ArticlePloS one2017
DEET as a feeding deterrent.
Article in PloS one, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Small molecules as arthropod kinin receptor antagonists, feeding modulators, or novel mosquitocidal agents.Pest management science · 2026Article
- Template-based modeling of insect odorant receptors outperforms AlphaFold3 for ligand binding predictions.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Natural insensitivity and the effects of concentration on the repellency and survival of American dog ticks (Dermacentor variabilis) by DEET.Experimental & applied acarology · 2020Article
- Multiple channels of DEET repellency in Drosophila.Pest management science · 2020Article
- Cellular and Molecular Targets of Waterbuck Repellent Blend Odors in Antennae ofFrontiers in cellular neuroscience · 2020Article
- DEET and other repellents are inhibitors of mosquito odorant receptors for oviposition attractants.Insect biochemistry and molecular biology · 2019Article
- Aedes aegypti Mosquitoes Use Their Legs to Sense DEET on Contact.Current biology : CB · 2019Article
- A popular Indian clove-based mosquito repellent is less effective against Culex quinquefasciatus and Aedes aegypti than DEET.PloS one · 2019Article
- Bacteria: A novel source for potent mosquito feeding-deterrents.Science advances · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The insect repellent N,N-diethyl-3-methylbenzamide (DEET), is a multimodal compound that acts as a spatial repellent as well as an irritant (contact repellent), thus being perceived by the insect's olfactory and gustatory systems as an odorant and a tastant, respectively. Soon after DEET was developed, almost 6 decades ago, it was reported that it reduced mosquito feeding on blood mixed with this repellent. It is now known that the mosquito proboscis senses contact repellents with the tips (labella) of the labium, which remain in direct contact with the outer layers of the skin, while the stylets, including the feeding deterrent sensor (labrum), penetrate the skin. We designed a behavioral assay that allowed us to measure feeding deterrence without complications from contact or spatial repellency. Using the southern house mosquito, Culex quinquefasciatus, we demonstrate here that when DEET was mixed with blood and covered by Parafilm® layers, the mean number of landings and duration of contacts with surfaces covering blood mixed with DEET or blood plus solvent (dimethyl sulfoxide) did not differ significantly thus implying that DEET did not leak to the outer surface. The feeding times, however, were significantly different. When blood was mixed either with 0.1 or 1% DEET, female southern house mosquitoes spent significantly (P<0.0001) less time feeding than the time spent feeding on blood mixed only with the solvent. By contrast, significant differences in the mean times of feeding on blood containing 1% picaridin and blood plus solvent were significant at 5%, but not at 1% level. Like DEET, the contact repellent and insecticide, permethrin, caused a significant (P<0.0001) reduction in feeding time. We, therefore, concluded, that in this context, DEET, permethrin, and, to a lesser extent, picaridin, act as feeding deterrents.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.