Next Article in Journal
Midgut and Head Transcriptomic Analysis of Silkworms Reveals the Physiological Effects of Artificial Diets
Next Article in Special Issue
Comparison of Ground Release and Drone-Mediated Aerial Release of Aedes aegypti Sterile Males in Southern Mexico: Efficacy and Challenges
Previous Article in Journal
Characterization of Molting Process during the Different Developmental Stages of the Diamondback Moth Plutella xylostella
Previous Article in Special Issue
All-in-One Mosquito Containers: From the Laboratory to the Release Sites
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Insects
Volume 13
Issue 3
10.3390/insects13030290
insects-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Behavioural Responses of Male Aedes albopictus to Different Volatile Chemical Compounds

by
Davide Carraretto
,
Laura Soresinetti
,
Irene Rossi
,
Anna R. Malacrida
,
Giuliano Gasperi
and
Ludvik M. Gomulski
*
Department of Biology and Biotechnology, University of Pavia, 27100 Pavia, Italy
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Insects 2022, 13(3), 290; https://doi.org/10.3390/insects13030290
Submission received: 13 January 2022 / Revised: 4 March 2022 / Accepted: 13 March 2022 / Published: 15 March 2022
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Mosquito Handling, Transport, Release and Male Trapping Methods)
Browse Figures
Review Reports Versions Notes

Abstract

:

Simple Summary

Many studies have been performed to assess the effects of chemical compounds on mosquito behaviour. These studies almost exclusively involve only female mosquitoes as they can transmit disease pathogens, or at least, cause biting nuisance. Few studies have considered male mosquitoes. The identification of chemical substances that attract males can be very useful for trapping purposes, especially for monitoring the makeup of the male population during control programmes, such as those involving the release of sterile male mosquitoes. Twenty-eight chemical compounds from different chemical classes were evaluated using a dual-port olfactometer assay with at least three serial hexane dilutions against a hexane control. The compounds included known animal, plant and fungal volatiles, and the components of a putative Aedes aegypti pheromone. Many of the compounds were repellent for male mosquitoes, especially at the highest concentration. One compound, decanoic acid, acted as an attractant for males at an intermediate concentration. Decanoic acid did not elicit a significant response from female mosquitoes.

Abstract

The Asian tiger mosquito, Aedes albopictus, has become one of the most important invasive vectors for disease pathogens such as the viruses that cause chikungunya and dengue. Given the medical importance of this disease vector, a number of control programmes involving the use of the sterile insect technique (SIT) have been proposed. The identification of chemical compounds that attract males can be very useful for trapping purposes, especially for monitoring the makeup of the male population during control programmes, such as those involving the use of the SIT. Twenty-eight chemical compounds from different chemical classes were evaluated using a dual-port olfactometer assay. The compounds included known animal, fungal and plant host volatiles, and components of a putative Aedes aegypti pheromone. Many of the compounds were repellent for male mosquitoes, especially at the highest concentration. One compound, decanoic acid, acted as an attractant for males at an intermediate concentration. Decanoic acid did not elicit a significant response from female mosquitoes.

1. Introduction

The study of the chemically-mediated behaviour of male mosquitoes has, to a large extent, been ignored in favour of the more exciting animal host odour-related behaviour of their blood-feeding female counterparts [1]. Male mosquitoes, like females, require nectar as a source of carbohydrates and respond to semiochemicals released by suitable host plants. Semiochemicals may also signal the presence of suitable resting sites. As mosquitoes are thought to be important in the pollination of certain plant species [2,3], it is highly likely that coevolution between a mosquito species and a flowering plant species will have resulted in plant-mosquito specialisations. Certain plant volatiles may therefore be expected to be attractive or repellent for some mosquito species but not others. For example, eugenol has been shown to be repellent for Ae. Aegypti and Culex quinquefasciatus, but not Anopheles coluzzi [4]. Within a species, males and females appear to respond to, and share, the same preferences for host plants [5,6]. Many mosquitoes species have preferred animal hosts, so certain host emanations may be mosquito species-specific, but perhaps to a lesser extent than plant volatiles. Certain host cues, such as carbon dioxide, however, appear to be important for all blood-feeding species [7]. Males may also respond to the same animal host odours as blood-seeking females, as these represent resources where sexually receptive females might be found [8,9]. The identification of the semiochemicals responsible for behavioural responses (i.e., attraction to plant and animal hosts) could lead to new and effective synthetic attractants that target both male and female mosquitoes. Such attractants could be used in traps for surveillance, monitoring the success of control programmes, or for lure and kill approaches [10,11].
Here we used a dual-port olfactometer to test the responses of male Ae. albopictus to different concentrations of twenty-eight chemical compounds that constitute components of plant, fungi, human and animal host emanations, and two putative components of an Ae. aegypti aggregation pheromone [12]. The compounds belong to the following range of different chemical classes: ketones, terpenes, esters, aldehydes, alcohols and a fatty acid. Many of these compounds have been previously implicated in male and female mosquito behavioural responses [1,10,11,13,14], or have been shown to activate odour receptors in different mosquito species [15,16]. Our hypothesis was that male mosquitoes may be attracted to one or more concentrations of these compounds.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Insects

Six to ten day old male and female Ae. albopictus individuals of the Rimini strain were used in all our experiments. This strain was established by Romeo Bellini of the Centro Agricoltura Ambiente “Giorgio Nicoli” in 2004 from eggs collected at Rimini, Emilia Romagna, Italy, and has been maintained in Pavia since 2013. Larvae were reared on fish food (Tetra Goldfish granules, Tetra GmbH, Melle, Germany). Pupae were collected daily in a small volume of rearing water in small plastic cups and placed in an empty 20 cm × 20 cm × 20 cm cage (Bugdorm, NHBS, Totnes, UK). Newly emerged adults were collected daily. Male and females were maintained together in cages (sex ratio approximately 1:1). Adults were given access to 20% glucose solution and were maintained at 26 °C and 65–70% relative humidity under a 12:12 h (light:dark) photoperiod. The dark period was from 20:00 to 8:00. The females used in our assays were not blood-fed.

