Literature DB >> 26527362

Comparison of Repellency Effect of Mosquito Repellents for DEET, Citronella, and Fennel Oil.

Jong Kwang Yoon1, Kang-Chang Kim1, Yeondong Cho1, Yong-Dae Gwon1, Han Sam Cho1, Yoonki Heo1, Kihoon Park1, Yang-Won Lee2, Mijeong Kim3, Yu-Kyoung Oh4, Young Bong Kim1.   

Abstract

To confirm that Korean Food and Drug Administration (KFDA) guidelines are applicable to test the efficacy of mosquito repellents, these guidelines were used to test the efficacy and complete protection times (CPTs) of three representative mosquito repellents: N,N-diethyl-3-methylbenzamide (DEET), citronella, and fennel oil. The repellency of citronella oil decreased over time, from 97.9% at 0 h to 71.4% at 1 h and 57.7% at 2 h, as did the repellency of fennel oil, from 88.6% at 0 h to 61.2% at 1 h and 47.4% at 2 h. In contrast, the repellency of DEET remained over 90% for 6 h. The CPT of DEET (360 min) was much longer than the CPTs of citronella (10.5 min) and fennel oil (8.4 min). These results did not differ significantly from previous findings, and hence confirm that the KFDA guidelines are applicable for testing the efficacy of mosquito repellents.

Entities:  

Year:  2015        PMID: 26527362      PMCID: PMC4617422          DOI: 10.1155/2015/361021

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Parasitol Res        ISSN: 2090-0023


1. Introduction

Insect-borne diseases are a worldwide health problem, especially in tropical and subtropical climates. Mosquitoes transmit many diseases, including yellow fever, dengue hemorrhagic fever, malaria, several forms of encephalitis, and filariasis [1]. For example, malaria has been estimated to kill 3 million persons per year, including over 1 million children. Mosquito repellents may effectively protect humans from vector-borne diseases as well as other problems caused by mosquitoes. N,N-Diethyl-m-toluamide (DEET) is a readily available and frequently used mosquito repellent. However, adverse effects of DEET have been reported, with some being severe enough to cause sensory disturbances and affect motor capacity, memory, and learning ability [2-8]. In addition, DEET is not recommended for children, because high concentrations of DEET can cause encephalopathy and other side effects [9, 10]. Botanical mosquito repellents, which cause little risk to the environment or human health, may be feasible alternatives to synthetic chemical repellents such as DEET. Thus, many people prefer to use natural repellents extracted from plants, such as citronella oil from Cymbopogon nardus, p-menthane-3,8-diol (PMD) from Eucalyptus maculata citriodora, and fennel oil from Foeniculum vulgare [11-14]. Little information is available, however, about the mosquito repellent activities of these natural and herbal-based substances. This study evaluated the repellency of commercially available natural mosquito repellents using the Korean FDA guidelines and compared their activities with that of 24% DEET.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Mosquitoes Used in Repellent Tests

Aedes albopictus (Skuse) mosquitoes were used for repellent testing. Mosquito larvae were obtained from the Division of Medical Entomology of Korea Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (KCDC). The larvae were reared at 27°C and 70% relative humidity at a dedicated facility of Konkuk University. Adult mosquitoes were fed and maintained on a 10% sucrose solution, as described previously [15].

2.2. Repellent Testing

Three kinds of mosquito repellents, 5% citronella (California Baby Citronella spray, California Baby, USA), 5% fennel oil (Moszero spray, Naturobiotech Co., Korea), and 24% DEET (Insectan Spray, Green Cross, Korea), were purchased. Aliquots of 1.5 mL were applied to volunteers' forearms to test repellent efficacy [16].

2.3. Test Cage

A test cage (40 × 50 × 40 cm) was constructed with a metal frame to make decontamination easier. All sides were covered with an observable white net to allow viewing. A fabric sleeve was added to the front side of the test cage to allow access by a human forearm.

2.4. Patch Tests

A patch containing repellent agent was applied to clean skin on the volunteer's forearm and allowed to remain on the skin for 48 hours. Volunteers were not permitted to remove or wet the patch during this time [17]. After 48 hours, the patch was removed by medical personnel, and initial results were determined. The patch region was marked on the forearm and results were determined 96 hours after initial patch placement.

