Efficacy of the d-phenothrin/pyriproxyfen association against mites in naturally co-infested rabbits
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of the present study was to evaluate the efficacy of the d-phenothrin/pyriproxyfen association against Psoroptes ovis, Cheyletiella parasitivorax, and Leporacarus gibbus infestations in naturally co-infested rabbits. Twenty crossbreed (New Zealand White x California) rabbits concurrently infested by the three mite species were randomly divided in two groups. All rabbits presented with hyperemia, erythema and formation of crusts in the ear canals caused by P. ovis. Infestations by both C. parasitivorax and L. gibbus were considered asymptomatic in all animals.Ten animals were treated with a 4.4% d-phenothrin and 0.148% pyriproxyfen spray formulation until have their body surface uniformly sprayed, including external ear canals. The other ten rabbits remained untreated, serving as control group. Observations were done on days +7, +14, +21, +28, and +35 post-treatment. The d-phenothrin/pyriproxyfen association showed 100% efficacy against the three mite species and was responsible for the remission of psoroptic mange lesions on treated animals. No signs of intoxication were observed. The results indicate that d-phenothrin/pyriproxyfen spray formulation in a single application is an effective and clinically safe option for the control of different mite infestations in rabbits.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".