2.2. Olfactometer

A dual-port olfactometer was used to determine the responses of Ae. albopictus to different stimuli (odorants). The olfactometer was constructed using plexiglass (Figure 1). The airstream (medical-grade air source) was filtered using activated carbon and then humidified using a bubble bottle containing distilled water. The airstream was then split into two streams, each controlled by flow meters (0–10 L/min). The streams passed into the two arms of the olfactometer. Conical funnels were positioned within the arms leading to traps whose distal ends were covered in net fabric (Figure 1). The two arms were designed to accommodate a plexiglass cylinder that could contain either live individuals or other stimulants (see below). One end of the cylinder was covered in net fabric while the other end was covered by netting held in place by an elastic band. Alternatively, the arms could accommodate chemical compounds, as described in Section 2.4.

2.3. Olfactometer Validation

To validate the olfactometer (Dataset S1), a known mosquito attractant, human foot odour [17], was used. A polyamide sock (Ciak 15 Sanpellegrino, CSP International Fashion Group SpA, Ceresara, Italy) was worn by one of the male authors (LMG) for three days and nights to accumulate foot odour [18,19]. The worn sock (treatment) was placed in a plexiglass cylinder and closed at each end with net fabric. An unworn sock (control) was placed in an identical cylinder. The two cylinders were positioned in the distal part of the arms of the olfactometer. The entire olfactometer was covered by a white cotton sheet to avoid visual stimulation of the mosquitoes during the test. The olfactometer was illuminated from above the sheet by a 60 watt halogen light bulb (OSRAM GmbH, Munich, Germany). The illuminance just above the olfactometer was around 2000 lux. Twenty Ae. albopictus individuals (males or females) were released into the main chamber of the olfactometer by inserting the release chamber and rotating it 180 degrees, thus allowing the plexiglass lid to swing open, permitting the mosquitoes to enter the main chamber.
The end caps of the two arms were then fixed in position and the airflow commenced, and maintained, at a constant rate of 3 L/min. After 10 min had elapsed, the number of individuals in the traps of the two arms were counted. The cylinders containing the socks were removed and all of the mosquitoes were removed and eliminated after each run. Clean air was allowed to flow through the olfactometer for 15 min between replicates. The position of the worn and control socks in each arm was alternated for each replicate. Five replicates were performed for each sex. Given that the number of individuals trapped in each arm may not have a normal distribution, and that they could be considered proportions, each number was arcsine transformed [20] and compared using a paired, two tailed t test. This assay was always conducted between 15:00 and 19:00 to limit the influence of circadian factors. The temperature within the olfactometer was 27 ± 0.72 °C with 60.8 ± 4.0 relative humidity (RH), as determined by a thermometer-hygrometer (Tacklife HM01).

2.4. Chemical Compounds and Preparation

The chemical compounds (Sigma-Aldrich/Merck Life Science Srl, Milan, Italy) listed in Table 1 were tested against Ae. albopictus for a response.
At least three serial dilutions in hexane (>95%, Merck) were tested for each compound (1% by volume, or mass in the case of solids (decanoic acid), 10−2; 0.01%, 10−4; 0.0001%, 10−6). An additional dilution of 0.000001%, 10−8, was tested for 4-propyl-benzaldehyde.
A 400 µL aliquot of the hexane dilution of the test compound, or 400 µL of hexane (control), was spotted on a 20 mm × 35 mm Whatman 3MM filter paper rectangle supported by a 24 mm× 40 mm glass microscope coverslip. The hexane was allowed to evaporate for 2 min (under a benchtop extractor arm) and then the control and treatment filters/coverslips were positioned in each arm of the olfactometer on an inverted 2 cm thick solid watch glass (Figure 1). The olfactometer was covered by a white cotton sheet and illuminated from above as described in the previous section. Twenty Ae. albopictus males were released into the main chamber of the olfactometer, and after 10 min had elapsed, the number of individuals in the trap from each arm was counted. The filter papers with supporting microscope coverslips, and all the mosquitoes, were removed and eliminated after each run. Clean air was allowed to flow through the olfactometer for 15 min between replicates. Compounds were tested with at least six replicate runs for each concentration. The position of the test stimuli and control in each arm was alternated for each replicate. Each compound was initially tested using the low concentration followed by the intermediate and high concentrations. After each set of runs, the apparatus was thoroughly wiped with 70% ethanol using paper towels and air was pumped through the apparatus for 24 h to aid the evaporation and elimination of any contaminating compound. This assay was conducted between 15:00 and 19:00.
We described the effects of the compounds on the mosquitoes in terms of attraction and repulsion: attraction, when a significantly higher number of individuals accumulated in the trap from the arm with the test compound; repulsion, when a significantly higher number accumulated in the control arm. Some compounds might, of course, elicit alternative responses, for example, as an excitant or an arrestant, without attracting or repelling the mosquitoes. We were not able to assess these responses.

3. Results

3.1. Olfactometer Validation

Female mosquitoes showed a significant preference for the arm of the olfactometer containing the foot odour/worn sock (two tailed paired t test, p = 0.010). Male mosquitoes did not show any preference and were not attracted to either the foot odour/worn sock or the control sock (Figure 2).

