Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25961834›Full record

ArticlePloS one2015

The Repellent DEET Potentiates Carbamate Effects via Insect Muscarinic Receptor Interactions: An Alternative Strategy to Control Insect Vector-Borne Diseases.

Aly Abd-Ella, Maria Stankiewicz, Karolina Mikulska, Wieslaw Nowak, Cédric Pennetier, Mathilde Goulu, Carole Fruchart-Gaillard, Patricia Licznar, Véronique Apaire-Marchais, Olivier List and 3 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

18 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

13 authors.

Aly Abd-EllaLaboratoire Récepteurs et Canaux Ioniques Membranaires (RCIM) UPRES EA 2647/USC INRA 1330, SFR 4207 QUASAV, Université d'Angers, UFR SCIENCES, Angers cedex, France; Plant Protection Department, Faculty of Agriculture, Assiut University, Assiut, Egypt.
Maria StankiewiczFaculty of Biology and Environment Protection, N. Copernicus University, Torun, Poland.
Karolina MikulskaInstitute of Physics, Faculty of Physics, Astronomy and Informatics, N. Copernicus University, Torun, Poland.
Wieslaw NowakInstitute of Physics, Faculty of Physics, Astronomy and Informatics, N. Copernicus University, Torun, Poland.
Cédric PennetierInstitut de Recherche pour le Développement, UMR 224 Maladies Infectieuses et Vecteurs: Ecologie, Génétique, Evolution et Contrôle (MiVEGEC), Montpellier, France.
Mathilde GouluLaboratoire Récepteurs et Canaux Ioniques Membranaires (RCIM) UPRES EA 2647/USC INRA 1330, SFR 4207 QUASAV, Université d'Angers, UFR SCIENCES, Angers cedex, France.
Carole Fruchart-GaillardCEA, iBiTecS, Service d'Ingénierie Moléculaire des Protéines (SIMOPRO), Laboratoire de Toxinologie Moléculaire et Biotechnologie, Gif sur Yvette, France.
Patricia LicznarLaboratoire Récepteurs et Canaux Ioniques Membranaires (RCIM) UPRES EA 2647/USC INRA 1330, SFR 4207 QUASAV, Université d'Angers, UFR SCIENCES, Angers cedex, France.
Véronique Apaire-MarchaisLaboratoire Récepteurs et Canaux Ioniques Membranaires (RCIM) UPRES EA 2647/USC INRA 1330, SFR 4207 QUASAV, Université d'Angers, UFR SCIENCES, Angers cedex, France.
Olivier ListLaboratoire Récepteurs et Canaux Ioniques Membranaires (RCIM) UPRES EA 2647/USC INRA 1330, SFR 4207 QUASAV, Université d'Angers, UFR SCIENCES, Angers cedex, France.
Vincent CorbelInstitut de Recherche pour le Développement, UMR 224 Maladies Infectieuses et Vecteurs: Ecologie, Génétique, Evolution et Contrôle (MiVEGEC), Montpellier, France; Department of Entomology, Faculty of Agriculture at Kamphaeng Saen, Kamphaeng Saen Campus, Kasetsart University, Nakhon Pathom, Thailand.
Denis ServentCEA, iBiTecS, Service d'Ingénierie Moléculaire des Protéines (SIMOPRO), Laboratoire de Toxinologie Moléculaire et Biotechnologie, Gif sur Yvette, France.
Bruno LapiedLaboratoire Récepteurs et Canaux Ioniques Membranaires (RCIM) UPRES EA 2647/USC INRA 1330, SFR 4207 QUASAV, Université d'Angers, UFR SCIENCES, Angers cedex, France.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Insect vector-borne diseases remain one of the principal causes of human mortality. In addition to conventional measures of insect control, repellents continue to be the mainstay for personal protection. Because of the increasing pyrethroid-resistant mosquito populations, alternative strategies to reconstitute pyrethroid repellency and knock-down effects have been proposed by mixing the repellent DEET (N,N-Diethyl-3-methylbenzamide) with non-pyrethroid insecticide to better control resistant insect vector-borne diseases. By using electrophysiological, biochemichal, in vivo toxicological techniques together with calcium imaging, binding studies and in silico docking, we have shown that DEET, at low concentrations, interacts with high affinity with insect M1/M3 mAChR allosteric site potentiating agonist effects on mAChRs coupled to phospholipase C second messenger pathway. This increases the anticholinesterase activity of the carbamate propoxur through calcium-dependent regulation of acetylcholinesterase. At high concentrations, DEET interacts with low affinity on distinct M1/M3 mAChR site, counteracting the potentiation. Similar dose-dependent dual effects of DEET have also been observed at synaptic mAChR level. Additionally, binding and in silico docking studies performed on human M1 and M3 mAChR subtypes indicate that DEET only displays a low affinity antagonist profile on these M1/M3 mAChRs. These results reveal a selective high affinity positive allosteric site for DEET in insect mAChRs. Finally, bioassays conducted on Aedes aegypti confirm the synergistic interaction between DEET and propoxur observed in vitro, resulting in a higher mortality of mosquitoes. Our findings reveal an unusual allosterically potentiating action of the repellent DEET, which involves a selective site in insect. These results open exciting research areas in public health particularly in the control of the pyrethroid-resistant insect-vector borne diseases. Mixing low doses of DEET and a non-pyrethroid insecticide will lead to improvement in the efficiency treatments thus reducing both the concentration of active ingredients and side effects for non-target organisms. The discovery of this insect specific site may pave the way for the development of new strategies essential in the management of chemical use against resistant mosquitoes.

Indexed as

AedesAnimalsCarbamatesDEETDrug SynergismHumansInsect RepellentsInsect VectorsPropoxurReceptor, Muscarinic M1Receptor, Muscarinic M3CarbamatesDEETInsect RepellentsPropoxurReceptor, Muscarinic M1Receptor, Muscarinic M3

Identifiers

PMID25961834
PMCPMC4427492

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.