Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
14 August 2024 | Story Martinette Brits | Photo Supplied
Dr Luther van der Mescht
Dr Luther van der Mescht, Senior Lecturer in the Department of Zoology and Entomology.

Ticks that feed on South Africa’s cattle are developing resistance to the only effective pesticides, making them increasingly difficult to control. If this issue is not addressed, the spread of these parasites and their resistance to pesticides could significantly impact farmers' incomes and food security.

According to a study by Dr Luther van der Mescht, Senior Lecturer in the Department of Zoology and Entomology, many tick populations in South Africa are resistant to at least two of the three main types of acaricides (chemical classes) used in the country.

Dr Van der Mescht notes that with around 12 million cattle in South Africa, these ticks not only lower meat and milk production but also carry pathogens that can cause potentially fatal diseases. He estimates that the economic losses from tick-borne diseases and the use of acaricides could reach up to R670 million annually in the cattle industry alone.

He adds that South Africa's agricultural sector is unique due to its dual farming system, which includes both subsistence and commercial farmers, amplifying the impact of ticks. “The country is also home to a wide variety of tick species that transmit numerous pathogens across a diverse range of habitats and climates in which cattle are farmed. Consequently, the effects of ticks and tick-borne diseases in South Africa may be more severe compared to those in developed countries.”

Dr Van der Mescht highlights that ticks are developing resistance primarily due to poor farm management practices, such as underdosing, overdosing, and excessive use of acaricides. “Additionally, insufficient government support in educating farmers and managing resistance exacerbates the problem.”

Managing acaricide resistance

Dr Van der Mescht explains that while ticks will inevitably develop resistance to acaricides, this usually happens much slower if pesticides are used strategically. To slow the development of resistance, several measures can be implemented: 

• Minimise the number of acaricide treatments.
• Assess tick diversity and acaricide resistance at the farm level and monitor it regularly. The study found that acaricide resistance was highly variable across South Africa, likely due to different farm management practices; hence it should be assessed at the farm level.
• Quarantine animals when transferring them to a new farm, ensuring they are free of ticks before releasing them.
• Rotate acaricides from different chemical classes, with a gap of at least two years between applications.

• Government veterinary services should raise awareness about acaricide resistance and provide support, particularly to under-resourced farmers. Establishing acaricide resistance testing laboratories would help monitor resistance and offer guidance to farmers.

Expert in parasitology

Dr Van der Mescht is particularly fascinated by the fact that most animals on earth follow a parasitic way of life. He graduated with a PhD in Conservation Ecology from the Department of Conservation Ecology and Entomology at Stellenbosch University in 2015, focusing on rodent parasites.

Career highlights include receiving the Wilhelm Neitz Memorial Scholarship in Parasitology from the Parasitological Society of Southern Africa (PARSA) for study abroad, and the Blaustein Centre for Scientific Cooperation Postdoctoral Fellowship in 2016 from Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Israel, to conduct research on the experimental evolution of host specialisation. He also received the Claude Leon Foundation Postdoctoral Fellowship in 2019 to study the cat flea at Stellenbosch University’s Department of Botany and Zoology.

With over four years of experience in the industry at a contract research organisation, he has conducted more than 40 clinical studies for international pharmaceutical companies and published over 50 peer-reviewed scientific articles.

Making research visible, impactful, and relevant to society

Dr Van der Mescht recently published an article for The Conversation and participated in interviews with eNCA, Newzroom Afrika, and Cape Talk to discuss his research. “This effort aligns with the Vision 130 strategy of being a regionally engaged university and supports one of the key pillars of research development at the University of the Free State (UFS), which is to make our research visible, impactful, and relevant to society.”

He also highlighted the significance of popular science, noting that it helps scientists communicate their research to a broader audience, build their professional reputation, enhance their funding opportunities, and improve their research outcomes.

News Archive

UFS study shows playing time in Super Rugby matches decreasing
2016-12-19

Description: Super Rugby playing time Tags: Super Rugby playing time 

The study by Riaan Schoeman, (left), Prof Robert Schall,
and Prof Derik Coetzee from the University of the Free State
on variables in Super Rugby can provide coaches with
insight on how to approach the game.
Photo: Anja Aucamp

It is better for Super Rugby teams not to have the ball, which also leads to reduced overall playing time in matches.

This observation is from a study by the University of the Free State on the difference between winning and losing teams. Statistics between 2011 and 2015 show that Super Rugby winning teams kick more and their defence is better.

These statistics were applied by Riaan Schoeman, lecturer in Exercise and Sport Sciences, Prof Derik Coetzee, Head of Department: Exercise and Sport Sciences, and Prof Robert Schall, Department of Mathematics and Actuarial Sciences. The purpose of the study, Changes in match variables for winning and losing teams in Super Rugby from 2011 to 2015, was to observe changes. Data on 30 games (four from each team) per season, supplied by the Cheetahs via Verusco TryMaker Pro, were used.

About two minutes less action
“We found that the playing time has decreased. This is the time the ball is in play during 80 minutes,” says Schoeman. In 2011, the average playing time was 34.12 minutes and in 2015 it was 31.95.

“The winning team has less possession of the ball and doesn’t want it. They play more conservatively. They dominate with kicks and then they play,” says Prof Coetzee, who was the conditioning coach for the Springboks in 2007 when they won the World Cup.

Lineouts also more about kicking
As a result, the number of line-outs also increased (from 0.31 per minute in 2011 to 0.34 in 2015) and the winning teams are better in this regard.

“The winning team has less possession of the ball
and doesn’t want it. They play a more conservative
game. They dominate with kicks and then they play.”

Schoeman believes that rule changes could also have contributed to reduced playing time, since something like scrum work nowadays causes more problems. “When a scrum falls, the time thereafter is not playing time.”

According to Prof Coetzee, rucks and mauls have also increased, (rucks from 2.08 per minute in 2011 to 2.16 in 2015 and mauls from 0.07 per minute in 2011 to 0.10 in 2015). “The teams that win, dominate these areas,” he says.

We use cookies to make interactions with our websites and services easy and meaningful. To better understand how they are used, read more about the UFS cookie policy. By continuing to use this site you are giving us your consent to do this.

Accept