3.2. Response of Male Mosquitoes to Chemical Compounds

Seven of the ten ketones tested showed repellency at one or more concentrations (Figure 3b–e,g–i). For 2-nonanone, acetophenone, 6-methyl-5-hepten-2-one, 2,6,6-trimethyl-2-cyclohexanene-1,4-dione, 3,7-dimethyl-oct-6-en-1-yn-3-ol and 4′-ethyl-acetophenone, there was significant repellency at only the high concentration (10−2), whereas 4-propyl-benzaldehyde showed repellency at both the intermediate and high concentrations, with greater repellency at the high concentration. For the majority of the assayed ketones, there was an evident, though not always significant, correspondence between the responses of the males and the concentration of the compound. For 4-propyl-benzaldehyde (Figure 3d), there appeared to be a trend of decreasing repellency and increasing attraction for each dilution. For this reason, an additional six replicates of a higher dilution of 10−8 were tested, although no significant response was recorded.
Two of the five terpenes tested showed repellency at the 10−2 concentration (geraniol, p = 0.034; linalool oxide, p = 0.030; Figure 3m,o). The other terpenes did not produce a significant response from the males at any concentration.
Of the seven esters tested, two showed repellency, both at the high concentration (methyl benzoate, p = 0.007; methyl 2-methylbenzoate, p = 0.029; Figure 3r,s).
Two of the three aldehydes tested showed repellency. Nonanal showed significant repellency only at the high concentration (Figure 3w, p = 0.025), whereas phenylacetaldehyde showed significant repellency only at the low concentration (Figure 3x, p = 0.039).
One of the two alcohols tested, 1-octen-3-ol showed repellency at the high concentration (p = 0.025, Figure 3aa).
The only acid tested, decanoic acid, had no significant effect at the low concentration (10−6), but at the intermediate concentration (10−4), there was significant attraction of males (p = 0.025). At the high concentration, the compound acted as a repellent (10−2, p = 0.027) (Figure 3ab). Given this result, the same serial dilutions of decanoic acid were assayed using female mosquitoes. No significant response to any dilution was recorded (Figure 3ac, Dataset S2).

4. Discussion

We tested 28 compounds belonging to six chemical classes originating from plants, fungi, or animals, and we provide evidence that 13 acted as repellents at one or more concentrations, usually the highest concentration. Fourteen compounds elicited no significant response, while one compound, decanoic acid, acted as an attractant for males at the intermediate concentration, and as a repellent at the high concentration. Female Ae. albopictus showed no significant response to decanoic acid. We discuss our results in relation to those of previous studies, considering for the most part only the mosquito species. This is not a simple task due to a high number of variables, such as different treatment concentrations, test assay conditions, and species and sex of the mosquitoes tested, to mention a few. We have divided the discussion into sections based on the origin of each volatile.

4.1. Animal-Related Volatiles

Decanoic acid is a fatty acid that is a surface component of human skin [23] and is present in many plants. It is also a component of mosquito cuticular and internal lipids [24]. In our assay, decanoic acid was found to be attractive at the intermediate concentration and repellent at the high concentration for male Ae. albopictus. No effect was observed against females. Decanoic acid acts as a biting deterrent for Ae. aegypti with an efficacy similar to that of N,N-diethyl-m toluamide (DEET), but decanoic acid remains effective for a longer period of time [25].
Decanoic acid-treated pools initially became repellent and then subsequently highly attractive for ovipositing females of Cx. restuans [26]. The attraction of decanoic acid-treated pools for ovipositing mosquitoes was confirmed in another study (this time for Cx. pipiens molestus and Ae. aegypti), apparently as a consequence of the attractiveness of the bacterial breakdown products from the decanoic acid substrate [27].
Nonanal, a major odour component of birds and human skin, was repellent at the highest concentration in our tests. At low concentrations, it acts as an attractant for host-seeking mosquitoes (Ae. aegypti, An. gambiae and Cx. quinquefasciatus), while in gravid females it acts as a cue for a suitable ovipositioning site (An. arabensis, Cx. quinquefasciatus, Cx. tarsalis). The same chemical also contributes to the recognition of plant hosts for Ae. aegypti [2,10,28,29,30]. The Plasmodium parasite induces an increase in the production of certain volatiles by infected individuals, including the aldehydes heptanal, octanal and nonanal. The emission of these volatiles makes humans infected with malaria more attractive to Anopheles vectors, resulting in greater transmission of the parasite [31,32].
The alcohol, 1-octen-3-ol, a component of cattle breath and human sweat [33,34], was repellent for Ae. albopictus males at the highest concentration we tested. As a lure in traps, it was attractive for females of An. gambiae, Ae. aegypti and Ae. albopictus, but failed to attract Cx. quinquefasciatus [35,36] and may be a repellent for the latter species [37].
Finally, 2-nonanone and 6-methyl-5-hepten-2-one (sulcatone) are components of human odour that have been shown to be attractive for Ae. albopictus females [36]. In our assays, at the highest concentration, sulcatone acted as a repellent. Indeed, sulcatone appears to act as a “masking”, or even a repellent, odorant for host-seeking Ae. aegypti [30,38]. The emission of 6-methyl-5-hepten-2-one from overcrowded or pre-occupied larval sites appears to act as an ovipositioning deterrent for gravid An. coluzzii females to reduce the risk of intraspecific competition and cannibalism [39].

