ArticleJournal of medical entomology2025
Novo plant-based mosquito repellent shows promise for exclusion of Aedes mosquitoes from "window" entry.
Article in Journal of medical entomology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- A natural barrier: tick-repellent potential of a spruce-derived volatile blend against Hyalomma excavatum and Ixodes ricinus.Pest management science · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Mosquitoes threaten over half of the world's population through vectored diseases such as malaria, zika, yellow fever, dengue, and chikungunya. Mosquitoes have a highly developed olfactory system attuned to chemotaxis relating to host-seeking, mating, and oviposition behavior. In this study, we aimed to determine the spatial efficacy of 2 plant-based repellent blends (Blend3 and Blend4 that had previously been found to successfully repel Aedes, Anopheles and Culex mosquitoes in wind tunnel assays) in excluding Aedes aegypti from the window entry. A new cage system was developed for parallel "no-choice" and "choice" olfactometric assays. In the no-choice trial, Blends 3 and 4, as well as commercial products (N, N-diethyl-3-methylbenzamide, p-menthane-3,8-diol [PMD], 3-(N-n-butyl-N-acetyl)-amino-propionic acid ethyl ester, and 2-(2-hydroxyethyl)-1-methylpropylstyrene 1-piperidine carboxylate), were adsorbed into filter papers of different sizes and placed in a window created between 2 attached bug dorms. Then, the number of mosquitoes entering the window was counted through a 6-min period. In choice olfactometric assays, Blends 3, 4, and PMD were adsorbed into filter paper and the number of mosquitoes moving away from Blend 3 and PMD were compared. No-choice assays showed that Blend3 (P < 0.001) and Blend4 (P = 0.0012) were more repellent than the best commercial product PMD. Additionally, while Blend 4 was significantly more repellent than Blend 3 (P = 0.012) in the choice assay, overall, these 2 blends show promise as new repellents for the spatial exclusion of Aedes aegypti from window entry alone or as part of a "push-pull'' strategy.
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.