1
|
Protection against mosquito vectors Aedes aegypti, Anopheles stephensi and Culex quinquefasciatus using a novel insect repellent, ethyl anthranilate. Acta Trop 2017; 174:56-63. [PMID: 28666890 DOI: 10.1016/j.actatropica.2017.06.024] [Citation(s) in RCA: 21] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/08/2017] [Revised: 06/16/2017] [Accepted: 06/19/2017] [Indexed: 02/06/2023]
Abstract
Growing concern on the application of synthetic mosquito repellents in the recent years has instigated the identification and development of better alternatives to control different mosquito-borne diseases. In view of above, present investigation evaluates the repellent activity of ethyl anthranilate (EA), a non-toxic, FDA approved volatile food additive against three known mosquito vectors namely, Aedes aegypti, Anopheles stephensi and Culex quinquefasciatus under laboratory conditions following standard protocols. Three concentration levels (2%, 5% and 10% w/v) of EA were tested against all the three selected mosquito species employing K & D module and arm-in-cage method to determine the effective dose (ED50) and complete protection time (CPT), respectively. The repellent activity of EA was further investigated by modified arm-in-cage method to determine the protection over extended spatial ranges against all mosquito species. All behavioural situations were compared with the well-documented repellent N,N-diethylphenyl acetamide (DEPA) as a positive control. The findings demonstrated that EA exhibited significant repellent activity against all the three mosquitoes species. The ED50 values of EA, against Aedes aegypti, Anopheles stephensi and Culex quinquefasciatus were found to be 0.96%, 5.4% and 3.6% w/v, respectively. At the concentration of 10% w/v, it provided CPTs of 60, 60 and 30min, respectively, against Aedes aegypti, Anopheles stephensi and Culex quinquefasciatus mosquitoes. Again in spatial repellency evaluation, EA was found to be extremely effective in repelling all the three tested species of mosquitoes. Ethyl anthranilate provided comparable results to standard repellent DEPA during the study. Results have concluded that the currently evaluated chemical, EA has potential repellent activity against some well established mosquito vectors. The study emphasizes that repellent activity of EA could be exploited for developing effective, eco-friendly, acceptable and safer alternative to the existing harmful repellents for personal protection against different hematophagous mosquito species.
Collapse
|
2
|
van Eijk AM, Ramanathapuram L, Sutton PL, Peddy N, Choubey S, Mohanty S, Asokan A, Ravishankaran S, Priya GSL, Johnson JA, Velayutham S, Kanagaraj D, Patel A, Desai N, Tandel N, Sullivan SA, Wassmer SC, Singh R, Pradhan K, Carlton JM, Srivasatava HC, Eapen A, Sharma SK. The use of mosquito repellents at three sites in India with declining malaria transmission: surveys in the community and clinic. Parasit Vectors 2016; 9:418. [PMID: 27465199 PMCID: PMC4963934 DOI: 10.1186/s13071-016-1709-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 23] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/11/2016] [Accepted: 07/18/2016] [Indexed: 12/01/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Repellents such as coils, vaporizers, mats and creams can be used to reduce the risk of malaria and other infectious diseases. Although evidence for their effectiveness is limited, they are advertised as providing an additional approach to mosquito control in combination with other strategies, e.g. insecticide-treated nets. We examined the use of repellents in India in an urban setting in Chennai (mainly Plasmodium vivax malaria), a peri-urban setting in Nadiad (both P. vivax and P. falciparum malaria), and a more rural setting in Raurkela (mainly P. falciparum malaria). Methods The use of repellents was examined at the household level during a census, and at the individual level in cross-sectional surveys and among patients visiting a clinic with fever or other symptoms. Factors associated with their use were examined in a multivariate analysis, and the association between malaria and the use of repellents was assessed among survey- and clinic participants. Results Characteristics of participants differed by region, with more people of higher education present in Chennai. Use of repellents varied between 56–77 % at the household level and between 32–78 % at the individual level. Vaporizers were the main repellents used in Chennai, whereas coils were more common in Nadiad and Raurkela. In Chennai and Nadiad, vaporizers were more likely to be used in households with young male children. Vaporizer use was associated with higher socio-economic status (SES) in households in Chennai and Nadiad, whereas use of coils was greater in the lower SES strata. In Raurkela, there was a higher use of coils among the higher SES strata. Education was associated with the use of a repellent among survey participants in Chennai and clinic study participants in Chennai and Nadiad. Repellent use was associated with less malaria in the clinic study in Chennai and Raurkela, but not in the surveys, with the exception of the use of coils in Nadiad. Conclusions Repellents are widely used in India. Their use is influenced by the level of education and SES. Information on effectiveness and guidance on choices may improve rational use. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13071-016-1709-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Anna Maria van Eijk
- Center for Genomics and Systems Biology, Department of Biology, New York University, New York, NY, 10003, USA.