4.2. Plant-Related Volatiles

Mosquitoes visit flowers for nectar and may, in turn, act as pollinators for the plants [2,40,41]. The interaction between the mosquito and the plant is determined by the composition of the inflorescence odour, which may contain a mixture of attractive and repellant compounds [2]. One such case is provided by the Spanish catchfly, Silene otites, whose inflorescences emit a strong odour at night that is attractive for Culex pipiens molestus [41]. Individual components of the S. otites odour were demonstrated to elicit antennal responses in both male and female Cx. pipiens and Ae. aegypti [6]. The floral emissions of S. otites includes six of the compounds that we tested against male Ae. albopictus, namely: 2-phenyl ethanol, phenylacetaldehyde, (Z)-3-hexenyl acetate, linalool oxide, acetophenone and methyl salicylate. These compounds were not attractive in our behavioural test; moreover, three of them—phenylacetaldehyde, linalool oxide and acetophenone—were repellent. It is noteworthy that 2-phenyl ethanol, phenylacetaldehyde, linalool oxide and acetophenone were attractive in two choice bioassays for Cx. p. molestus females (males were not tested but were equally attracted by the odour of Silene otites inflorescences) [6].
A given chemical cue induces behavioural responses by activating some receptors and inhibiting, or having no effect, on others, and this may differ between species [42]. In addition, the concentration of a compound, the assay type and scale of the assay can influence the response. For example, the floral components phenylacetaldehyde and acetophenone, which had previously been shown to be attractive for Ae. aegypti in small scale experiments, were not attractive in a larger setting [43]. Moreover, Von Oppen and colleagues [44] found no response from Ae. aegypti to 2-phenyl ethanol (at a concentration equivalent to our 10−4 dilution) in a Y-tube olfactometer. However, when undiluted 2-phenyl ethanol is applied directly to the skin or clothing, it becomes an extremely effective repellent against female Ae. aegypti [45]. Compounds may act as attractants for insects at low concentrations but as repellents at higher concentrations [46]. This is what we observed for decanoic acid.
Methyl cinnamate and methyl salicylate have been identified as the active components of Ocimum forskolei, a plant traditionally used in Eritrea as a repellent against mosquitoes, black flies and ticks [47,48,49]. At a concentration of 10−3 in hexane, both methyl cinnamate and methyl salicylate significantly reduced landing of Ae. aegypti females on human skin odour baits. Ocimum forskolei, and other plants in the genus, have been shown to be repellent for other mosquito species such as An. arabiensis and An. stephensi, suggesting a similar modality of repulsion across mosquito taxa [47]. In our tests, methyl cinnamate was repellent at the lowest concentration whereas methyl salicylate elicited no response at any concentration.
The malarial vector, An. Gambiae, has been shown to respond to three of the compounds tested here: R-(+)-limonene, linalool oxide and (E)-β-farnesene [50]. These were among the components isolated from three plants favoured by nectar-feeding An. Gambiae: Santa Maria feverfew, Parthenium hysterophorus; the castor oil plant Ricinus communis; Cobbler’s pegs, Bidens Pilosa. We did not record attraction of male Ae. albopictus to R-(+)-limonene or farnesene, although we used a mixture of isomers rather than (E)-β-farnesene, and all of our concentrations were higher than the concentrations used against An. gambiae. The potential of linalool oxide as a single-component plant-based lure has been investigated for trapping Aedes species in unlit bait traps at field sites in Kenya [51]. Linalool oxide-baited traps performed comparably with commercial BioGent (BG) Lure-baited traps for trapping female Ae. aegypti, but significantly more males were collected in the linalool oxide traps. When CO2 was added, linalool oxide was significantly better than the BG Lure with a 2.8-fold increase in male Ae. aegypti captures [51]. In our tests, however, male Ae. albopictus were repelled by linalool oxide at our highest concentration.
Hao and colleagues [13] tested several plant volatiles, including geraniol, eugenol and anisaldehyde against Ae. albopictus females using a two-port olfactometer. Geraniol and eugenol did not induce a significant response, regardless of concentration, while anisaldehyde elicited significant attraction at a 6% concentration. In our assays, we found no response of male Ae. albopictus to eugenol or anisaldehyde. Geraniol did, however, act as a repellent for males at our highest concentration. Geraniol was also shown to be highly repellent for An. gambiae females when tested at concentrations between 10−2 and 10−5 g/mL [52]. Afify and colleagues employed a close proximity assay to demonstrate that 60% eugenol was a repellent for Ae. aegypti and Cx. quinquefasciatus, but not An. coluzzii. They argued that the response of mosquitoes to different repellents, and presumably attractants, is species-specific [4]. We would add that each sex of a mosquito species might also respond differently to odour stimuli, as observed, for example, with foot odour.
We found that geranyl acetate elicited no response at any concentration, however, repellent activity assays with female Ae. aegypti found that higher concentrations (10 and 25%) offered 97–100% protection for more than 60 min [53].
The compound, 3,7-dimethyl-oct-6-en-1-yn-3-ol (dehydrolinalool), which is present in the floral odours of many plant species, elicited no response from male Ae. albopictus, except at the highest concentration, when it acted as a repellent. For Ae. aegypti, however, it resulted in activation and/or orientation towards the chemical source [54].

4.3. Putative Pheromones

Several laboratory studies have shown that swarming Ae. aegypti males or females upwind in an olfactometer elicit a flight response in female mosquitoes, suggesting that both sexes produce volatile signals that can initiate swarm formation [10]. Indeed, two of the compounds that we found to be repellent at the highest concentration, 2,6,6-trimethylcyclohex-2-ene-1,4-dione and 4′-ethyl-acetophenone, were isolated and identified as aggregation pheromones for Ae. aegypti together with another untested compound, 2,2,6-trimethylcyclohexane-1,4-dione, [12]. 2,6,6-trimethylcyclohex-2-ene-1,4-dione and 2,2,6-trimethylcyclohexane-1,4-dione elicited a flight excitation effect on females, whereas 4′-ethyl-acetophenone acted as an attractant at a concentration comparable to our intermediate concentration. Male Ae. aegypti responded only to 2,6,6-trimethylcyclohex-2-ene-1,4-dione, in a dose-dependent manner, with a characteristic flight pattern similar to swarming, where the number of males participating in the swarm was a function of the concentration of the compound [12].

