Loading…

Laboratory and field evaluation of the repellents deet, CIC-4, and AI3-37220 against Anopheles farauti (Diptera: Culicidae) in Australia

Laboratory and field tests of the repellents diethyl methylbenzamide (deet), 1-(3-cyclohexen-1-yl-carbonyl)-2-methylpiperidine (AI3-37220), and (2-hydroxymethylcyclohexyl) acetic acid lactone (CIC-4) were conducted against Anopheles farauti s.s. Laveran, an important malaria vector in the southwest...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of medical entomology 1998-09, Vol.35 (5), p.690-693
Main Author: Frances, S.P. (Australian Army Malaria Institute, Queensland, Australia.)
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Laboratory and field tests of the repellents diethyl methylbenzamide (deet), 1-(3-cyclohexen-1-yl-carbonyl)-2-methylpiperidine (AI3-37220), and (2-hydroxymethylcyclohexyl) acetic acid lactone (CIC-4) were conducted against Anopheles farauti s.s. Laveran, an important malaria vector in the southwest Pacific region. In the laboratory, An. farauti was tolerant of all 3 repellents, but deet and CIC-4 provided significantly better protection than AI3-37220. The field study was conducted in rain forest located near Innisfail, northern Queensland, and tested 25% (vol:vol) ethanol solutions of each repellent against An. farauti. All 3 repellents provided 95% protection against An. farauti for 5 h after application. In contrast to the laboratory tests, protection provided by AI3-37220 was significantly better than that by either deet or CIC-4, and there was no difference between protection by deet and CIC-4. The protection by deet and CIC-4 declined 8 h after application and provided less than or equal to 50% protection at 9 h. In contrast, AI3-37220 provided greater than or equal to 94% protection for 9 h
ISSN:0022-2585
1938-2928
DOI:10.1093/jmedent/35.5.690