2.5. Laboratory Tests of Mosquito Repellents

The repellent tests followed KFDA guidelines modified from WHOPES [21] and EPA methods [22]. Two hundred female mosquitoes (age 5–10 days), which had never received a blood meal, were placed into each test cage and starved of their sugar diet for 12 h before the test. The arms of each volunteer were washed with unscented soap, rinsed with water, and dried for 5 min. A 1.5 mL aliquot of each repellent solution was applied evenly on the right forearm between the wrist and elbow using a pipette and allowed to dry for approximately 5 min. The untreated left arm was placed into a test cage for 3 min and the number of mosquitoes landing on that arm was counted. If fewer than 10 mosquitoes landed on that arm, the volunteer was excluded from further testing. Repellent-treated right arms were placed into the test cage for 3 min at 1 h intervals, DEET-treated arms for 6 h, and arms treated with fennel or citronella oil for 2 h. The number of mosquitoes that landed on or bit that arm was recorded every hour. Repellency (R) was calculated using the formula [23]where C is the number of mosquito bites on the control arm and T the number of bites on the treated arm. The complete protection time (CPT) was defined as the time the first mosquito landed on or bit a treated arm. To determine the CPT of mosquito repellents, the treated right arm of each volunteer was inserted into the test cage for 3 min. If there were no bites, that arm was reinserted at 10 min intervals until the first bite occurred.

2.6. Statistical Analysis

The repellency of the control and treated arms was compared using F-tests, with a P value < 0.05 considered statistically significant. SPSS was used for statistical analysis. The CPT of DEET repellent was replaced with a Kaplan-Meier survival function, since there were no bites over 6 h.

2.7. Ethics

The study protocol was approved by the IRB of Konkuk University Hospital (Approval number KUH 1120025). Forty-three volunteers were enrolled, all of whom provided written informed consent.

3. Results and Discussion

3.1. The Choice of Mosquito Species

To evaluate the effectiveness of repellent activity against mosquito, we performed preparatory experiments with widespread kinds of mosquitoes, Culex pipiens, Aedes togoi, and Aedes albopictus. Culex pipiens, common house mosquito, however, is not ideal for the repellency test in the laboratory setting because it fed on human only at night time due to its nocturnal characteristic. On the other hand, Aedes togoi showed much less biting activity compared to Aedes albopictus throughout the experiment setting, which is not optimal to quantify the biting rate to assess the effect of repellants. Thus, Aedes albopictus was chosen to evaluate the effect of repellant activities clearly in the experimental setting.

3.2. Patch Test for Mosquito Repellents

DEET, citronella, and fennel oil were tested on 10, 20, and 13 volunteers, respectively. Initial skin tests on volunteers' forearms were performed to assess their allergic responses to the three repellents. As determined by a dermatologist, none of the volunteers had allergic reactions at 48 h and 96 h (data not shown).

3.3. Repellent Effect for DEET, Citronella, and Fennel Oil

As hazards by mosquitoes have gradually increased, many kinds of mosquito repellents have been manufactured to protect humans against mosquito bites. Because mosquito repellents have played an important role in protecting humans from vector-borne diseases caused by mosquitoes, standardized guidelines are needed to evaluate the efficacy of these repellents. In the United States, for example, repellents are tested against mosquitoes and other pests according to the guidelines of the Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA; [22]) and the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM; [24]). Although European guidelines have not been developed, the efficacy of these repellents has been tested according to the guidelines of the World Health Organization Pesticide Evaluation Scheme (WHOPES; [21]) and the US EPA, which are considered the international standard testing guidelines. In Korea, the standardized guideline to test the efficacy of mosquito repellents has been established by modifying the existing EPA and WHOPES methods in 2012. In this study, we applied a laboratory test and the semifield test (data not shown) to the efficacy of DEET according to Yoon et al. [18] and botanical mosquito repellents such as citronella and fennel oils according to the KFDA guideline. Table 1 shows the mean numbers of mosquitoes landing on untreated (control) and treated forearms of volunteers over 3 min. The mean number landing on the untreated forearms of 10 volunteers over 3 min was 16.00 ± 1.71. Testing of the repellency of treated forearms every hour for 6 h showed perfect repellency for 24% DEET over the first 3 hours. One (V10), two (V9 and V10), and six (V2, V3, V4, V6, V9, and V10) volunteers were bitten at 4, 5, and 6 h, respectively, making the repellency at these times 99.54 ± 0.46%, 97.89 ± 1.49%, and 90.33 ± 4.16%, respectively. These results indicated that 24% DEET had >90% repellency for 6 hours, with a complete protection time (CPT) of over 300 min. The other four volunteers treated with DEET (V1, V5, V7, and V8) were not bitten by mosquitoes for 6 h, so the average CPT for all 10 volunteers could not be calculated. Thus, CPT in this group was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier survival function, resulting in a CPT between 315.45 and 405.55 min at 95% confidence interval.
Table 1

Repellency and CPT of 24% DEET against Aedes albopictus in laboratory test.

UntreatedRepellency (%) (±SE) at hours after treatmentCPT (min)
N 0~3 h 4 h 5 h 6 h
N R (%) N R (%) N R (%) N R (%)
V1200100010001000100Unknown
V210010001000100190360
V310010001000100460360
V425010001000100196360
V5120100010001000100Unknown
V622010001000100195.4360
V7110100010001000100Unknown
V8150100010001000100Unknown
V91301000100192.3284.6300
V10220100195.4386.4577.3240

AVG16 ± 1.710.0 ± 0.00100 ± 0.00.1 ± 0.199.54 ± 0.460.4 ± 0.3197.89 ± 1.491.4 ± 0.5690.33 ± 4.16301.45~401.55

The number (N) of mosquitoes landing on arm of each volunteer was counted per hour for 6 h. Repellency (R) was calculated each hour and complete protection time (CPT) was determined by calculating the number of minutes from the time of repellent application to the first mosquito landing.

The use of botanical mosquito repellents has increased due to their lack of adverse effects on humans. Commercially available repellent products based on plant essential oils include extracts of basil, citronella, fennel, cedar, cinnamon, garlic, geranium, lavender, rosemary, thyme, pennyroyal, peppermint, pine, and verbena oils, which have shown repellent activity against different mosquito species as well as Aedes albopictus [1, 25–27]. This study tested the repellency and CPT of 5% citronella and fennel oil-containing products according to KFDA guidelines. The repellency of 5% citronella oil was tested in 20 volunteers. When their untreated left forearms were exposed to 200 mosquitoes for 3 min, a mean (±SE) of 35.25 ± 2.81 mosquitoes landed. To calculate the CPT, the treated right arm of each volunteer was placed into the test cage for 3 min at 10 min intervals until the first mosquito landed (Table 2). Seven volunteers (V3, V8, V10, V11, V12, V13, and V17) were bitten within the first 3 min, another 11 volunteers (V2, V5, V6, V7, V9, V14, V15, V16, V18, V19, and V20) during the second 3 min exposure period (13 min), and the last two (V1 and V4) during the third 3 min exposure (23 min). These results indicated that the average CPT of citronella oil for these 20 volunteers was 10.50 ± 1.20 min.
Table 2

Repellency and CPT of 5% citronella oil against Aedes albopictus in laboratory test.

UntreatedRepellency (%) (±SE) at hours after treatmentCPT (min)
N 0 h 1 h 2 h
N R (%) N R (%) N R (%)
V1500100786127623
V2170100570.61135.313
V333390.91166.71360.63
V4190100763.21426.323
V51801001327.71422.213
V6340100779.41361.813
V7320100487.51456.313
V823195.7865.21630.43
V92701001063870.313
V1043393783.71174.43
V1138294.71365.81268.43
V1235294.31168.61265.73
V1331293.51164.51551.63
V143301001263.61748.513
V154501001175.6186013
V16520100982.71767.313
V1727196.3966.71544.43
V186801001380.9177513
V19380100878.9781.513
V20420100588.1978.613

AVG35.25 ± 2.810.70 ± 0.2497.92 ± 0.699.05 ± 0.6371.42 ± 3.0513.25 ± 0.6957.73 ± 4.0310.50 ± 1.20

The number (N) of mosquitoes landing on arm of each volunteer was counted per hour for 2 h. Repellency (R) was calculated each hour and complete protection time (CPT) was determined by calculating the number of minutes from the time of repellent application to the first mosquito landing.

After completing the CPTs for each volunteer, repellency tests were performed at application and at 1 h and 2 h after treatment (Table 2). Repellency at 0 h, 1 h, and 2 h was 97.92 ± 0.69%, 71.42 ± 3.05%, and 57.73 ± 4.03%, respectively. Repellency tests of fennel oil were performed on 13 volunteers. A mean (±SE) of 21.15 ± 0.36 mosquitoes landed on their untreated left forearms during exposure to 200 mosquitoes for 3 min (Table 3).
Table 3

Repellency and CPT of 5% fennel oil against Aedes albopictus in laboratory test.

UntreatedRepellency (%) (±SE) at hours after treatmentCPT (min)
N 0 h 1 h 2 h
N R (%) N R (%) N R (%)
V123673.91152.2115.23
V221385.71052.4766.73
V321481957.11052.43
V42019513352003
V5210100861.91052.413
V620290105018503
V72038557510503
V82001001050105023
V9210100481766.723
V1022490.9863.61054.53
V11200100860105023
V1222266.7481.8863.63
V1324483.36751154.23

AVG21.15 ± 0.362.23 ± 0.5488.57 ± 2.968.15 ± 0.7761.15 ± 3.8510.92 ± 1.0747.36 ± 5.788.38 ± 1.12

The number (N) of mosquitoes landing on arm of each volunteer was counted per hour for 2 h. Repellency (R) was calculated each hour and complete protection time (CPT) was determined by calculating the number of minutes from the time of repellent application to the first mosquito landing.

Testing of the CPT of citronella oil showed that nine volunteers (V1, V2, V3, V4, V6, V7, V10, V12, and V13) were bitten within the first 3 min, one (V5) was bitten during the second 3 min exposure period, and three (V8, V9, and V11) were bitten during the third 3 min exposure period. These results indicated that the average CPT of fennel oil for these 13 volunteers was 8.38 ± 1.12 min. Repellency tests of fennel oil were performed at application and 1 h and 2 h later. Repellency at 0 h, 1 h, and 2 h was 88.57 ± 2.96%, 61.15 ± 3.85%, and 47.36 ± 5.78%, respectively. Many plant essential oils contain volatile components, including alkanes, alcohols, aldehydes, terpenoids, and monoterpenoids, with some of these components showing a repellency effect in the vapor phase [28]. Due to their volatility, however, these components have a much shorter protection time against mosquitoes than DEET [1, 29]. Therefore, several controlled-release formulations have been developed to increase the duration of repellency [13, 30–32]. Therefore, Efficacy Data Sheets used to register repellent products with the EPA specify CPTs. Fradin and Day [33] conducted the laboratory test with the method modified from EPA and WHOPES method as follows. 250 mosquitoes were placed in a test cage measuring 30 cm × 22 cm × 22 cm and volunteers' arms were inserted for 1 min every hour for a total of 4 h to test repellency. CPT was determined by inserting volunteers' arms for 1 min every 5 min for a total of 20 min until the first mosquito bite occurred. Using this method, the mean CPTs of 23.8% DEET and 5% citronella were 301.5 ± 37.6 min and 13.5 ± 7.5 min, respectively (Table 4).
Table 4

Comparative CPT of DEET and citronella oil against mosquito bites.

Product nameActive ingredientPercentage (%)CPT (min)Reference (year)
Insectan SprayDEET24301.45~401.55 Yoon et al. (2014) [18]
(360 ± 1.96)
Aero Bug OffDEET25480EPA (2013) [20]
AquaPel 25% DEET
Insect Repellent PumpDEET25480EPA (2013) [20]
Spray 27411
/DEET25360Thavara et al. (2001) [19]
OFF! Deep WoodsDEET23.8301.5 (±37.6)Fradin and Day (2002) [33]
California Baby Citronella sprayCitronella 59.5 (±1.43)in this study
Buzz AwayCitronella 513.5 (±7.5)Fradin and Day (2002) [33]

Complete protection time (CPT) was determined by calculating the number of minutes from the time of repellent application to the first mosquito landing.

In comparison, this study used a lower density of mosquitoes, with 200 mosquitoes in a cage measuring 40 cm × 50 cm × 40 cm, because the lower-density environment more accurately mimics the biting pressures during outdoor activities. The repellency and CPT of DEET were assessed for 3 min every 1 h for a total of 6 hours. In contrast, the repellency of citronella and fennel oils was tested for 2 h, because their repellency was approximately 50% at 2 h. The mean CPTs of DEET and citronella repellent were 360 min and 9.5 min, respectively, similar to previous findings [19, 33]. However, the CPT of 25% DEET repellents registered with the EPA was reported to be 480 min, which differed from our results (Table 1). Since four of our volunteers (V1, V5, V7, and V8) were not bitten by any mosquito 6 hours after DEET treatment, the average CPT would likely have been longer had the experiment been continued until each volunteer was bitten. Thus, the CPT measured in this study was consistent with that specified by the EPA. The repellency and CPTs of DEET, citronella, and fennel oil, measured according to KFDA guidelines, were consistent with previous findings. KFDA guidelines will therefore be utilized to evaluate the efficacy of mosquito repellents.
  23 in total

Review 1.  Neurological effects associated with use of the insect repellent N,N-diethyl-m-toluamide (DEET).

Authors:  T G Osimitz; J V Murphy
Journal:  J Toxicol Clin Toxicol       Date:  1997

2.  Laboratory evaluation of controlled-release repellent formulations on human volunteers under three climatic regimens.

Authors:  R K Gupta; L C Rutledge
Journal:  J Am Mosq Control Assoc       Date:  1989-03       Impact factor: 0.917

3.  Development and evaluation of a semifield test for repellent efficacy testing.

Authors:  Jong Kwang Yoon; Kang-Chang Kim; Yeon Dong Cho; Han Sam Cho; Yang-Won Lee; Bo-Kyung Choi; Yu-Kyoung Oh; Young Bong Kim
Journal:  J Med Entomol       Date:  2014-01       Impact factor: 2.278

4.  Comparative repellency of 38 essential oils against mosquito bites.

Authors:  Yuwadee Trongtokit; Yupha Rongsriyam; Narumon Komalamisra; Chamnarn Apiwathnasorn
Journal:  Phytother Res       Date:  2005-04       Impact factor: 5.878

5.  Subchronic dermal application of N,N-diethyl m-toluamide (DEET) and permethrin to adult rats, alone or in combination, causes diffuse neuronal cell death and cytoskeletal abnormalities in the cerebral cortex and the hippocampus, and Purkinje neuron loss in the cerebellum.

Authors:  A Abdel-Rahman; A K Shetty; M B Abou-Donia
Journal:  Exp Neurol       Date:  2001-11       Impact factor: 5.330

6.  Repellency of Lantana camara (Verbenaceae) flowers against Aedes mosquitoes.

Authors:  V K Dua; N C Gupta; A C Pandey; V P Sharma
Journal:  J Am Mosq Control Assoc       Date:  1996-09       Impact factor: 0.917

7.  Toxic encephalopathy associated with use of DEET insect repellents: a case analysis of its toxicity in children.

Authors:  G Briassoulis; M Narlioglou; T Hatzis
Journal:  Hum Exp Toxicol       Date:  2001-01       Impact factor: 2.903

8.  Effects of daily dermal application of DEET and epermethrin, alone and in combination, on sensorimotor performance, blood-brain barrier, and blood-testis barrier in rats.

Authors:  M B Abou-Donia; L B Goldstein; A Dechovskaia; S Bullman; K H Jones; E A Herrick; A A Abdel-Rahman; W A Khan
Journal:  J Toxicol Environ Health A       Date:  2001-04-06

9.  Stress and combined exposure to low doses of pyridostigmine bromide, DEET, and permethrin produce neurochemical and neuropathological alterations in cerebral cortex, hippocampus, and cerebellum.

Authors:  A Abdel-Rahman; Suzanne Abou-Donia; Eman El-Masry; Ashok Shetty; Mohamed Abou-Donia
Journal:  J Toxicol Environ Health A       Date:  2004-01-23

10.  Comparative efficacy of insect repellents against mosquito bites.

Authors:  Mark S Fradin; John F Day
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2002-07-04       Impact factor: 91.245

View more
  5 in total

1.  N,N-Diethyl-3-toluamide Formulation Based on Ethanol Containing 0.1% 2-Hydroxypropyl-β-cyclodextrin Attenuates the Drug's Skin Penetration and Prolongs the Repellent Effect without Stickiness.

Authors:  Noriaki Nagai; Mayu Kawaguchi; Misa Minami; Kana Matsumoto; Tatsuji Sasabe; Kenji Nobuhara; Akira Matsubara
Journal:  Molecules       Date:  2022-05-16       Impact factor: 4.927

Review 2.  Emerging Role of Zika Virus in Adverse Fetal and Neonatal Outcomes.

Authors:  Alice Panchaud; Miloš Stojanov; Anne Ammerdorffer; Manon Vouga; David Baud
Journal:  Clin Microbiol Rev       Date:  2016-07       Impact factor: 26.132

Review 3.  Essential Oils as Repellents against Arthropods.

Authors:  Mi Young Lee
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2018-10-02       Impact factor: 3.411

4.  Controlled Release of DEET Loaded on Fibrous Mats from Electrospun PMDA/Cyclodextrin Polymer.

Authors:  Claudio Cecone; Fabrizio Caldera; Francesco Trotta; Pierangiola Bracco; Marco Zanetti
Journal:  Molecules       Date:  2018-07-11       Impact factor: 4.411

5.  The Mosquito Repellent Activity of the Active Component of Air Freshener Gel from Java Citronella Oil (Cymbopogon winterianus).

Authors:  Willy Tirza Eden; Dante Alighiri; Kasmadi Imam Supardi; Edy Cahyono
Journal:  J Parasitol Res       Date:  2020-01-29
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.