB, Groff F, Silva PS, Jesus MS, Pellegrini DCP, et al. Prevalence of and potential risk factors for multiple resistance to acaricides in Rhipicephalus (Boophilus) microplus ticks: A survey in the state of Rio Grande Do Sul, Brazil. Med Vet Entomol. 2024; 39:134-145.
  • 41 Valsoni LM, Freitas MG, Borges DGL, Borges FA. Status of Rhipicephalus microplus resistance to ivermectin, fipronil and fluazuron in Mato Grosso do Sul, Brazil. Rev Bras Parasitol Vet. 2021; 30(1):e025220.
  • 42 Hooper B, Pieruzzi PAP, Lima JHV, Anobi BT, Ferreira KNA, Silva RR, et al. [Chromotherapy combined with phytotherapy: overall health and parasite control in dairy calves]. Rev. Bras. Prat Integr Complement Saude. 2022; 2(4):26-43.
  • 43 Paraná Rural Development Institute (Idr). [Climatological summary]. 2025 Jan [cited 2025 Jul 25]. Available from: https://www.idrparana.pr.gov.br/system/files/publico/agrometeorologia/medias-historicas/Umuarama.pdf
    » https://www.idrparana.pr.gov.br/system/files/publico/agrometeorologia/medias-historicas/Umuarama.pdf
  • 44 Paraná Rural Development Institute (Idr). [Average temperature of the Municipality of Umuarama-Paraná 2014 to 2023]. [Email sent 2024 Set 30]. Recipient: leo.miloca@ifpr.edu.br
  • 45 Furlong J, Martins JR, Prata MCA. [Cattle ticks and resistance: is there anything to celebrate?]. Hora Vet. 2007; 27(159):1-7.
  • 46 De Aquino LM, Zapa DMB, Rodrigues DC, Strydom T, Torres S, Ferreira LL, et al. Two protocols using fluralaner for Rhipicephalus microplus strategic control on taurine cattle in a tropical region. Parasites Vectors. 2024;17(1):15.
  • 47 Coulibaly A, Biguezoton AS, Hema DM, Dah FF, Sawadogo I, Bationo RK, et al. Evaluation of synergism in essential oils against the cattle tick Rhipicephalus microplus in Burkina F. Exp Parasitol. 2023; 255:108643.
  • 48 Brazilian Agricultural Research Corporation (Embrapa). [Main mistakes made in the fight against cattle ticks]. Embrapa Dairy Cattle, 3.ed, January, 2009 (c). Available from: https://www.embrapa.br/documents/1354377/1875819/Principais-erros-cometidos-luta-contra-carrapato-bovinos.pdf/8d9606a3-bd81-46a6-8cfc-8167918c8b39?version=1.0
    » https://www.embrapa.br/documents/1354377/1875819/Principais-erros-cometidos-luta-contra-carrapato-bovinos.pdf/8d9606a3-bd81-46a6-8cfc-8167918c8b39?version=1.0
  • Editor-in-Chief:
    Bill Jorge Costa
  • Associate Editor:
    Renata Marino Romano

Publication Dates

  • Publication in this collection
    17 July 2026
  • Date of issue
    2026

History

  • Received
    07 Oct 2025
  • Accepted
    02 Mar 2026
Creative Common - by 4.0
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
location_on
Instituto de Tecnologia do Paraná - Tecpar Rua Prof. Algacyr Munhoz Mader, 3775 - CIC, 81350-010 , Tel: +55 41 3316-3054 - Curitiba - PR - Brazil
E-mail: babt@tecpar.br
rss_feed Acompanhe os números deste periódico no seu leitor de RSS
Reportar erro