| | - Lalitha Ramanathapuram
- Center for Genomics and Systems Biology, Department of Biology, New York University, New York, NY, 10003, USA
| | - Patrick L Sutton
- Center for Genomics and Systems Biology, Department of Biology, New York University, New York, NY, 10003, USA.,Acsel Health, 500 5th Ave, Suite 2760, New York, NY, 10110, USA
| | - Nandini Peddy
- Jigyansha, International Center of Excellence for Malaria Research, Sector 1, Raurkela, Odisha, India
| | - Sandhya Choubey
- Jigyansha, International Center of Excellence for Malaria Research, Sector 1, Raurkela, Odisha, India
| | - Stuti Mohanty
- Jigyansha, International Center of Excellence for Malaria Research, Sector 1, Raurkela, Odisha, India
| | - Aswin Asokan
- National Institute of Malaria Research Field Unit, Indian Council of Medical Research, National Institute of Epidemiology Campus, Ayapakkam, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India
| | - Sangamithra Ravishankaran
- National Institute of Malaria Research Field Unit, Indian Council of Medical Research, National Institute of Epidemiology Campus, Ayapakkam, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India
| | - G Sri Lakshmi Priya
- National Institute of Malaria Research Field Unit, Indian Council of Medical Research, National Institute of Epidemiology Campus, Ayapakkam, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India
| | - Justin Amala Johnson
- National Institute of Malaria Research Field Unit, Indian Council of Medical Research, National Institute of Epidemiology Campus, Ayapakkam, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India
| | - Sangeetha Velayutham
- National Institute of Malaria Research Field Unit, Indian Council of Medical Research, National Institute of Epidemiology Campus, Ayapakkam, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India
| | - Deena Kanagaraj
- National Institute of Malaria Research Field Unit, Indian Council of Medical Research, National Institute of Epidemiology Campus, Ayapakkam, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India
| | - Ankita Patel
- National Institute of Malaria Research Field Unit, Civil Hospital, Nadiad, Gujarat, India
| | - Nisha Desai
- National Institute of Malaria Research Field Unit, Civil Hospital, Nadiad, Gujarat, India
| | - Nikunj Tandel
- National Institute of Malaria Research Field Unit, Civil Hospital, Nadiad, Gujarat, India
| | - Steven A Sullivan
- Center for Genomics and Systems Biology, Department of Biology, New York University, New York, NY, 10003, USA
| | - Samuel C Wassmer
- London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, Keppel St, London, WC1E 7HT, UK
| | - Ranveer Singh
- National Institute of Malaria Research Field Unit, Civil Hospital, Nadiad, Gujarat, India
| | - K Pradhan
- Jigyansha, International Center of Excellence for Malaria Research, Sector 1, Raurkela, Odisha, India
| | - Jane M Carlton
- Center for Genomics and Systems Biology, Department of Biology, New York University, New York, NY, 10003, USA
| | - H C Srivasatava
- National Institute of Malaria Research Field Unit, Civil Hospital, Nadiad, Gujarat, India
| | - Alex Eapen
- National Institute of Malaria Research Field Unit, Indian Council of Medical Research, National Institute of Epidemiology Campus, Ayapakkam, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India
| | - S K Sharma
- National Institute of Malaria Research, Indian Council of Medical Research, Dwarka Sector 8, New Delhi, India
| |
Collapse
|