5. Conclusions

Some considerations emerge from these preliminary data. Firstly, compounds that are emitted by plants and animals may elicit different responses depending on its concentration and the species and sex of the mosquito. Moreover, the effect of a single compound may be enhanced or diminished, depending on the other compounds that are present. Further investigations should evaluate different blends of these compounds, as many studies have shown that blends are more likely to elicit a response than individual volatiles [55,56]. Wide-scale tests should be performed with individual candidate compounds, and mixtures of compounds, in the environment where the mosquito is found and where trapping is planned, testing different concentrations, formulations and methods of emission. These wide-scale tests could be performed in association with an evironmental evaluation of the presence of plants, animals and fungi to help explain the absence of mosquitoes and frequent negative collections at certain trapping points.
One of the compounds tested in this study, decanoic acid, appears to be a promising candidate for male trapping. Further tests in the field, perhaps in combination with other compounds or sound stimuli [57], will be necessary to identify the optimal dose for its potential use in monitoring during SIT and population-modification programmes aimed at Ae. albopictus populations.

Supplementary Materials

The following supporting information can be downloaded at: https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/insects13030290/s1, Dataset S1: Data for olfactometer validation using human foot odour, Dataset S2: Data for response of male mosquitoes to chemical compounds (and female response to decanoic acid).

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, methodology, visualization, supervision, L.M.G.; investigation, D.C., L.S., I.R., L.M.G.; resources, L.M.G., A.R.M., G.G.; writing—original draft preparation, L.M.G., A.R.M.; writing—review and editing, L.M.G., G.G., A.R.M., D.C. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was partially funded by the Italian Ministry of Universities and Research.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

The data present in this study are available in the supplementary material.

Acknowledgments

This study was performed within the Food and Agriculture Organization/International Atomic Energy Agency (FAO/IAEA) Research Coordinated Project “Mosquito Handling, Transport, Release and Male Trapping Methods” and benefited from discussions at IAEA funded meetings therein. The research was performed within the Dept. of Biology and Biotechnology ‘L. Spallanzani’ recognised within the “Dipartimenti di Eccellenza Program (2018–2022)” by the Italian Ministry of Education, University and Research (MIUR). We thank the reviewers for their useful comments.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest. The funders had no role in the design of the study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript; or in the decision to publish the results.

