ArticleScientific reports2024
Comparative toxicity of three variant oils and their nanoemulsions on the brown dog tick Rhipicephalus sanguineus.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Development and characterization of ivermectin nanoformulations for topical acaricidal activity against Rhipicephalus sanguineus ticks.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Larvicidal activity of essential oils and nanoemulsions against Culex pipiens larvae (Diptera: Culicidae).Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Essential Oils for Flea and Tick Control in Companion Animals: A Critical Review of Efficacy, Safety, Resistance Mitigation and Integrated Pest Management.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Acaricidal and synergistic activity of essential oils, their binary combinations, and nanoemulsions against larvae and unfed adult stages of brown dog tick Rhipicephalus sanguineus (Acari: Ixodidae).BMC veterinary research · 2026Article
- In Vitro Acaricidal Activity ofVeterinary medicine international · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Tick control mainly depends on using chemical acaricides that have led to the emergence of resistant tick populations along with environmental hazards. Natural alternatives including essential oils are now widely used to avoid the undesirable effects of chemicals on human, animals and environment. In this study, three commercial oils (myrrh, patchouli, and cypress) and their nanoemulsions (NEs) were tested against Rhipicephalus sanguineus sensu lato unfed adults. Transmission electron microscopy (TEM) and dynamic light scattering (DLS) were used to characterize the nanoemulsions. Four concentrations with three replicates were used in the bioassay of oils and NEs against ticks using an adult immersion test. Furthermore, a toxicity study of the three oils and their NEs using normal fibroblast cells (BJ-1) was performed. TEM revealed particle size ranges from 29 to 211 nm with spherical droplets. The droplet size and polydispersity index were (29.30 nm & 0.367), (211.6 nm & 0.221) and (164.2 nm & 0.237) for myrrh NE, patchouli NE, and cypress NE, respectively. Myrrh and patchouli oils recorded high acaricidal activity followed by cypress oil with LC
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.