Excito-repellency of deltamethrin on the malaria vectors, Anopheles minimus, Anopheles dirus, Anopheles swadiwongporni, and Anopheles maculatus, in Thailand.

This study compared the behavioral avoidance responses of 4 mosquito malaria vectors, Anopheles minimus, Anopheles dirus, Anopheles maculatus form B, and Anopheles swadiwongporni, to deltamethrin, the primary insecticide used for indoor residual spraying for malaria vector control in Thailand. Six test populations. representing 4 laboratory colonies and 2 wild-caught populations, were observed during and after exposure to deltamethrin at the operational dose (0.02 g active ingredient/m2) in excito-repellency escape chambers. The laboratory colonies included a deltamethrin-susceptible colony and a deltamethrin-resistant colony of An. minimus species A, 1 colony of An. dirus species B, and 1 colony of An. maculatus form B. The 2 wild-caught populations included An. swadiwongporni and members of the An. dirus complex. Times to escape by female mosquitoes during 30 min of exposure to deltamethrin-treated papers were observed in all populations and compared to nontreated paired controls in contact and noncontact test configurations. Strong behavioral avoidance was observed in the deltamethrin-resistant colony of An. minimus, followed by An. swadiwongporni and An. maculatus. The slowest escape response was observed in the colony of An. dirus species B. All 6 populations of Anopheles showed marked contact irritancy to deltamethrin compared to paired controls and noncontact repellency trials, in both controlled laboratory colonies and field-caught populations. The degree of repellency was less profound than irritancy but, in most cases, produced a significant escape response compared to paired controls. Avoidance behavior appears to be an innate behavior of mosquitoes, as indicated by the general avoidance response detected in all 4 species, regardless of deltamethrin susceptibility status, age, or nutritional and physiological status. Excito-repellency assays of the type described in this study should become an integral part of the overall assessment of an insecticide's ability to control disease transmission in any given area.

[1]  M. Bangs,et al.  Effects of nutritional and physiological status on behavioral avoidance of Anopheles minimus (Diptera: Culicidae) to DDT, deltamethrin and lambdacyhalothrin. , 2001, Journal of vector ecology : journal of the Society for Vector Ecology.

[2]  T. Chareonviriyaphap,et al.  Insecticide-induced behavioral responses of Anopheles minimus, a malaria vector in Thailand. , 2001, Journal of the American Mosquito Control Association.

[3]  M. Bangs,et al.  A probability model of vector behavior: effects of DDT repellency, irritancy, and toxicity in malaria control. , 2000, Journal of vector ecology : journal of the Society for Vector Ecology.

[4]  M. Bangs,et al.  Status of malaria in Thailand. , 2000, The Southeast Asian journal of tropical medicine and public health.

[5]  S. Ratanatham,et al.  Current insecticide resistance patterns in mosquito vectors in Thailand. , 1999, The Southeast Asian journal of tropical medicine and public health.

[6]  R. Gupta,et al.  Responses of male and female mosquitoes to repellents in the World Health Organization insecticide irritability test system. , 1999, Journal of the American Mosquito Control Association.

[7]  M. Bangs,et al.  Pesticide avoidance behavior in Anopheles albimanus, a malaria vector in the Americas. , 1997, Journal of the American Mosquito Control Association.

[8]  T. Chareonviriyaphap,et al.  Methods of testing and analyzing excito-repellency responses of malaria vectors to insecticides. , 1997, Journal of the American Mosquito Control Association.

[9]  R. Rattanarithikul,et al.  Illustrated keys to the medically important mosquitos of Thailand. , 1994, The Southeast Asian journal of tropical medicine and public health.

[10]  R. G. Evans Laboratory evaluation of the irritancy of bendiocarb, lambda-cyhalothrin and DDT to Anopheles gambiae. , 1993, Journal of the American Mosquito Control Association.

[11]  D. Roberts,et al.  Behavioral response of Anopheles darlingi to DDT-sprayed house walls in Amazonia. , 1991, Bulletin of the Pan American Health Organization.

[12]  M. Takagi,et al.  A field study on the response of Anopheles dirus to DDT and fenitrothion sprayed to huts in Phetchabun Province, Thailand. , 1990 .

[13]  Quinones Ml,et al.  Irritability to DDT of natural populations of the primary malaria vectors in Colombia. , 1989 .

[14]  C. A. Green,et al.  Formal Recognition of the Species of the Anopheles Maculatus Group (Diptera: Culicidae) Occurring in Thailand, Including the Descriptions of Two New Species and a Preliminary Key to Females , 1986 .

[15]  D. Roberts,et al.  Influence of physiological condition on the behavioral response of Anopheles darlingi to DDT , 1984 .

[16]  A. Shalaby Observations on some Responses of Anopheles culicifacies to DDT in Experimental Huts in Gujarat State, India. , 1966 .

[17]  A. Brown EXPERIMENTAL OBSERVATIONS GOVERNING THE CHOICE OF A TEST METHOD FOR DETERMINING THE DDT-IRRITABILITY OF ADULT MOSQUITOS. , 1964, Bulletin of the World Health Organization.

[18]  J. Kennedy The excitant and repellent effects on mosquitos of sub-lethal contacts with DDT. , 1947, Bulletin of entomological research.

[19]  L. Arzt Protection against Mosquito Bites. , 2022 .