ArticleParasites & vectors2022
Comparison of the variability in mortality data generated by CDC bottle bioassay, WHO tube test, and topical application bioassay using Aedes aegypti mosquitoes.
Article in Parasites & vectors, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Evolution of Knockdown Resistance: Genotypic and Phenotypic Insights IntoEvolutionary applications · 2026Article
- Updated Adulticide Susceptibility Status of Florida Populations ofPathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Pyrethroid resistance in Aedes aegypti: genetic mechanisms worldwide, and recommendations for effective vector control.Parasites & vectors · 2025Review
- Evaluating the Metrics of Insecticide Resistance and Efficacy: Comparison of the CDC Bottle Bioassay with Formulated and Technical-Grade Insecticide and a Sentinel Cage Field Trial.Tropical medicine and infectious disease · 2025Article
- A multi-assay assessment of insecticide resistance in Culex pipiens (Diptera: Culicidae) informs a decision-making framework.PloS one · 2025Article
- Article
- Exploring sources of inaccuracy and irreproducibility in the CDC bottle bioassay through direct insecticide quantification.Parasites & vectors · 2024Article
- Pyrethroid susceptibility reversal in Aedes aegypti: A longitudinal study in Tapachula, Mexico.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2024Article
- Assessing pyrethroid resistance in Aedes aegypti from Cordoba Colombia: Implications of kdr mutations.PloS one · 2024Article
- Topical, contact, and oral susceptibility of adult Culicoides biting midges (Diptera: Ceratopogonidae) to fluralaner.Parasites & vectors · 2023Article
- Fine-scale spatial distribution of deltamethrin resistance and population structure of Anopheles funestus and Anopheles arabiensis populations in Southern Mozambique.Malaria journal · 2023Article
- Characterising the intensity of insecticide resistance: A novel framework for analysis of intensity bioassay data.Current research in parasitology & vector-borne diseases · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundInsecticide resistance remains a major public health problem. Resistance surveillance is critical for effective vector control and resistance management planning. Commonly used insecticide susceptibility bioassays for mosquitoes are the CDC bottle bioassay and the WHO tube test. Less commonly used in the field but considered the gold standard for assessing insecticide susceptibility in the development of novel insecticides is the topical application bioassay. Each of these bioassays has critical differences in how they assess insecticide susceptibility that impacts their ability to differentiate between resistant and susceptible populations or determine different levels of resistance intensity.
methodsWe compared the CDC bottle bioassay, the WHO tube test, and the topical application bioassay in establishing the dose-response against deltamethrin (DM) using the DM-resistant Aedes aegypti strain MC1. Mosquitoes were exposed to a range of insecticide concentrations to establish a dose-response curve and assess variation around model predictions. In addition, 10 replicates of 20-25 mosquitoes were exposed to a fixed dose with intermediate mortality to assess the degree of variation in mortality.
resultsThe topical application bioassay exhibited the lowest amount of variation in the dose-response data, followed by the WHO tube test. The CDC bottle bioassay had the highest level of variation. In the fixed-dose experiment, a higher variance was similarly found for the CDC bottle bioassay compared with the WHO tube test and topical application bioassay.
conclusionThese data suggest that the CDC bottle bioassay has the lowest power and the topical application bioassay the highest power to differentiate between resistant and susceptible populations and assess changes over time and between populations. This observation has significant implications for the interpretation of surveillance results from different assays. Ultimately, it will be important to discuss optimal insecticide resistance surveillance tools in terms of the surveillance objective, practicality in the field, and accuracy of the tool to reach that objective.
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.