References

  1. Pitts, R.J.; Mozūraitis, R.; Gauvin-Bialecki, A.; Lempérière, G. The roles of kairomones, synomones and pheromones in the chemically-mediated behaviour of male mosquitoes. Acta Trop. 2014, 132, S26–S34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Lahondère, C.; Vinauger, C.; Okubo, R.P.; Wolff, G.H.; Chan, J.K.; Akbari, O.S.; Riffell, J.A. The olfactory basis of orchid pollination by mosquitoes. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2019, 117, 708–716. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  3. Peach, D.A.H.; Gries, G. Nectar thieves or invited pollinators? A case study of tansy flowers and common house mosquitoes. Arthropod-Plant Interact. 2016, 10, 497–506. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Afify, A.; Potter, C.J. Insect repellents mediate species-specific olfactory behaviours in mosquitoes. Malar. J. 2020, 19, 127. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  5. Otienoburu, P.E.; Ebrahimi, B.; Phelan, P.L.; Foster, W.A. Analysis and optimization of a synthetic Milkweed floral attractant for mosquitoes. J. Chem. Ecol. 2012, 38, 873–881. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  6. Jhumur, U.S.; Dötterl, S.; Jürgens, A. Electrophysiological and behavioural responses of mosquitoes to volatiles of Silene otites (Caryophyllaceae). Arthropod-Plant Interact. 2007, 1, 245–254. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Gillies, M.T. The role of carbon dioxide in host-finding by mosquitoes (Diptera: Culicidae): A review. Bull. Entomol. Res. 1980, 70, 525–532. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  8. Gubler, D.J.; Bhattacharya, N.C. Swarming and mating of Aedes (S.) albopictus in nature. Mosq. News 1972, 32, 219–223. [Google Scholar]
  9. Hartberg, W.K. Observations on the mating behaviour of Aedes aegypti in nature. Bull. World Health Organ. 1971, 45, 847–850. [Google Scholar]
  10. Wooding, M.; Naudé, Y.; Rohwer, E.; Bouwer, M. Controlling mosquitoes with semiochemicals: A review. Parasites Vectors 2020, 13, 80. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Nyasembe, V.O.; Torto, B. Volatile phytochemicals as mosquito semiochemicals. Phytochem. Lett. 2013, 8, 196–201. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  12. Fawaz, E.Y.; Allan, S.A.; Bernier, U.; Obenauer, P.J.; Diclaro, J.W. Swarming mechanisms in the yellow fever mosquito: Aggregation pheromones are involved in the mating behavior of Aedes aegypti. J. Vector Ecol. 2014, 39, 347–354. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Hao, H.; Sun, J.; Dai, J. Dose-dependent behavioral response of the mosquito Aedes albopictus to floral odorous compounds. J. Insect Sci. 2013, 13, 127. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  14. Dormont, L.; Mulatier, M.; Carrasco, D.; Cohuet, A. Mosquito attractants. J. Chem. Ecol. 2021, 47, 351–393. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Wang, G.; Carey, A.F.; Carlson, J.R.; Zwiebel, L.J. Molecular basis of odor coding in the malaria vector mosquito Anopheles gambiae. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2010, 107, 4418–4423. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  16. McBride, C.S.; Baier, F.; Omondi, A.B.; Spitzer, S.A.; Lutomiah, J.; Sang, R.; Ignell, R.; Vosshall, L.B. Evolution of mosquito preference for humans linked to an odorant receptor. Nature 2014, 515, 222–227. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  17. Kline, D.L. Olfactory responses and field attraction of mosquitoes to volatiles from Limburger cheese and human foot odor. J. Vector Ecol. 1998, 23, 186–194. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  18. Qui, Y.; Smallegange, R.; Smid, H.; van Loon, J.; Galimard, A.; Posthumus, M.; van Beek, T.; Takken, W. GC-EAG analysis of human odours that attract the malaria mosquito Anopheles gambiae sensu stricto. Proc. Neth. Entomol. Soc. 2004, 15, 59–64. [Google Scholar]
  19. Verhulst, N.O.; Qiu, Y.T.; Beijleveld, H.; Maliepaard, C.; Knights, D.; Schulz, S.; Berg-Lyons, D.; Lauber, C.L.; Verduijn, W.; Haasnoot, G.W.; et al. Composition of human skin microbiota affects attractiveness to malaria mosquitoes. PLoS ONE 2011, 6, e28991. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  20. Sokal, R.R.; Rohlf, F.J. Biometry, 2nd ed.; W. H. Freeman and Company: San Francisco, CA, USA, 1981. [Google Scholar]
  21. Kim, S.; Chen, J.; Cheng, T.; Gindulyte, A.; He, J.; He, S.; Li, Q.; Shoemaker, B.A.; Thiessen, P.A.; Yu, B.; et al. PubChem in 2021: New data content and improved web interfaces. Nucleic Acids Res. 2021, 49, D1388–D1395. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  22. The Good Scents Company Information System. Available online: https://www.thegoodscentscompany.com/ (accessed on 1 October 2021).
  23. Skinner, W.A.; Tong, H.C.; Maibach, H.I.; Skidmore, D. Human skin-surface lipid fatty acids—Mosquito repellents. Experientia 1970, 26, 728–730. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Kaczmarek, A.; Wrońska, A.K.; Boguś, M.I.; Kazek, M.; Gliniewicz, A.; Mikulak, E.; Matławska, M. The type of blood used to feed Aedes aegypti females affects their cuticular and internal free fatty acid (FFA) profiles. PLoS ONE 2021, 16, e0251100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Ali, A.; Cantrell, C.L.; Bernier, U.R.; Duke, S.O.; Schneider, J.C.; Agramonte, N.M.; Khan, I. Aedes aegypti (Diptera: Culicidae) biting deterrence: Structure-activity relationship of saturated and unsaturated fatty acids. J. Med. Entomol. 2012, 49, 1370–1378. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  26. Maw, M.G. Capric acid as a larvicide and an oviposition stimulant for mosquitoes. Nature 1970, 227, 1154–1155. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Ikeshoji, T.; Saito, K.; Yano, A. Bacterial production of the ovipositional attractants for mosquitoes on fatty acid substrates. Appl. Entomol. Zool. 1975, 10, 239–242. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  28. Owino, E.A.; Sang, R.; Sole, C.L.; Pirk, C.; Mbogo, C.; Torto, B. An improved odor bait for monitoring populations of Aedes aegypti-vectors of dengue and chikungunya viruses in Kenya. Parasites Vectors 2015, 8, 253. