Laboratory and Field Evaluation of the Impact of Exercise on the Performance of Regular and Polymer-Based Deet Repellents
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Studies were done in Manitoba, Canada, to evaluate the impact of exercise on repellent performance against mosquitoes. Two products containing the active ingredient N,N-diethyl-3-methylbenzamide (deet) were tested; one product was a polymer-based cream (3M Ultrathon Insect Repellent) and the other product was an alcohol-based pump spray formulation (Muskol Insect Repellent). Assessments were done in the laboratory using Aedes aegypti (L.) and in the field with naturally occurring populations of mosquitoes. Repellent was applied to the forearms (laboratory) or a lower leg (field) of test subjects at 1.5 g of test product per 600 cm2 surface area (0.75 or 0.83 mg deet/cm2). For a given test day, subjects exercised or did not. Exposure to mosquito attack was for 1 min at 30-min intervals in laboratory procedures, and it was continuous in field tests. Performance was measured as complete protection time (CPT). Moderate levels of physical activity resulted in a >40% decline in mean CPT, from 468 to 267 min in the laboratory experiments and from 359 to 203 min in field tests. Repellent product did not affect the magnitude of the decline. Mean biting pressure during field trials was 21.3 bites per min, and mosquito collections were made up primarily of Ochlerotatus sticticus (Meigen) and Aedes vexans (Meigen).
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".