J Arthropod-Borne Dis, December 2017, 11(4): 469–481 F Nikpour et al.: Evaluation of … 469 http://jad.tums.ac.ir Published Online: December 30, 2017 Original Article Evaluation of Deltamethrin in Combination of Piperonyl Butoxide (PBO) against Pyrethroid Resistant, Malaria Vector, Anopheles stephensi in IRS Implementation: An Experimental Semi-Filed Trial in Iran Fatemeh Nikpour 1, *Hassan Vatandoost 1,2, Ahmad Ali Hanafi-Bojd 1,2, Ahmad Raeisi 3, Mansour Ranjbar 4, Ahmad Ali Enayati 5, Mohammad Reza Abai 1,2, Mansoreh Shayeghi 1, Abdol Rasoul Mojahedi 6, Abolghasem Pourreza 1 1Department of Medical Entomology and Vector Control, School of Public Health, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran 2Department of Environmental Chemical Pollutants, Institute for Environmental Research, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran 3Malaria Control Department, Ministry of Health and Medical Education, Tehran, Iran 4Independent Malaria Consultant, Tehran, Iran 5Department of Medical Entomology and Vector Control, School of Public Health, Mazandaran University of Medical Sciences, Sari, Iran 6Provincial Health Center, Bandar Abbas University of Medical Sciences, Bandar Abbas, Iran (Received 10 Oct 2017; accepted 15 Nov 2017) Abstract Background: The aim of this study was to evaluate different concentrations of deltamethrin combined with formu- lated piperonyl butoxide (PBO) synergist on various surfaces against the wild strain of Anopheles stephensi, the main malaria vector in Southern Iran under semi-field condition. Methods: Four concentrations of deltamethrin WG 25% (Tagros) and PBO 800EC-UV (Endura) were prepared and sprayed on the pre-designed surfaces in accordance with WHO alliance line of the IRS Micronair®. The WHO’s rec- ommended bioassay kit and method was used during this study. Results: Comparing the mortality rate of mosquitoes, the results showed a significant difference between months after treatment of IRS (Indoor Residual Spraying) (P< 0.05) but didn’t show any significant differences between days during the first and second months (P> 0.05). Statistical test revealed a significance difference between mortality rate of mosquitoes in exposing to concentrations of 1 and 4 (P< 0.05) which demonstrated effect of synergizing PBO on mortality rate. Conclusion: This research as the first semi-field trial on deltamethrin added to different concentrations of formulat- ed PBO for IRS, indicates that deltamethrin+10X PBO is more effective than other concentrations. Therefore, using synergists can be suggested as a new tool for prevention of pyrethriod resistance, although more studies are recom- mended. Keywords: Insecticide resistance, Anopheles stephensi, Deltamethrin, Piperonyl butoxide, IRS Introduction Noticeable reduction (90%) in incidence and mortality of global malaria became one of aims of 2030 (1). Instead, the development of resistance to insecticides is probably the greatest threat to defeat malaria vectors con- trol program. Pyrethroids are the main chemi- cal com-ponents used in malaria vector control programs. The best methods for using pyre- throids are long lasting insecticidal nets (LLIN) and indoor re-sidual spraying (IRS) (2). But in- creasing use and coverage of IRS and LLIN are causing more resistant mosquitoes which can finally undermine the success of these meth- ods (3). *Corresponding author: Prof Hassan Vatandoost, E-mail: hvatandoost1@yahoo.com, vatando@tums.ac.ir J Arthropod-Borne Dis, December 2017, 11(4): 469–481 F Nikpour et al.: Evaluation of … 470 http://jad.tums.ac.ir Published Online: December 30, 2017 Vector Control Advisory Group (VCAG) has been established by WHO for advising new tools and approaches to vector control (4). The national malaria control program of the Islamic Republic of Iran was focused on controlling malaria however, in 2006 elimi- nation became the focus along with the Na- tional Strategic Plan on elimination of local transmission (5). The action towards reduc- ing malaria resulted in identification of only 167 indigenous (local) cases in 2015, that were almost all found in the three south-eastern