ArticlePest management science2026
A natural barrier: tick-repellent potential of a spruce-derived volatile blend against Hyalomma excavatum and Ixodes ricinus.
Article in Pest management science, 2026. 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.
- Synthesis, Characterization and Biological Activity of Alkyl 3-(Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
Abstract
Ixodes ricinus and Hyalomma excavatum are two widely dispersed vectors of pathogens, including those that cause Lyme disease and Crimean-Congo haemorrhagic fever in the human population. Recently developed, plant-derived, mosquito-repellent blends have shown promise against other vector clades, and this study assesses these blends as potential tick repellents. Blends of (+)-borneol, bornyl acetate, eugenol, isoeugenol and camphor were assessed in two formats: blends 3 and 4. Ticks were assessed using the moving object bioassay (Ixodes) or a dual-choice behavioural assay (Hyalomma). Both blends were compared against negative controls and four commercially available synthetic repellents: N,N-diethyl-3-methylbenzamide (DEET), 2-(2-hydroxyethyl)-1-methylpropylstyrene 1-piperidine carboxylate) (Picaridin), 3-(N-n-butyl-N-acetyl)-amino-propionic acid ethyl ester (IR3535) and p-menthane-3,8-diol (PMD). Results demonstrate the efficacies of blends 3 and 4; moreover, both were more effective than the commercial repellents (P < 0.05). Blend 3 was marginally more effective than blend 4, and differences in the repellent action were noted for each of the tick species, suggesting broad-spectrum vector-repellent activities, irrespective of life strategy. Overall, this work demonstrates the clear potential of blends 3 and 4 as tick repellents that offer an improved vector response over currently available commercial repellents. Furthermore, that the same repellent blends are capable of tick repellency in addition to mosquito repellency, offers the potential for widely dispersed usage across a range of integrated vector management strategies. © 2025 The Author(s). Pest Management Science published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Society of Chemical Industry.
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.