Spatial repellents transfluthrin and metofluthrin affect the behavior of Dermacentor variabilis, Amblyomma americanum, and Ixodes scapularis in an in vitro vertical climb assay

Abstract

Repellents serve an important role in bite protection. Tick repellents largely rely on biomechanisms that induce responses with direct contact, but synthetic pyrethroids used as spatial repellents against insects have received recent attention for potential use in tick protection systems. An in vitro vertical climb assay was designed to assess spatial repellency against Dermacentor variabilis, Amblyomma americanum, and Ixodes scapularis adult, female ticks. Climbing behavior was assessed with and without the presence of two spatial repellents, transfluthrin and metofluthrin. Repellency parameters were defined to simulate the natural questing behavior of ambushing ticks, including measures of detachment, pseudo-questing duration, climbing deterrence, and activity. Significant effects were observed within each parameter. D. variabilis showed the greatest general susceptibility to each repellent, followed by A. americanum, and I. scapularis. The most important and integrative measure of repellency was climbing deterrence–a measure of the spatial repellent’s ability to disrupt a tick’s natural propensity to climb. Transfluthrin deterred 75% of D. variabilis, 67% of A. americanum, and 50% of I. scapularis. Metofluthrin was slightly more effective, deterring 81% of D. variabilis, 73% of A. americanum, and 72% of I. scapularis. The present study poses a novel paradigm for repellency and reports a preliminary assessment of spatial repellent effect on tick behavior. Further research will assess spatial repellency in a more natural setting, scale exposure conditions, and incorporate host cues.

Ixodes scapularis Is the Most Susceptible of the Three Canonical Human-Biting Tick Species of North America to Repellent and Acaricidal Effects of the Natural Sesquiterpene, (+)-Nootkatone

“…Thus, multiple mechanisms are responsible for the repellency we observe. Similar effects have been shown with SS220, indalone, and the pyrethroid spatial repellents transfluthrin and metofluthrin [58,59]. The assay used in the present study cannot differentiate between gustatory, touch, and olfactory effects due to the limited scope of physical observation; however, distinguishing between reluctance to contact a treated surface and readily walking on a treated surface before impact is important [58].…”

“…The assay used in the present study cannot differentiate between gustatory, touch, and olfactory effects due to the limited scope of physical observation; however, distinguishing between reluctance to contact a treated surface and readily walking on a treated surface before impact is important [58]. Future work may employ other designs to further explore these effects in more detail [56,59]. Differences in nootkatone's effects between species should also be further investigated.…”