Field Assessment of Buzz Away Extreme HOMS formulation
To Repel Mosquitoes
University of Guelph, Dept. of Environmental Biology, Guelph, Ontario, Canada
Back to BuzzAway repellents
SUMMARY
Buzz Away Extreme HOMS formula Spray Insect Repellent was tested
outdoors against three mosquito species. It provided 99.3% protection
after one hour, 91.6% protection at two hours and 89.2% protection at 3
hours. The performance is similar to that of low concentration
DEET-based products.
INTRODUCTION
The purpose of this study was to assess, under field conditions,
the efficacy of Buzz Away Extreme HOMS formula Insect Repellent (pump
spray) to protect humans for up to 4 hours post-application against
various mosquito species in southern Ontario.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Site
The study was conducted in a meadow bordering a large mixed
deciduous/coniferous woodlot (e.g. maples, poplars, birch, tamarack,
white cedar, and white pine are predominant species) with secondary
growth under the canopy in a rural area four km south of the southern
city limit of Guelph, Ontario. Adjacent to the study area was a cattail
marsh (> four hectares) approximately 30 meters from the center of
the study area, which is a source of Aedes and Anopheles mosquito
species and the mosquito Coquilleuidia perturbans. Previous unpublished
studies have shown the site to provide sufficient numbers of adult
mosquitoes for repellent evaluations. The evaluation took place on
eight evenings in July, 2003.
Repellency assessment
Eight subjects and a supervisor were used in this evaluation.
Subjects were selected from staff and students at the University of
Guelph. To adjust for size differences among subjects, the surface area
of the forearms (wrist to elbow) of each subject was measured and
surface area was calculated. The product was applied evenly to the
forearms of each subject using latex gloves at a rate of 1.0 ml per 600
cm2 of forearm. During each evening of the evaluation, three subjects
per product were treated at various times before the start of the
biting counts (0.5, 1.5 and 3.5 hours before counts). Trvo subjects
were non-treated and served as controls. Biting counts were performed
over a 30 minute period and therefore the duration of protection that
was measured was 1, 2 and 4 hours. Hence during the eight-evening
study, the product was evaluated on each subject once for each time
interval for a total of eight replications. After the third evening of
testing, the 4-hour duration time was replaced with a 3-hour duration
time for the remainder of the study (subjects applied 2.5 hours before
counts initiated).
Subjects dressed in identical green overalls,
head nets and white cotton gloves. The eight subjects were randomly
assigned to one of eight positions on a grid located within the study
site. All grid positions were at least 10 m from each other. Biting
counts were initiated just prior to dusk (20:30 h) to correspond with
peak mosquito biting activity and consisted of 8 3.5-minute biting
counts. During each biting count subjects aspirated all mosquitoes
landing and probing on two exposed forearms. Mosquitoes were aspirated
into 150 ml clear plastic vials and following the biting count,
subjects recorded the number of mosquitoes captured. Subjects rotated
to the next position on the grid within 17 seconds when the next
3.5-minute biting count began. In this manner, each subject was at each
grid position once each night and the duration of exposure was at least
30 minutes.
Ambient air temperature and wind speed within the
study site were measured at the start and end of the biting counts each
evening. Biting counts were not conducted on evenings when air
temperature was below 11�C or when strong winds (z 25 kph) or rain
occurred because these conditions limit mosquito host-seeking activity.
Data analysis
Percent repellency provided by the product was calculated using the
formula: ((number of mosquitoes biting non-treated subjects - number
biting treated subjects)/number biting non-treated subjects) X 100%.
Percent repellency was calculated for the complete 30 minute exposure
period (i.e. total repellency provided after each subject had been at
each of the eight grid positions).
The mean number of mosquitoes biting treated and
non-treated subjects over the eight-evening study was compared using
analysis of variance and a Scheffe's comparison of means. The analyses
was completed using Statistical Analysis Systems version 6.12 (SAS
Institute Inc., Cary, NC).
RESULTS
The results are summarized in Table 1. Buzz Away
Extreme HOMS formula Insect Repellent provided a mean protection of
99.3 for a duration of one hour. Subjects treated with the product, at
all duration times tested, had significantly fewer mosquitoes landing
and biting than non-treated control subjects (P> 0.05).
| Treatment |
Hours post-application
(duration time) |
Mean number of mosquitoes
per 3.5 min' |
Percent reduction |
| Control |
|
6.51 � 5.48 a |
|
| Buzz Away Extreme HOMS |
1 |
0.05 � 0.21 b |
99.3 |
| |
2 |
0.55 � 0.92 b |
91.6 |
| |
3 |
0.70�1.18b |
89.2 |
CONCLUSIONS
Buzz Away Extreme HOMS formula Spray Insect
Repellent a provided 99.3% protection after one hour, 91.6% protection
at two hours and 89.2% protection at 3 hours. The performance is
similar to that of low concentration DEET-based products.
Back to BuzzAway repellents