↓ Skip to main content

Efficacy of ULV and thermal aerosols of deltamethrin for control of Aedes albopictus in Nice, France

Overview of attention for article published in Parasites & Vectors, November 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
18 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
92 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Efficacy of ULV and thermal aerosols of deltamethrin for control of Aedes albopictus in Nice, France
Published in
Parasites & Vectors, November 2016
DOI 10.1186/s13071-016-1881-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Saïd C Boubidi, David Roiz, Marie Rossignol, Fabrice Chandre, Romain Benoit, Marc Raselli, Charles Tizon, Bernard Cadiou, Reda Tounsi, Christophe Lagneau, Didier Fontenille, Paul Reiter

Abstract

Ultra-low volume (ULV) insecticidal aerosols dispensed from vehicle-mounted cold-foggers are widely considered the method of choice for control of Aedes aegypti and Ae. albopictus during outbreaks of dengue and chikungunya and, more recently, Zika. Nevertheless, their effectiveness has been poorly studied, particularly in Europe. Nearly all published studies of ULV efficacy are bio-assays based on the mortality of caged mosquitoes. In our study we preferred to monitor the direct impact of treatments on the wild mosquito populations. This study was undertaken to evaluate the efficiency of the two widely used space spraying methods to control Ae. albopictus and Ae. aegypti. We determined the susceptibility of local Ae. albopictus to deltamethrin by two methods: topical application and the "WHO Tube Test". We used ovitraps baited with hay infusion and adult traps (B-G Sentinel) baited with a patented attractant to monitor the mosquitoes in four residential areas in Nice, southern France. The impact of deltamethrin applied from vehicle-mounted ULV fogging-machines was assessed by comparing trap results in treated vs untreated areas for 5 days before and 5 days after treatment. Four trials were conducted at the maximum permitted application rate (1 g.ha(-1)). We also made two small-scale tests of the impact of the same insecticide dispensed from a hand-held thermal fogger. Susceptibility to the insecticide was high but there was no discernable change in the oviposition rate or the catch of adult female mosquitoes, nor was there any change in the parous rate. In contrast, hand-held thermal foggers were highly effective, with more than 90% reduction of both laid eggs and females. We believe that direct monitoring of the wild mosquito populations gives a realistic assessment of the impact of treatments and suggest that the lack of efficacy is due to lack of interaction between the target mosquitoes and the ULV aerosol. We discuss the factors that influence the effectiveness of both methods of spraying in the context of epidemic situations.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 92 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 1%
Argentina 1 1%
Unknown 90 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 15 16%
Student > Master 10 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 10%
Other 9 10%
Student > Bachelor 8 9%
Other 12 13%
Unknown 29 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 15 16%
Medicine and Dentistry 9 10%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 7%
Immunology and Microbiology 5 5%
Social Sciences 4 4%
Other 19 21%
Unknown 34 37%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 09 September 2017.
All research outputs
#18,571,001
of 23,001,641 outputs
Outputs from Parasites & Vectors
#4,258
of 5,498 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#304,050
of 416,009 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Parasites & Vectors
#64
of 86 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,001,641 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,498 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 416,009 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 86 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.