A popular Indian clove-based mosquito repellent is less effective against Culex quinquefasciatus and Aedes aegypti than DEET.

Insect repellents are widely used as the first line of defense against mosquito bites and transmission of disease-causing agents. However, the cost of daily applications of even the most affordable and the gold standard of insect repellents, DEET, is still high for low-income populations where repellents are needed the most. An Indian clove-based homemade recipe has been presented as a panacea. We analyzed this homemade repellent and confirmed by behavioral measurements and odorant receptor responses that eugenol is the active ingredient in this formulation. Prepared as advertised, this homemade repellent is ineffective, whereas 5x more concentrated extracts from the brand most enriched in eugenol showed moderate repellency activity against Culex quinquefasciatus and Aedes aegypti. DEET showed higher performance when compared to the 5x concentrated formulation and is available in the same market at a lower price than the cost of the ingredients to prepare the homemade formulation.

Conspecific and allospecific larval extracts entice mosquitoes to lay eggs and may be used in attract-and-kill control strategy.

One of the strategies of integrated vector management is to lure gravid mosquitoes for surveillance purposes or to entice them to lay eggs in water containing toxins that kill the offspring (attract-and-kill or trap-and-kill). Typically, the major challenge of this approach is the development of a lure that stimulates oviposition plus a toxin with no deterrent effect. Bacillus thuringiensis var. israelensis (Bti) satisfies the latter criterion, but lures for these autocidal gravid traps are sorely needed. We observed that gravid Aedes aegypti, Ae. albopictus, and Culex quinquefasciatus laid significantly more eggs in cups with extracts from 4th-stage larvae (4 L) of the same or different species. No activity was found when 4 L were extracted with hexane, diethyl ether, methanol, or butanol, but activity was observed with dimethyl sulfoxide extracts. Larval extracts contained both oviposition stimulant(s)/attractant(s) and deterrent(s), which partitioned in the water and hexane phases, respectively. Lyophilized larval extracts were active after a month, but activity was reduced by keeping the sample at 4 °C. In the tested range of 0.1 to 1 larvae-equivalent per milliliter, oviposition activity increased in a dose-dependent manner. In field experiments, Ae. aegpti laid significantly more eggs in traps loaded with larval extracts plus Bti than in control traps with water plus Bti.

Does Zika virus infection affect mosquito response to repellents?

The World Health Organization (WHO) recommends that people travelling to or living in areas with Zika virus (ZIKV) outbreaks or epidemics adopt prophylactic measures to reduce or eliminate mosquito bites, including the use of insect repellents. It is, however, unknown whether repellents are effective against ZIKV-infected mosquitoes, in part because of the ethical concerns related to exposing a human subject's arm to infected mosquitoes in the standard arm-in-cage assay. We used a previously developed, human subject-free behavioural assay, which mimics a human subject to evaluate the top two recommended insect repellents. Our measurements showed that DEET provided significantly higher protection than picaridin provided against noninfected, host-seeking females of the southern house mosquito, Culex quinquefasciatus, and the yellow fever mosquito, Aedes aegypti. When tested at lower doses, we observed a significant reduction in DEET-elicited protection against ZIKV-infected yellow fever mosquitoes from old and recent laboratory colonies. The reduction in protection is more likely associated with aging than the virus infection and could be compensated by applying a 5x higher dose of DEET. A substantial protection against ZIKV-infected and old noninfected mosquitoes was achieved with 5% DEET, which corresponds approximately to a 30% dose in the conventional arm-in-cage assays.