Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
Background: The bites and blood sucking of bed bugs (Cimex spp.) (Hemiptera: Cimicidae) pose a serious threat to human physical and mental health. Application of an effective repellent can prevent or reduce bed bug bites. Previous studies on repellent screening mainly focused on Cimex lectularius L. In this study, we investigated the repellent effect of two safe food additives, ethyl anthranilate (EA) and butyl anthranilate (BA), against Cimex hemipterus (F.), and also explored the role of antennae and mouthparts on C. hemipterus perception of repellents.
Results: Both EA and BA had a strong repellent effect against tropical bed bugs and their repellency was similar or lower than that of N,N-diethyl-3-methyl benzoyl amide, depending on whether or not a CO source was present. EA had higher repellency than BA and exhibited repellency to C. hemipterus for 3 days when a CO source was present. C. hemipterus avoided resting on 20% EA- and BA-treated harborages. Applying 20% EA and BA on rabbit skin significantly reduced the blood intake of C. hemipterus within 2 h. C. hemipterus could perceive EA and BA after their antennae or mouthparts or both antennae and mouthparts were removed.
Conclusion: Both EA and BA had strong repellency against C. hemipterus, with EA being more repellent. Ablation of antennae and mouthparts did not affect the perception of EA and BA by C. hemipterus. © 2023 Society of Chemical Industry.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ps.7829 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!