Search

Simple Summary: Biting hematophagous dipterans are responsible for painful bites and blood spoliation; they induce behavioral modifications, anemia, and significant production losses in cattle. A feedlot of 100 feeder cattle would register a total loss of USD 16,000 within 5 months, which appears to be an unexpectedly huge loss caused by dipterans. Investing part of this money in fly control would probably be beneficial. In addition to blood pathogen transmission, insects of the order Diptera affect livestock through visual and contact harassment; blood-feeders are responsible for painful bites and blood despoliation, generating behavioral modifications, anemia, and production losses. Knowledge of their economic impact is a basis for cost-effective control. Here, we measured the global impact of diptera insects by comparing two batches of six feeder cattle, one in the open air and the other protected by a mosquito net. The analytical data were insect density in the open air and, for feeder cattle, tail flick counts, hematocrit values (Ht), feed intake, feed conversion ratio (FCR), and live body weight gain (LBWG). Over a period of five months, the results showed significant losses in the LBWG of cattle exposed to insects, estimated at 8.0 ± 1.5 kg/month [2.7; 13.3], with a total loss reaching 40.0 ± 5.5 kg/head. Main diurnal insects were Stomoxys spp. and Musca crassirostris. There was a strong correlation between fly density and diurnal tail flicks. Night trapping and tail flicks showed a potentially important role of mosquitoes to be further explored. The Ht levels of exposed animals were 3–4% lower than those of controls. FCRs indicated that exposed animals needed 33% more dry matter intake/kg of LBWG. An economic assessment showed that dipterans were responsible for a 10–11% loss in LBWG during the main growing period of feeder cattle (10–15 months). A feedlot of 100 calves would register a total loss of USD 16,000 within 5 months, which appears to be an unexpectedly huge loss caused by dipterans. Investing part of this money into fly control would probably be beneficial. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]