The efficacy of Sebacil EC50%, Gamatox and Ivomec in the treatment of sarcoptic mange in camel (Camelus dromedarius)

The efficacy of Sebacil E.C.50%, Gamatox and Ivomec in the treatment of advanced and well established lesions of sarcoptic mange in the one humped camel was evaluated, compared and rated. A 0.1% Sebacil E.C.50% gave "excellent" (100%) and "good" (80%) cure when used with and without premedication of the lesions with salicylic acid, respectively. Early and complete clinical recovery without recurrence of the disease was produced. No live Sarcoptes scabiei mites were seen in skin scrapings and clearance of the histopathological changes. This proved that sebacil E.C.50% had an excellent acaricidal effect in advanced and well established lesions of sarcoptic mange in camels. The emulsifiers added to Sebacil E.C.50% made it a stable solution after reconstitution for use and was able to soak in and penetrate the thick layers of scab in the recommended concentration for the destruction of the deeply burrowing mite and all its developmental stages. A 0.1% Gamatox when used after the premedication of the lesions with salicylic acid proved to be "excellent but was slightly less efficient (90%) than Sebacil E.C.50% and when used without the premedication gave "poor" results (20%). Gamatox after reconstitution for use, was in a suspension form and the active ingredient was unable to penetrate through the thick scab and keratin to reach the deeply burrowing mites, despite the known excellent acaricidal effect of gamma benzenehexachloride on making contact with the mite. Ivomec was "Fair" and produced transient and permanent clinical recovery in 60 and 40% of the camels, respectively. However, the response to treatment was very slow and more severe clinical signs recurred in six camels 7-8 weeks after treatment. Although Sebacil E.C.50% gave 100% cure of sarcoptic mange when used after the premedication of the lesions with salicylic acid, yet the use of Sebacil E.C.50% alone was found to be more practicable underfield conditions when taken into consideration the risk of exposure of the personnel to infection, extra time, labour and expenses employed in the premedication process.