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  29. Syed, Z. Chemical ecology and olfaction in arthropod vectors of diseases. Curr. Opin. Insect Sci. 2015, 10, 83–89. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  30. Logan, J.G.; Stanczyk, N.M.; Hassanali, A.; Kemei, J.; Santana, A.E.G.; Ribeiro, K.A.L.; Pickett, J.A.; Mordue, A.J. Arm-in-cage testing of natural human-derived mosquito repellents. Malar. J. 2010, 9, 239. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  31. Cator, L. Malaria altering host attractiveness and mosquito feeding. Trends Parasitol. 2017, 33, 338–339. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  32. Robinson, A.; Busula, A.O.; Voets, M.A.; Beshir, K.B.; Caulfield, J.C.; Powers, S.J.; Verhulst, N.O.; Winskill, P.; Muwanguzi, J.; Birkett, M.A.; et al. Plasmodium-associated changes in human odor attract mosquitoes. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2018, 115, E4209–E4218. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  33. Hall, D.R.; Beevor, P.S.; Cork, A.; Nesbitt, B.F.; Vale, G.A. 1-Octen-3-ol. A potent olfactory stimulant and attractant for tsetse isolated from cattle odours. Int. J. Trop. Insect Sci. 1984, 5, 335–339. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Cork, A.; Park, K.C. Identification of electrophysiologically-active compounds for the malaria mosquito, Anopheles gambiae, in human sweat extracts. Med. Vet. Entomol. 1996, 10, 269–276. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  35. Kline, D.L.; Allan, S.A.; Bernier, U.R.; Welch, C.H. Evaluation of the enantiomers of 1-octen-3-ol and 1-octyn-3-ol as attractants for mosquitoes associated with a freshwater swamp in Florida, U.S.A. Med. Vet. Entomol. 2007, 21, 323–331. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  36. Xie, L.; Yang, W.; Liu, H.; Liu, T.; Xie, Y.; Lin, F.; Zhou, G.; Zhou, X.; Wu, K.; Gu, J.; et al. Enhancing attraction of the vector mosquito Aedes albopictus by using a novel synthetic odorant blend. Parasites Vectors 2019, 12, 243. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Xu, P.; Zhu, F.; Buss, G.K.; Leal, W.S. 1-Octen-3-ol—the attractant that repels. F1000Research 2015, 4, 156. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  38. Logan, J.G.; Birkett, M.A.; Clark, S.J.; Powers, S.; Seal, N.J.; Wadhams, L.J.; Mordue, A.J.; Pickett, J.A. Identification of human-derived volatile chemicals that interfere with attraction of Aedes aegypti mosquitoes. J. Chem. Ecol. 2008, 34, 308–322. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Suh, E.; Choe, D.-H.; Saveer, A.M.; Zwiebel, L.J. Suboptimal larval habitats modulate oviposition of the malaria vector mosquito Anopheles coluzzii. PLoS ONE 2016, 11, e0149800. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  40. Jhumur, U.S.; Dötterl, S.; Jürgens, A. Floral odors of Silene otites: Their variability and attractiveness to mosquitoes. J. Chem. Ecol. 2007, 34, 14–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Brantjes, N.B.M.; Leemans, J.A.A.M. Silene otites (caryophyllaceae) pollinated by nocturnal lepidoptera and mosquitoes. Acta Bot. Neerl. 1976, 25, 281–295. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Su, C.-Y.; Menuz, K.; Carlson, J.R. Olfactory perception: Receptors, cells, and circuits. Cell 2009, 139, 45–59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  43. Fikrig, K.; Johnson, B.J.; Fish, D.; Ritchie, S.A. Assessment of synthetic floral-based attractants and sugar baits to capture male and female Aedes aegypti (Diptera: Culicidae). Parasites Vectors 2017, 10, 32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  44. Von Oppen, S.; Masuh, H.; Licastro, S.; Zerba, E.; Gonzalez-Audino, P. A floral-derived attractant for Aedes aegypti mosquitoes. Entomol. Exp. Appl. 2015, 155, 184–192. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Morton, F.; Travis, B.; Linduska, J. Results of Screening Tests with Materials Evaluated as Insecticides, Miticides, and Repellents at the Orlando Laboratory. Available online: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/AA00025211/00001 (accessed on 5 May 2021).
  46. Finch, S. Volatile plant chemicals and their effect on host plant finding by the cabbage root fly (Delia brassicae). Entomol. Exp. Appl. 1978, 24, 350–359. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Dekker, T.; Ignell, R.; Ghebru, M.; Glinwood, R.; Hopkins, R. Identification of mosquito repellent odours from Ocimum forskolei. Parasites Vectors 2011, 4, 183. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  48. Aisien, M.; Imasuen, A.; Wagbatsoma, V.; Ayinde, B. Preliminary evaluation of the repellent activity of some plant essential oils against Simulium damnosum s.l., the vector of human onchocerciasis. Int. J. Trop. Insect Sci. 2004, 24, 196–199. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Mwangi, E.N.; Hassanali, A.; Essuman, S.; Myandat, E.; Moreka, L.; Kimondo, M. Repellent and acaricidal properties of Ocimum suave against Rhipicephalus appendiculatus ticks. Exp. Appl. Acarol. 1995, 19, 11–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  50. Nyasembe, V.O.; Teal, P.E.; Mukabana, W.R.; Tumlinson, J.H.; Torto, B. Behavioural response of the malaria vector Anopheles gambiae to host plant volatiles and synthetic blends. Parasites Vectors 2012, 5, 234. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  51. Nyasembe, V.O.; Tchouassi, D.P.; Mbogo, C.M.; Sole, C.L.; Pirk, C.W.W.; Torto, B. Linalool oxide: Generalist plant based lure for mosquito disease vectors. Parasites Vectors 2015, 8, 581. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  52. Omolo, M.O.; Okinyo, D.; Ndiege, I.O.; Lwande, W.; Hassanali, A. Repellency of essential oils of some Kenyan plants against Anopheles gambiae. Phytochemistry 2004, 65, 2797–2802. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  53. Portilla-Pulido, J.S.; Morales, R.M.C.; Rodríguez, M.A.B.; Duque, J.E.; Mendez-Sanchez, S. Design of a repellent against Aedes aegypti (Diptera: Culicidae) using in silico simulations with AaegOBP1 protein. J. Med. Entomol. 2019, 57, 463–476. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  54. Kline, D.L.; Bernier, U.R.; Posey, K.H.; Barnard, D.R. Olfactometric evaluation of spatial repellents for Aedes aegypti. J. Med. Entomol. 2003, 40, 463–467. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  55. Díaz-Santiz, E.; Rojas, J.C.; Casas-Martínez, M.; Cruz-López, L.; Malo, E.A. Rat volatiles as an attractant source for the Asian tiger mosquito, Aedes albopictus. Sci. Rep. 2020, 10, 168–175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  56. Bruce, T.J.; Pickett, J.A. Perception of plant volatile blends by herbivorous insects–Finding the right mix. Phytochemistry 2011, 72, 1605–1611. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  57. Johnson, B.J.; Ritchie, S.A. The Siren’s Song: Exploitation of female flight tones to passively capture male Aedes aegypti (Diptera: Culicidae). J. Med. Entomol. 2015, 53, 245–248. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Insects 13 00290 g001 550