provinces i.e Sistan and Baluchestan, Hor- mozgan and Kerman (6). In these areas, Anopheles culicifacies Giles s.l., Anopheles dthali Patton, Anopheles fluviatilis James s.l., Anopheles stephensi Liston and Anopheles superpictus Grassi are known to be proven malaria vectors, while there is also report of sporozoite infection of Anopheles pul- cherrimus Theobald (7–9). Several researches on insecticide resistance monitoring, revealed resistance status of Anopheles mosquitoes to a wide range of in- secticides in Iran. An. stephensi resistance to insecticides (DDT, dieldrin and malathion) was first reported in 1957, 1960 and 1976 re- spectively. The results of susceptibility tests of the most recent report of pyrethroid resistance of this species in Iran (10) indicated that An. culicifacies is tolerant/ resistant to DDT, diel- drin, propoxur (11), malathion (12). Anopheles dthali has been known as re- sistant to DDT and dieldrin in Iran, but current studies show that An. dthali is susceptible to all tested insecticides from organochlorine, organ- ophosphate, carbamates and pyrethroids (13). The tolerance to deltamethrin in this species (9, 14) is also a noticeable. Re- sistance to pyrethroids in Anopheles mosqui- toes appears to be effected by target site in- sensitivity knock down resistance (kdr) and metabolic mechanism caused by mixed- function oxidases (MFO) (15–16). Insects, in general, despite their suscep- tibility to insecticides, contain enzymes for metabolizing xenobiotic compounds and con- verting them to a non-toxic one that are fi- nally removed through excretion. Degradation or metabolism of insecticides are inhibited by PBO through blocking action, making it more effective. A great advantage of adding PBO to LLIN is the increased activity of py- rethoids in susceptible insects. PBO also in- creases the activity of pyrethroids in suscepti- ble insects, so the addition of PBO to LLIN has an advantage, even in areas where there is no resistance. Some studies have shown the im- pact of PBO resistances to pyrethroids in malaria vectors (17–18). Also, there were some laboratory and field trials in which PBO added to LLIN or larvicide component. The results of the latter showed PBO sup- pressed resistance to pyrethroid insecticides in different populations of Culicidae, indi- cating that oxidases and/or esterases play an important role in the reduction of pyrethroids toxicity (19–20). Despite laboratory and field evaluation of PBO efficiency in LLINs and larvicides, so far there has not been any study on using this combination in IRS. Therefore, this study was aimed to evaluate insecticidal activity of dif- ferent concentrations of deltamethrin com- bined with formulated PBO synergistic on various surfaces against the wild strain of An. stephensi, the malaria vector in southern Iran under the semi-field condition. Materials and Methods Preparation of the artificial surfaces Initially, 24 wooden containers with dimen- sions of 5x40x40cm, were divided into four parts and each part had three spikes for holding cones used for bioassay test (Fig. 1a). Cement, plaster, clay and wood surfaces were placed in each the wooden container and left to dry at room temperature. These containers were treat- ed with insecticide and different concentrations J Arthropod-Borne Dis, December 2017, 11(4): 469–481 F Nikpour et al.: Evaluation of … 471 http://jad.tums.ac.ir Published Online: December 30, 2017 of deltamethrin+synergist, while four untreated control containers were maintained (21). Concentrations Four concentrations of deltamethrin WG 25% (Tagros) and PBO 800EC-UV (En- dura) were prepared as follows: -Concentration 1 (Con 1) deltamethrin (without PBO) -Concentration 2 (Con 2) deltamethrin: PBO= 1: 3 -Concentration 3 (Con 3) deltamethrin: PBO= 1: 5 -Concentration 4 (Con 4) deltamethrin: PBO= 1:10 Residual spraying Five replicates of the containers have been installed on the wall and treated by different concentrations according to WHO alliance line of the IRS Micronair®. Insecticide was sprayed using a compression sprayer recom- mended by WHO for the IRS which is equipped with a pressure gauge