首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>PLoS Neglected Tropical Diseases >Efficacy of novel indoor residual spraying methods targeting pyrethroid-resistant Aedes aegypti within experimental houses
【2h】

Efficacy of novel indoor residual spraying methods targeting pyrethroid-resistant Aedes aegypti within experimental houses

机译:针对室内拟除虫菊酯抗性埃及伊蚊的新型室内残留喷雾方法的功效

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

Challenges in maintaining high effectiveness of classic vector control in urban areas has renewed the interest in indoor residual spraying (IRS) as a promising approach for Aedes-borne disease prevention. While IRS has many benefits, application time and intrusive indoor applications make its scalability in urban areas difficult. Modifying IRS to account for Ae. aegypti resting behavior, named targeted IRS (TIRS, spraying walls below 1.5 m and under furniture) can reduce application time; however, an untested assumption is that modifications to IRS will not negatively impact entomological efficacy. We conducted a comparative experimental study evaluating the residual efficacy of classically-applied IRS (as developed for malaria control) compared to two TIRS application methods using a carbamate insecticide against a pyrethroid-resistant, field-derived Ae. aegypti strain. We performed our study within a novel experimental house setting (n = 9 houses) located in Merida (Mexico), with similar layouts and standardized contents. Classic IRS application (insecticide applied to full walls and under furniture) was compared to: a) TIRS: insecticide applied to walls below 1.5 m and under furniture, and b) Resting Site TIRS (RS-TIRS): insecticide applied only under furniture. Mosquito mortality was measured eight times post-application (out to six months post-application) by releasing 100 Ae. aegypti females /house and collecting live and dead individuals after 24 hrs exposure. Compared to Classic IRS, TIRS and RS-TIRS took less time to apply (31% and 82% reduction, respectively) and used less insecticide (38% and 85% reduction, respectively). Mortality of pyrethroid-resistant Ae. aegypti did not significantly differ among the three IRS application methods up to two months post application, and did not significantly differ between Classic IRS and TIRS up to four months post application. These data illustrate that optimizing IRS to more efficiently target Ae. aegypti can both reduce application time and insecticide volume with no apparent reduction in entomological efficacy.
机译:在城市地区保持经典病媒控制的高效性方面的挑战使人们对室内残留喷洒(IRS)成为一种预防伊蚊传播疾病的新方法有了新的兴趣。尽管IRS具有许多优点,但应用程序时间和侵入性室内应用程序使其在城市地区的可伸缩性变得困难。修改IRS以解决Ae。 aegypti的休息行为称为目标IRS(TIRS,在1.5 m以下并在家具下喷涂墙壁)可以减少施工时间;但是,未经检验的假设是对IRS的修改不会对昆虫学功效产生负面影响。我们进行了一项对比实验研究,评估了传统应用的IRS(为控制疟疾而开发)与使用氨基甲酸酯类杀虫剂对拟除虫菊酯抗药性,田间Ae的两种TIRS应用方法相比的残留功效。埃及毒株。我们在墨西哥梅里达(Merida)的一个新颖的实验房屋环境中(n = 9所房屋)进行了研究,该房屋具有相似的布局和标准化的内容。将典型的IRS施用(杀虫剂施用到整面墙壁和家具下面)与以下情况进行了比较:a)TIRS:施用到1.5 m以下的墙壁和家具下面的杀虫剂,以及b)TIRS休息场所(RS-TIRS):仅在家具下面施用的杀虫剂。通过释放100 Ae,在施用后八次(施用后六个月)测量蚊虫死亡率。暴露于埃及24小时后的埃及雌性/房屋,并收集活体和死亡个体。与经典IRS相比,TIRS和RS-TIRS花费的时间更少(分别减少31%和82%),使用的杀虫剂更少(分别减少38%和85%)。拟除虫菊酯抗性Ae的死亡率。在申请后两个月内,aegypti在三种IRS申请方法之间没有显着差异,在申请后四个月内,Classic IRS和TIRS之间也没有显着差异。这些数据说明优化IRS以更有效地瞄准Ae。埃及菊既可以减少施用时间,又可以减少杀虫剂的使用量,而昆虫学功效却没有明显降低。

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号