Figure 1. Schematic diagram of the dual-port olfactometer.
Figure 1. Schematic diagram of the dual-port olfactometer.
Insects 13 00290 g001
Insects 13 00290 g002 550
Figure 2. Male and female responses to worn and control socks. The blue bar represents the mean number (±SE) of individuals trapped in the test (worn sock) or control chamber. The sex of the tested mosquitoes is indicated on the left of the graph and the associated paired, two tailed t test p values are on the right (* p < 0.05).
Figure 2. Male and female responses to worn and control socks. The blue bar represents the mean number (±SE) of individuals trapped in the test (worn sock) or control chamber. The sex of the tested mosquitoes is indicated on the left of the graph and the associated paired, two tailed t test p values are on the right (* p < 0.05).
Insects 13 00290 g002
Insects 13 00290 g003a 550Insects 13 00290 g003b 550
Figure 3. Responses of males (and females for decanoic acid) to different concentrations of chemical compounds. The orange and blue bars represent the mean number (±SE) of individuals trapped in the control and test chambers, respectively. The concentrations of the test compound are indicated on the left of each graph and the associated paired, two tailed t test p values are on the right (* p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001).
Figure 3. Responses of males (and females for decanoic acid) to different concentrations of chemical compounds. The orange and blue bars represent the mean number (±SE) of individuals trapped in the control and test chambers, respectively. The concentrations of the test compound are indicated on the left of each graph and the associated paired, two tailed t test p values are on the right (* p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001).
Insects 13 00290 g003aInsects 13 00290 g003b
Table
Table 1. Chemical compounds used in this study.
Table 1. Chemical compounds used in this study.
CompoundSigma-Aldrich Product No.Purity 1FamilyEC No. 2Origin: Perceived Odour 3
3-Octanone136913>98%Ketone203-423-0Fungal: fresh, herbal, lavender, mushroom
2-Nonanone108731>99%Ketone212-480-0Animal: fragrant, fruit, green, hot milk
Acetophenone42163NSKetone202-708-7Plant: almond, floral, sweet, cherry
4-Propyl-benzaldehyde56288295%Ketone249-221-6-
6-Methyl-5-hepten-2-one (sulcatone)M48805>98%Ketone203-816-7Animal: citrus, green, musty
EugenolE5179199%Ketone202-589-1Plant: clove
2,6,6-Trimethyl-2-cyclohexene-1,4-dione14239≥98%Ketone214-406-2Pheromone: sweet, leaf, floral, tobacco
3,7-Dimethyl-oct-6-en-1-yn-3-ol (Dehydrolinalool)CDS009913≤100%Ketone249-482-6Plant: mould
4′-Ethyl-acetophenone22675097%Ketone213-326-5Pheromone: floral, hawthorn
γ-DecanolactoneD80498%Ketone211-892-8Plant: fat, fruit, lactone, peach
Farnesene, mix of isomersW383902NSTerpene207-948-6Plant: green apple
Geranyl acetate173495≥97%Terpene203-341-5Plant: floral
Geraniol16333398%Terpene203-377-1Plant: geranium, lemon peel, passion fruit, peach, rose
R-(+)-limonene18316497%Terpene227-813-5Plant: citrus
Linalool oxide62141≥97%Terpene262-038-6Plant: floral, herbal
Hexyl hexanoateW257206≥97%Ester228-952-4Plant: apple peel, peach, plum
Hexyl-2-methylbutanoateW349909≥95%Ester233-106-2Plant: sweet, green apple
Methyl benzoateM2990899%Ester202-259-7Plant: phenolic, almond, floral
Methyl 2-methyl benzoate25998599%Ester201-932-2Plant: floral, orange flower
Methyl salicylateM6752≥99%Ester204-317-7Plant: liniments, hospital
Methyl cinnamate96410≥99%Ester203-093-8Plant: balsamic, cinnamon
cis-3-Hexenyl acetateW317101≥98%Ester222-960-1Plant: banana, candy, floral, green
NonanalW27822097%Aldehyde204-688-5Animal/Plant: fat, rose, orange
PhenylacetaldehydeW287407≥95%Aldehyde204-574-5Plant: honey, sweet, rose, green
p-AnisaldehydeA8810798%Aldehyde204-602-6Plant: floral, aniseed
2-Phenyl ethanol77861≥99%Alcohol200-456-2Plant: floral, honey, rose
1-Octen-3-olO528498%Alcohol222-226-0Animal: mushroom, earthy
Decanoic acidW236403≥98%Fatty acid206-376-4Animal: goat, fat, grass, dust
1 NS: not stated by supplier. 2 European Community number. 3 Derived from PubChem [21] and TGSC Information System [22].
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Carraretto, D.; Soresinetti, L.; Rossi, I.; Malacrida, A.R.; Gasperi, G.; Gomulski, L.M. Behavioural Responses of Male Aedes albopictus to Different Volatile Chemical Compounds. Insects 2022, 13, 290. https://doi.org/10.3390/insects13030290

AMA Style

Carraretto D, Soresinetti L, Rossi I, Malacrida AR, Gasperi G, Gomulski LM. Behavioural Responses of Male Aedes albopictus to Different Volatile Chemical Compounds. Insects. 2022; 13(3):290. https://doi.org/10.3390/insects13030290

Chicago/Turabian Style

Carraretto, Davide, Laura Soresinetti, Irene Rossi, Anna R. Malacrida, Giuliano Gasperi, and Ludvik M. Gomulski. 2022. "Behavioural Responses of Male Aedes albopictus to Different Volatile Chemical Compounds" Insects 13, no. 3: 290. https://doi.org/10.3390/insects13030290

APA Style

Carraretto, D., Soresinetti, L., Rossi, I., Malacrida, A. R., Gasperi, G., & Gomulski, L. M. (2022). Behavioural Responses of Male Aedes albopictus to Different Volatile Chemical Compounds. Insects, 13(3), 290. https://doi.org/10.3390/insects13030290

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop