ArticleParasites & vectors2026
Efficacy of injectable versus topical formulation of ivermectin against Anopheles stephensi mosquitoes feeding on different body locations of treated Holstein calves.
Article in Parasites & vectors, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
backgroundMalaria is a major public health concern and is transmitted to humans by the bite of infected Anopheles mosquitoes. One strategy to reduce populations of zoophagic Anopheles (i.e., likely to feed on other animals as well as humans) is the use of systemic veterinary parasiticides. The most widely systemic parasiticide used for this purpose is ivermectin. Ivermectin is available for livestock in two formulations; injectable and topical "pour-on." The purpose of this study was to evaluate the survival and fecundity of a zoophagic species, Anopheles stephensi, when fed on calves treated with different ivermectin formulations.
methodsThree groups of four dairy calves were used; calves in one group received a single subcutaneous injection of commercial ivermectin, calves in another group were treated topically once with pour-on ivermectin, and the third group was left untreated. At various times after treatment, groups of mosquitoes were fed simultaneously on different parts of the body to determine if feeding location of mosquitoes influenced the efficacy of treatment. Engorged mosquitoes were maintained for 7 days to monitor survival and fecundity.
resultsBoth formulations significantly reduced An. stephensi survival and fecundity for up to 9 and 14 days, respectively, following treatment of calves. Topical formulation of ivermectin applied to the back of the calves significantly reduced the survival of An. stephensi that fed on the back for up to 23 days after treatment, but not for mosquitoes that fed concurrently on the belly or the leg of the same calves, suggesting that a portion of topically applied ivermectin may remain at the site of application. Mosquitoes were less likely to feed on topically treated calves, implying that topical application may confer some mild repellency.
conclusionsDetermining the body location(s) where zoophagic Anopheles mosquitoes feed on livestock (e.g., legs) will allow targeted application and methods (e.g., foot baths) for more efficient use of topical formulations of ivermectin as part of an integrated zoophagic vector management 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.