首页> 外文期刊>Acta tropica: Journal of Biomedical Sciences >Evaluation of commercial products for personal protection against mosquitoes
【24h】

Evaluation of commercial products for personal protection against mosquitoes

机译:评估个人防护蚊子的商业产品

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Human landing catch studies were conducted in a semi-field setting to determine the efficacy of seven commercial products used for personal protection against mosquitoes. Experiments were conducted in two empty, insecticide free, mesh-enclosed greenhouses, in Israel, with either 1500 Aedes albopictus or 1500 Culex pipiens released on consecutive study nights. The products tested in this study were the OFF!? Clip-On? Mosquito Repellent (Metofluthrin 31.2%) and the Terminix? ALLCLEAR? Sidekick Mosquito Repeller (Cinnamon oil 10.5%; Eugenol 13%; Geranium oil 21%; Peppermint 5.3%; Lemongrass oil 2.6%), which are personal diffusers; Super Band? Wristband (22% Citronella oil) and the PIC? Citronella Plus Wristband (Geraniol 15%; Lemongrass oil 5%, Citronella oil 1%); the Sonic Insect Repeller Keychain; the Mosquito Guard Patch (Oil of Lemon Eucalyptus 80mg), an adhesive-backed sticker for use on textiles; and the Mosquito Patch (vitamin B1 300mg), a transdermal patch. It was determined that the sticker, transdermal patch, wristbands and sonic device did not provide significant protection to volunteers compared with the mosquito attack rate on control volunteers who were not wearing a repellent device. The personal diffusers: - OFF!? Clip-On? and Terminix? ALLCLEAR? Sidekick - provided superior protection compared with all other devices in this study. These diffusers reduced biting on the arms of volunteers by 96.28% and 95.26% respectively, for Ae. albopictus, and by 94.94% and 92.15% respectively, for Cx. pipiens. In a second trial conducted to compare these devices directly, biting was reduced by the OFF!? Clip-On? and the Terminix? ALLCLEAR? by 87.55% and 92.83%, respectively, for Ae. albopictus, and by 97.22% and 94.14%, respectively, for Cx. pipiens. There was no significant difference between the performances of the two diffusers for each species.
机译:在半田野环境中进行了人类着陆捕获研究,以确定用于个人防护蚊子的七种商品的功效。在以色列的两个空无杀虫剂的封闭网状温室中进行了实验,在连续的研究之夜释放了1500只白纹伊蚊或1500个淡色库蚊。这项研究中测试的产品已经过关!夹上?驱蚊剂(甲氟蝶呤31.2%)和Terminix?全清? Sidekick驱蚊器(肉桂油10.5%;丁香酚13%;天竺葵油21%;薄荷5.3%;柠檬草油2.6%),它们是个人分散剂;超级乐队?腕带(22%香茅油)和PIC?香茅油加腕带(香叶油15%;柠檬草油5%,香茅油1%); Sonic昆虫驱鼠器钥匙串;蚊帐保护贴(柠檬桉树油80毫克),用于纺织品的胶粘剂背胶;和蚊子贴片(维生素B1 300毫克),一种透皮贴片。已确定,与未佩戴驱蚊装置的对照组志愿者的蚊子发作率相比,贴纸,经皮贴片,腕带和声音设备无法为志愿者提供显着保护。个人扩散器:-关!夹上?和Terminix?全清? Sidekick-与本研究中的所有其他设备相比,提供了出色的保护。这些扩散器使Ae的志愿者咬伤分别减少了96.28%和95.26%。的比例分别为94.94%和92.15%。 pipiens。在直接比较这些设备的第二次试验中,OFF !?减少了咬伤!夹上?和Terminix?全清? Ae分别降低了87.55%和92.83%。的比例分别为97.22%和94.14%。 pipiens。对于每个物种,两个扩散器的性能之间没有显着差异。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

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