ArticlePloS one2025
A multi-assay assessment of insecticide resistance in Culex pipiens (Diptera: Culicidae) informs a decision-making framework.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
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
Abstract
Insecticide resistance (IR) is an increasing problem globally, making control of vector-borne diseases more difficult. Reduced susceptibility to permethrin in Culex pipiens, an important vector for West Nile virus, has been reported across the US based on a standardized laboratory method: the CDC bottle bioassay. This bioassay uses a rapid phenotypic outcome to reveal evidence for IR, but how this translates to the effectiveness of formulated products used in an operational setting is unclear. Therefore, other methods for IR monitoring are recommended to quantify IR or evaluate formulated products against field populations in real-world conditions. To compare some of the available methods, we collected populations of Cx. pipiens from six sites in the Northwest Mosquito Abatement District (Cook Co., Illinois), and used a susceptible laboratory strain of Cx. pipiens as a control, to test for IR to pyrethroids using CDC bottle bioassays, caged field trials, and topical applications. CDC bottle bioassays suggested that Cx. pipiens from this area exhibit IR to both etofenprox and Sumithrin®. Caged field trials with ultra-low volume Anvil® 10 + 10 (Sumithrin®) demonstrated resistance to the product and underscored the need for inclusion of a susceptible control to differentiate IR from inadequate product distribution. Topical applications revealed low to high levels of resistance to synergized and unsynergized pyrethroids (etofenprox, Sumithrin®, and deltamethrin) in all field populations. Based on these data, we provide a new decision-making tree for mosquito control professionals which will guide selection of the most optimal assay for IR surveillance based on their goals, needs, and resources.
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.