and HSS- 8002 nozzles tips with regulator set at 24–55 PSI. Each concentration was dissolved in 10 liters of water in compression sprayer tanks. The sprayer discharge rate was set to 755 to 780ml/min. The spray duration was adjusted to spray 19m2 in one minute (21). The opera- tion was done by an expert under supervision (Fig. 1b). The containers treated with different concentrations were then allowed to dry at room temperature and installed vertically on the wall in four separate rooms (Fig. 1c). Mosquito species tested Anopheles stephensi larvae were collect- ed from Hormoodar village (27°19'14.72"N, 56°19'14.80"E), in the south of Bandar Abbas city during August 2015- January 2016 and were transferred to the insectary of Bandar Ab- bas Research Station as WHO collaborating Center for Malaria Training. The larvae were reared into F1 generation for subsequent tests. Adult susceptibility tests Insecticide susceptibility tests were carried out under laboratory conditions against An. stephensi with deltamethrin 0.05% (diagnostic dose) impregnated paper provided by WHO. The procedure of test was followed accord- ing to WHO (22). Bioassay tests The bioassay tests were carried out for evaluation of residual effect of different con- centrations using standard WHO cones. The cones were fitted on different treated surfac- es using rubber band. About 10–12 sugar-fed, 3–5 days old female mosquitoes were gently released into each cone at the vertical posi- tion. The mosquitoes were exposed for 30mins to each treated surfaces in five differ- ent replicates. The same procedures were car- ried out for control container. At the end of exposure time, the adults were transferred into clean cups with cotton wool pad contain- ing 10% sucrose solution and were kept in the insectary for 24h recovery period, the time for recording the mortality rate. Contact bioassay tests were carried out on days 1, 5, 15, 30, 45, 60, 105 and 120 after treatment. Relative humidity and tem- perature of the test rooms were recorded during the bioassay experiments (23). Statistical analysis Data obtained from different replicates were collected for each surface. The mortali- ty rate under 80% was considered as thresh- old level (24). The mortality rate rates were transformed into the Arc Sin √P. ANOVA test was used for comparison. Tests with control mortality rate between 5 and 20%, were cor- rected using Abbott’s formula (25). Results The susceptibility tests of An. stephensi against diagnostic dose of deltamethrin (0.05%) J Arthropod-Borne Dis, December 2017, 11(4): 469–481 F Nikpour et al.: Evaluation of … 472 http://jad.tums.ac.ir Published Online: December 30, 2017 resulted in 91% mortality rate. It means this species is a candidate of resistance to this in- secticide according to the new WHO criteria. Results of bioassay test on different sur- faces during 120 days were as follows: Mortality rate in plaster surface Results of bioassay test on plaster showed 80–100% mortality rate of An. stephensi dur- ing the first month of treatment for all concen- trations. This ratio reduced to 36% in concen- tration Con 1 and Con 3 after 120 days of treatment. These results indicated that deltame- thrin had a residual effect of about 2.5 months on Con 4 while the others had a residual ef- fect around 1–1.5 months (Table 1). There was no significant difference for plaster sur- face between different concentrations after 120 days of treatment (P> 0.05). Mortality rate in thatch surface Results of bioassay test on thatch showed 86–100% mortality rate of An. stephensi dur- ing the first month of treatment. Mortality rate after 120 days of treatment reduced to 45.1%, 50%, 50% and 47.5% in con.1, 2, 3 and 4 respectively. Mortality rate indicated that deltamethrin had a residual effect about two months on all concentrations except Con 1 (1.5 month) (Table 2). Mortality rate in cement surface Results of bioassay test on cement showed 84–100% mortality rate of An. stephensi dur- ing the first month of treatment. Mortality rate after 120 days of treatment reduced to 50% in all concentrations. Mortality rate indi- cated that deltamethrin