Laboratory and field evaluation of deet, CIC-4, and AI3-37220 against Anopheles dirus (Diptera: Culicidae) in Thailand.

Laboratory and field tests of the repellents diethyl methylbenzamide (deet), 1-(3-Cyclohexen-1-yl-carbonyl)-2-methylpiperidine (AI3-37220), and (2-hydroxymethylcyclohexyl) acetic acid lactone (CIC-4) were conducted against Anopheles dirus Peyton & Harrison, the principal malaria vector in Thailand. In the laboratory, An. dirus was more sensitive to CIC-4 than either AI3-37220 or deet. The duration of protection provided by each repellent in laboratory tests increased with higher concentrations of repellents and when exposed in cages containing fewer mosquitoes. A field study in Chanthaburi Province, southeastern Thailand, during November 1993 tested 25% (wt:wt) ethanol solutions of each repellent against An. dirus. In contrast to the laboratory experiments, protection provided by AI3-37220 was significantly better than either deet or CIC-4 and there was no significant difference between deet and CIC-4. Protection provided by deet and CIC-4 fell to below 95% 2 h after repellent application, whereas AI3-37220 provided > 95% protection for 4 h. The protection provided by all repellents fell to < or = 65% 7 h after repellent application.

Response of Anopheles dirus and Aedes albopictus to repellents in the laboratory.

Laboratory tests were conducted to study the response of Anopheles dirus and Aedes albopictus to repellent formulations containing diethyl methylbenzamide (deet) and dimethyl phthalate. Anopheles dirus was tolerant of low concentrations of deet (5-20%), and formulations containing < or = 35% deet provided protection for < or = 90 min. In contrast, Ae. albopictus was sensitive to these formulations, which provided > or = 180 min protection from bites.