Different repellents for Aedes aegypti against blood-feeding and oviposition.
Methyl N,N-dimethyl anthranilate (MDA), ethyl anthranilate (EA) and butyl anthranilate (BA) were previously shown to repel Aedes aegypti mosquitoes from landing on human skin. However, the effect of these compounds on the orientation of flying mosquitoes in a choice situation and their effect on mos...
Guardado en:
| Autores principales: | , , , |
|---|---|
| Formato: | article |
| Lenguaje: | EN |
| Publicado: |
Public Library of Science (PLoS)
2014
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | https://doaj.org/article/7732ac337b694a8c85b3cff3e6c791e6 |
| Etiquetas: |
Agregar Etiqueta
Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!
|
| Sumario: | Methyl N,N-dimethyl anthranilate (MDA), ethyl anthranilate (EA) and butyl anthranilate (BA) were previously shown to repel Aedes aegypti mosquitoes from landing on human skin. However, the effect of these compounds on the orientation of flying mosquitoes in a choice situation and their effect on mosquito oviposition are not yet known. Here, we used a modified Y-tube olfactometer to test the effect of these compounds on the orientation of Aedes aegypti flying towards skin odor (human fingers), and we tested their effect on Aedes aegypti oviposition choice in a cage assay. In both behavioral situations we compared the effect to the well-documented repellent N,N-diethyl-meta-toluamide (DEET). MDA, EA, and DEET inhibited Aedes aegypti from flying towards skin odor while BA had no such effect. Conversely, MDA had no effect on oviposition while EA, BA, and DEET deterred oviposition, with the strongest effect observed for BA. Thus, we confirm that EA and DEET are generally repellent, while MDA is repellent only in a host-seeking context, and BA is deterrent only in an oviposition context. These compounds appear of potential use in mosquito control programs. |
|---|