had a residual effect about 2.5 months on all concentrations ex- cept Con 1 (one month) (Table 3). Mortality rate in wood surface Results of bioassay test on wood showed 84–100% mortality rate of An. stephensi dur- ing the first month of treatment. Mortality rate after 120 days of treatment reduced to 46% in Con 2 and Con 3. Mortality rate indicated that deltamethrin had a residual effect about two months using Con 4, 1.5 month for Con 2 and Con 3, while one month using Con 1 (Table 4). Results of bioassay test using different con- centrations during 120 days were as follows: Mortality rate of Concentration 1 Mortality rate of An. stephensi on differ- ent surfaces ranged from 84–100% during the first month of treatment. This value has dropped to 50% on cement and wood surfac- es after 120 days of spraying. However, on plaster and thatch surfaces, mortality rate was reduced to less than 50% after 90 and 105 days after treatment. So deltamethrin had a resid- ual effect of about 1.5 month on thatch and plaster, one month on other surfaces (Fig. 2). Mortality rate of Concentration 2 Mortality rate of An. stephensi on different surfaces ranged from 80–100% during the first month of treatment. Mortality rate after 120 days of treatment was 50% on thatch and cement surfaces but mortality rate on plaster and wood was less than 50% after 105 after treatment so based on indicating that del- tamethrin has a residual effect of about 2.5 months on cement, two months on thatch, 1.5 month on wood and one month on plaster surface (Fig. 3). Mortality rate of Concentration 3 Mortality rate of An. stephensi on different surfaces ranged from 86–100% during the first month of treatment. Mortality rate after 120 days of treatment was 50% on thatch and ce- ment surfaces but mortality rate on plaster and wood surfaces were less than 50% after day 105 of treatment. The results showed that del- tamethrin has a residual effect of about 2.5 months on cement, two months on thatch, 1.5 month on wood and one month on plaster sur- face (Fig. 4). J Arthropod-Borne Dis, December 2017, 11(4): 469–481 F Nikpour et al.: Evaluation of … 473 http://jad.tums.ac.ir Published Online: December 30, 2017 Mortality rate of Concentration 4 Mortality rate of An. stephensi on different surfaces ranged from 88–100% during the first month of treatment. Mortality rate after 120 days of treatment was equal to or more than 50% on plaster, cement and wood surfaces but mortality rate on thatch was less than 50% after day 105 of treatment. Based on these re- sults deltamethrin has a residual effect of about 2.5 months on plaster and cement and two months on thatch and wood surfaces (Fig. 5). Comparing the mortality rate of mosqui- toes, there was a significant difference between months after treatment (P< 0.05) but there were no significant differences between days in the first and second months (P> 0.05). Statistical test revealed a significant dif- ference in mortality rate of mosquitoes in exposure to Con 1 and others (P< 0.0001), but no significant difference was found be- tween Con 2 and Con 3 (P> 0.05). Tukey's test showed that there was a sig- nificant difference between mortality rate of mosquitoes on cement and other surfaces (P< 0.05), while there was no significant be- tween other three surfaces (P> 0.05). Fig. 1. a. Wooden container with four different surfaces, b. Spraying operation, c. Install contair after spraying in room which seprated into four parts Fig. 2. Comparison of deltamethrin persistence without piperonyl but oxide on different surfaces against Anopheles stephensi, 2015–2016 J Arthropod-Borne Dis, December 2017, 11(4): 469–481 F Nikpour et al.: Evaluation of … 474 http://jad.tums.ac.ir Published Online: December 30, 2017 Fig. 3. Comparison of deltamethrin persistence with 3X piperonyl but oxide and deltamethrin on different surfaces against Anopheles stephensi, 2015–2016 Fig. 4. Comparison of deltamethrin persistence with 5X piperonyl but oxide on different surfaces against Anopheles stephensi, 2015–2016 J Arthropod-Borne Dis, December 2017, 11(4): 469–481 F Nikpour et al.: Evaluation of … 475 http://jad.tums.ac.ir