Comparison of the standard and boosted sterile insect techniques for the suppression of <i>Aedes albopictus</i> populations under semi-field conditions

Innovative control tools are needed against Aedes mosquitoes. The boosted sterile insect technique (bSIT) consists of treating sterile males with a biocide prior to their release to contaminate larval habitats. We compared the efficacy of SIT and boosted SIT to prevent the emergence of adult Aedes albopictus in large cages. We tested two sterile-to-fertile male ratios: 5:1 (SIT5) and 1:1 (SIT1), with and without pyriproxyfen enhancement (bSIT or SIT). The eggs were collected in ovitraps and the immature stages were monitored until adult emergence or up to 15 days after hatching to estimate the relative risk (RR) of adult emergence compared to the control category. The concentration of pyriproxyfen in the ovitrap water did not change when sterile males were released with females or alone (χ<sup>2</sup> = 0.99, df = 1, p = 0.547). This concentration was higher when the sterile-to-fertile male ratio was increased from 1:1 to 5:1: χ<sup>2</sup> = 18.8, df = 1, p = 0.006. All four treatment categories were effective in suppressing mosquito populations. With a relative risk RR = 0.194 95% CI [0.128; 0.275], SIT5 was the most effective. Boosted SIT was not as effective as SIT. However, bSIT1 (RR = 0.418 [0.351; 0.492]) and bSIT5 (RR = 0.512 [0.431; 0.596]) were equally effective. Boosted males directly vectored pyriproxyfen to breeding sites. Boosted SIT was more effective than SIT alone with a low sterile-to-fertile male ratio. Under operational conditions, it could be initially deployed to suppress the target population and then switched to standard SIT.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Parasite
Published
2025-01-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1051/parasite/2025047
Citations
2
Primary Topic
Mosquito-borne diseases and control
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
3.76

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Comparison of the standard and boosted sterile insect techniques for the suppression of Aedes albopictus populations under semi-field conditions

Gorgui Diouf, Renaud Lancelot, Thierry Baldet, Jérémy Bouyer et al.
2 citations
Parasite
Mosquito-borne diseases and control
3.76
article

Comparison of the standard and boosted sterile insect techniques for the suppression of Aedes albopictus populations under semi-field conditions

Gorgui Diouf, Renaud Lancelot, Thierry Baldet, Jérémy Bouyer, Lucie Marquereau, Marco Malfacini, Marlène Dupraz, Fabrice Chandre, Marie Rossignol, Louis‐Clément Gouagna
article en
2 citations

Abstract

Innovative control tools are needed against Aedes mosquitoes. The boosted sterile insect technique (bSIT) consists of treating sterile males with a biocide prior to their release to contaminate larval habitats. We compared the efficacy of SIT and boosted SIT to prevent the emergence of adult Aedes albopictus in large cages. We tested two sterile-to-fertile male ratios: 5:1 (SIT5) and 1:1 (SIT1), with and without pyriproxyfen enhancement (bSIT or SIT). The eggs were collected in ovitraps and the immature stages were monitored until adult emergence or up to 15 days after hatching to estimate the relative risk (RR) of adult emergence compared to the control category. The concentration of pyriproxyfen in the ovitrap water did not change when sterile males were released with females or alone (χ<sup>2</sup> = 0.99, df = 1, p = 0.547). This concentration was higher when the sterile-to-fertile male ratio was increased from 1:1 to 5:1: χ<sup>2</sup> = 18.8, df = 1, p = 0.006. All four treatment categories were effective in suppressing mosquito populations. With a relative risk RR = 0.194 95% CI [0.128; 0.275], SIT5 was the most effective. Boosted SIT was not as effective as SIT. However, bSIT1 (RR = 0.418 [0.351; 0.492]) and bSIT5 (RR = 0.512 [0.431; 0.596]) were equally effective. Boosted males directly vectored pyriproxyfen to breeding sites. Boosted SIT was more effective than SIT alone with a low sterile-to-fertile male ratio. Under operational conditions, it could be initially deployed to suppress the target population and then switched to standard SIT.

ParasiteVol. 32
Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (FR), Centre de Coopération Internationale en Recherche Agronomique pour le Développement (FR), Université de Montpellier (FR), University of Reunion Island (RE), Maladies Infectieuses et Vecteurs: Écologie, Génétique, Évolution et Contrôle (FR), Institut National de Recherche pour l'Agriculture, l'Alimentation et l'Environnement (FR), Animal, Santé, Territoires, Risques et Ecosystèmes (FR), Peuplements végétaux et bioagresseurs en milieu tropical (RE), Centro Agricoltura Ambiente (Italy) (IT), Institut Sénégalais de Recherches Agricoles (SN), Institut de Recherche pour le Développement (FR)
European Commission, Université de Montpellier, HORIZON EUROPE European Research Council
Openalex Percentile: Top 6%
Mosquito-borne diseases and control
3.76
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.