Study summary
Laboratory and field evaluations of the insect repellent 3535 (ethyl butylacetylaminopropionate) and deet against mosquito vectors in Thailand
Thavara U, Tawatsin A, Chompoosri J, Suwonkerd W, Chansang UR, Asavadachanukorn P
Read the original paper- Study type
- Field Trial
- Year
- 2001
- Species tested
- Aedes, Culex, Anopheles, Mansonia (Thailand)
- Published in
- Journal of the American Mosquito Control Association 17(3):190-195
- Evidence strength
- Well-supported evidence
How it was tested
Human-volunteer skin bioassays measured complete protection time to the first bites, in the lab on treated forearms and in the field on treated lower legs, at roughly equal doses of active per square centimeter.
Summary
A 2001 Thai study compared IR3535 (chemical name EBAAP) against DEET in the lab and the field across a dozen mosquito vectors. The two were broadly comparable, with IR3535 slightly ahead against most species and DEET clearly better against the forest malaria vector Anopheles dirus.
Key findings
In the lab, IR3535 and DEET gave long, similar protection: about 9.8 versus 9.7 hours against Aedes aegypti, 13.7 versus 12.7 hours against Culex quinquefasciatus, and 14.8 versus 14.5 hours against Culex tritaeniorhynchus. The exception was Anopheles dirus, where DEET at 5.8 hours clearly beat IR3535 at 3.8 hours. In the field both held 94 to 100% protection for at least 5 to 8 hours depending on the species.
Limitations
Volunteer and replicate counts are not in the accessible abstract and the full text is paywalled, so those details are unverified, and field results are reported as ranges rather than per-arm means.