ArticleScientific reports2020
Boosting the sterile insect technique with pyriproxyfen increases tsetse flies Glossina palpalis gambiensis sterilization in controlled conditions.
Article in Scientific reports, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- The role of deer keds (Diptera: Hippoboscidae: Lipoptena and Neolipoptena) in occupational and public health.Journal of occupational medicine and toxicology (London, England) · 2025Review
- Article
- Comparison of the standard and boosted sterile insect techniques for the suppression of Aedes albopictus populations under semi-field conditions.Parasite (Paris, France) · 2025Article
- Pyriproxyfen induces lethal and sublethal effects on biological traits and demographic growth parameters in Musca domestica.Ecotoxicology (London, England) · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Tsetse flies (Diptera: Glossinidae) are the main vectors of animal and human trypanosomoses in Africa. The Sterile Insect Technique (SIT) has proven effective in controlling tsetse flies when applied to isolated populations but necessitates the production of large numbers of sterile males. A new approach, called boosted SIT, combining SIT with the contamination of wild females by sterile males coated with biocides has been proposed for large-scale control of vector populations. The aim of the study was to evaluate this new approach using pyriproxyfen on the riverine species Glossina palpalis gambiensis (Vanderplank, 1949) in the laboratory. The contamination dose and persistence of pyriproxyfen on sterile males, the impact of pyriproxyfen on male survival, and the dynamics of pyriproxyfen transfer from a sterile male to a female during mating, as well as the impact of pyriproxyfen on pupal production and adult emergence, were evaluated in the laboratory. For this purpose, a method of treatment by impregnating sterile males with a powder containing 40% pyriproxyfen has been developed. The results showed that the pyriproxyfen has no impact on the survival of sterile males. Pyriproxyfen persisted on sterile males for up to 10 days at a dose of 100 ng per fly. In addition, the horizontal transfer of pyriproxyfen from a treated sterile male to a female during mating could be measured with an average of 50 ng of pyriproxyfen transferred. After contacts without mating, the average quantity transferred was more than 10 ng. Finally, the pyriproxyfen powder was very effective on G. p. gambiensis leading to 0% emergence of the pupae produced by contaminated females. These promising results must be confirmed in the field. A large-scale assessment of this boosted pyriproxyfen-based SIT approach will be carried out against tsetse flies in Senegal (West Africa).
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.