DEET (N,N-diethyl-meta-toluamide)/PMD (para-menthane-3,8-diol) repellent-treated mesh increases Culicoides catches in light traps.

Abstract

Biting midges (Culicoides spp.) are vectors of bluetongue and Schmallenberg viruses. Treatment of mesh barriers is a common method for preventing insect-vectored diseases and has been proposed as a means of limiting Culicoides ingression into buildings or livestock transporters. Assessments using animals are costly, logistically difficult and subject to ethical approval. Therefore, initial screening of test repellents/insecticides was made by applying treatments to mesh (2 mm) cages surrounding Onderstepoort light traps. Five commercial treatments were applied to cages as per manufacturers' application rates: control (water), bendiocarb, DEET/p-menthane-3,8-diol (PMD) repellent, Flygo (a terpenoid based repellent) and lambda-cyhalothrin. The experimental design was a 5 × 5 Latin square, replicated in time and repeated twice. Incongruously, the traps surrounded by DEET/PMD repellent-treated mesh caught three to four times more Obsoletus group Culicoides (the commonest midge group) than the other treatments. A proposed hypothesis is that Obsoletus group Culicoides are showing a dose response to DEET/PMD, being attracted at low concentrations and repelled at higher concentrations but that the strong light attraction from the Onderstepoort trap was sufficient to overcome close-range repellence. This study does not imply that DEET/PMD is an ineffective repellent for Culicoides midges in the presence of an animal but rather that caution should be applied to the interpretation of light trap bioassays.