Novo plant-based mosquito repellent shows promise for exclusion of Aedes mosquitoes from "window" entry.

Sare I Yavasoglu, Martyn J Wood, James C Bull, Nergis Alkış, Emrecan Doğan, Abeer M Alkhaibari, Tariq M Butt
{"title":"Novo plant-based mosquito repellent shows promise for exclusion of Aedes mosquitoes from \"window\" entry.","authors":"Sare I Yavasoglu, Martyn J Wood, James C Bull, Nergis Alkış, Emrecan Doğan, Abeer M Alkhaibari, Tariq M Butt","doi":"10.1093/jme/tjae137","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Mosquitoes threaten over half of the world's population through vectored diseases such as malaria, zika, yellow fever, dengue, and chikungunya. Mosquitoes have a highly developed olfactory system attuned to chemotaxis relating to host-seeking, mating, and oviposition behavior. In this study, we aimed to determine the spatial efficacy of 2 plant-based repellent blends (Blend3 and Blend4 that had previously been found to successfully repel Aedes, Anopheles and Culex mosquitoes in wind tunnel assays) in excluding Aedes aegypti from the window entry. A new cage system was developed for parallel \"no-choice\" and \"choice\" olfactometric assays. In the no-choice trial, Blends 3 and 4, as well as commercial products (N, N-diethyl-3-methylbenzamide, p-menthane-3,8-diol [PMD], 3-(N-n-butyl-N-acetyl)-amino-propionic acid ethyl ester, and 2-(2-hydroxyethyl)-1-methylpropylstyrene 1-piperidine carboxylate), were adsorbed into filter papers of different sizes and placed in a window created between 2 attached bug dorms. Then, the number of mosquitoes entering the window was counted through a 6-min period. In choice olfactometric assays, Blends 3, 4, and PMD were adsorbed into filter paper and the number of mosquitoes moving away from Blend 3 and PMD were compared. No-choice assays showed that Blend3 (P < 0.001) and Blend4 (P = 0.0012) were more repellent than the best commercial product PMD. Additionally, while Blend 4 was significantly more repellent than Blend 3 (P = 0.012) in the choice assay, overall, these 2 blends show promise as new repellents for the spatial exclusion of Aedes aegypti from window entry alone or as part of a \"push-pull'' strategy.</p>","PeriodicalId":94091,"journal":{"name":"Journal of medical entomology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of medical entomology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jme/tjae137","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Mosquitoes threaten over half of the world's population through vectored diseases such as malaria, zika, yellow fever, dengue, and chikungunya. Mosquitoes have a highly developed olfactory system attuned to chemotaxis relating to host-seeking, mating, and oviposition behavior. In this study, we aimed to determine the spatial efficacy of 2 plant-based repellent blends (Blend3 and Blend4 that had previously been found to successfully repel Aedes, Anopheles and Culex mosquitoes in wind tunnel assays) in excluding Aedes aegypti from the window entry. A new cage system was developed for parallel "no-choice" and "choice" olfactometric assays. In the no-choice trial, Blends 3 and 4, as well as commercial products (N, N-diethyl-3-methylbenzamide, p-menthane-3,8-diol [PMD], 3-(N-n-butyl-N-acetyl)-amino-propionic acid ethyl ester, and 2-(2-hydroxyethyl)-1-methylpropylstyrene 1-piperidine carboxylate), were adsorbed into filter papers of different sizes and placed in a window created between 2 attached bug dorms. Then, the number of mosquitoes entering the window was counted through a 6-min period. In choice olfactometric assays, Blends 3, 4, and PMD were adsorbed into filter paper and the number of mosquitoes moving away from Blend 3 and PMD were compared. No-choice assays showed that Blend3 (P < 0.001) and Blend4 (P = 0.0012) were more repellent than the best commercial product PMD. Additionally, while Blend 4 was significantly more repellent than Blend 3 (P = 0.012) in the choice assay, overall, these 2 blends show promise as new repellents for the spatial exclusion of Aedes aegypti from window entry alone or as part of a "push-pull'' strategy.

诺沃植物驱蚊剂有望从 "窗户 "入口处驱除伊蚊。
蚊子传播疟疾、寨卡病毒、黄热病、登革热和基孔肯雅热等疾病,威胁着全球一半以上的人口。蚊子拥有高度发达的嗅觉系统,与寻找宿主、交配和产卵行为相关的趋化作用相适应。在这项研究中,我们的目的是确定两种植物驱蚊混合物(Blend3 和 Blend4,以前曾在风洞试验中成功驱赶过伊蚊、按蚊和库蚊)在从窗户入口处驱赶埃及伊蚊方面的空间功效。我们开发了一种新的笼子系统,用于平行进行 "无选择 "和 "有选择 "的嗅觉测定。在无选择试验中,将 3 号和 4 号混合物以及商用产品(N, N-二乙基-3-甲基苯甲酰胺、对-3,8-戊二醇[PMD]、3-(N-正丁基-N-乙酰基)-氨基丙酸乙酯和 2-(2-羟乙基)-1-甲基丙基苯乙烯 1-哌啶羧酸酯)吸附在不同大小的滤纸上,并将其放置在两个相连的蚊虫宿舍之间的窗户上。然后,在 6 分钟内对进入窗口的蚊子数量进行计数。在选择嗅觉测定法中,将混合物 3、4 和 PMD 吸附在滤纸上,比较蚊子远离混合物 3 和 PMD 的数量。非选择测定显示,混合物 3(P < 0.001)和混合物 4(P = 0.0012)比最好的商业产品 PMD 更具有驱避性。此外,在选择试验中,混合物 4 的驱避效果明显优于混合物 3(P = 0.012)。总体而言,这两种混合物有望作为新的驱虫剂,单独或作为 "推拉 "策略的一部分,在空间上阻止埃及伊蚊进入窗户。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信