Published Online: December 30, 2017 Fig. 5. Comparison of deltamethrin persistence with 10X piperonyl but oxide on different surfaces against Anopheles stephensi, 2015–2016 J Arthropod-Borne Dis, December 2017, 11(4): 469–481 F Nikpour et al.: Evaluation of … 476 http://jad.tums.ac.ir Published Online: December 30, 2017 Table 1. Persistence of deltamethrin with/without piperonyl but oxide on plaster surface against Anopheles stephensi, 2015–2016 Days after spraying Concentrations Control Concentration 1 Concentration 2 Concentration 3 Concentration 4 T o ta l D e a d M o r ta lity ± S E T o ta l D e a d M o r ta lity ± S E T o ta l D e a d M o r ta lity ± S E T o ta l D e a d M o r ta lity ± S E T o ta l D e a d M o r ta lity 1 52 47 90.4 ± 3.2 50 40 80.0 ± 0.6 50 43 86.0 ± 2.2 50 50 100.0 ± 0.0 40 3 7.5 5 50 50 100.0 ± 0.0 50 42 84.0 ± 2.8 50 50 100.0 ± 0.0 50 50 100.0 ± 0.0 40 5 12.5 15 51 51 100.0 ± 0.0 50 48 96.0 ± 4.0 50 48 96.0 ± 4.0 50 48 96.0 ± 2.6 40 2 5 30 50 46 92.0 ± 2.1 50 45 90.0 ± 2.7 50 45 90.0 ± 2.7 50 47 94.0 ± 2.4 40 2 5 45 51 41 80.4 ± 0.9 50 36 72.0 ± 3.0 50 36 72.0 ± 3.0 50 42 84.0 ± 3.9 40 3 7.5 60 50 37 74.0 ± 3.1 50 38 76.0 ± 5.1 50 38 76.0 ± 5.1 50 45 90.0 ± 2.9 40 2 5 75 50 32 64.0 ± 2.7 50 38 76.0 ± 2.0 50 38 76.0 ± 2.0 50 42 84.0 ± 2.2 40 4 10 90 50 27 54.0 ± 3.5 50 34 68.0 ± 2.2 50 29 58.0 ± 3.7 50 35 70.0 ± 3.3 40 0 0 105 50 25 50.0 ± 3.0 50 27 54.0 ± 1.9 50 27 54.0 ± 1.9 50 33 66.0 ± 2.6 40 1 2.5 120 50 18 36.0 ± 3.7 50 18 36.0 ± 1.9 50 18 36.0 ± 1.9 50 25 50.0 ± 1.6 40 2 5 Table 2. Persistence of deltamethrin with/without piperonyl but oxide on thatch surface against Anopheles stephensi, 2015–2016 Days after spraying Concentrations Control Concentration 1 Concentration 2 Concentration 3 Concentration 4 T o ta l D e a d M o r ta lity ± S E T o ta l D e a d M o r ta lity ± S E T o ta l D e a d M o r ta lity ± S E T o ta l D e a d M o r ta lity ± S E T o ta l D e a d M o r ta lity 1 50 50 100.0 ± 0.0 51 51 100.0 ± 0.0 49 48 98.0 ± 2.0 51 46 90.2 ± 3.6 40 3 7.5 5 51 50 98.0 ± 2.0 50 45 90.0 ± 3.2 50 50 100.0 ± 0.0 51 51 100.0 ± 0.0 40 5 12.5 15 50 50 100.0 ± 0.0 50 47 94.0 ± 2.5 50 47 94.0 ± 2.5 50 49 98.0 ± 2.0 40 2 5 30 50 43 86.0 ± 1.6 49 46 93.9 ± 4.0 49 46 93.9 ± 4.0 49 43 87.8 ± 3.7 40 2 5 45 51 42 82.4 ± 3.6 50 40 80.0 ± 3.2 50 40 80.0 ± 3.2 50 38 76.0 ± 2.0 40 3 7.5 60 50 38 76.0 ± 1.3 50 41 82.0 ± 1.9 50 41 82.0 ± 1.9 51 41 80.4 ± 4.6 40 2 5 75 50 33 66.0 ± 5.6 50 38 76.0 ± 4.2 50 38 76.0 ± 4.2 50 36 72.0 ± 6.7 40 4 10 90 50 21 42.0 ± 2.3 50 37 74.0 ± 3.0 50 32 64.0 ± 2.8 50 33 66.0 ± 9.4 40 0 0 105 52 23 44.2 ± 2.6 50 28 56.0 ± 1.9 50 28 56.0 ± 1.9 50 28 56.0 ± 4.2 40 1 2.5 120 51 23 45.1 ± 7.5 50 25 50.0 ± 2.8 50 25 50.0 ± 2.8 40 19 47.5 ± 3.3 40 2 5 J Arthropod-Borne Dis, December 2017, 11(4): 469–481 F Nikpour et al.: Evaluation of … 477 http://jad.tums.ac.ir Published Online: December 30, 2017 Table 3. Persistency of deltamethrin with/without piperonyl but oxide on cement surface against Anopheles stephensi, 2015–2016 Days after spraying Concentrations Control Concentration 1 Concentration 2 Concentration 3 Concentration 4 T o ta l D e a d M o r ta lity ± S E T o ta l D e a d M o r ta lity ± S E T o ta l D e a d M o r ta lity ± S E T o ta l D e a d M o r ta lity ± S E T o ta l D e a d M o r ta lity 1 50 42 84.0 ± 1.7 49 49 100.0 ± 0.0 50 50 100.0 ± 0.0 50 50 100.0 ± 0.0 40 3 7.5 5 51 45 88.2 ± 1.7 50 44 88.0 ± 2.0 50 50 100.0 ± 0.0 50 50 100.0 ± 0.0 40 5 12.5 15 50 50 100.0 ± 0.0 50 50 100.0 ± 0.0 50 50 100.0 ± 0.0 50 50 100.0 ± 0.0 40 2 5 30 50 46 92.0 ± 2.0 49 45 91.8 ± 3.5 49 45 91.8 ± 3.5 50 45 90.0 ± 3.2 40 2 5 45 50 37 74.0 ± 2.2 50 42 84.0 ± 2.2 50 42 84.0 ± 2.2 50 47 94.0 ± 2.4 40 3 7.5 60 49 36 73.5 ± 1.8 50 40 80.0 ± 3.2 50 40 80.0 ± 3.2 50 42 84.0 ± 2.2 40 2 5 75 51 36 70.6 ± 5.8 50 42 84.0 ± 2.6 50 42 84.0 ± 2.6 50 42 84.0 ± 2.2 40 4 10 90 49 34 69.4 ± 3.1 50 35 70.0 ± 3.3 50 32 64.0 ± 2.4 50 37 74.0 ± 2.7 40 0 0 105 50 32 64.0 ± 2.8 50 27 54.0 ± 1.6 50 27 54.0 ± 1.6 50 35 70.0 ± 3.5 40 1 2.5 120 50 25 50.0 ± 1.8 50 25 50.0 ± 3.2 50 25 50.0 ± 3.2 50 27 54.0 ± 2.7 40 2 5 Table 4. Persistence of deltamethrin with/without piperonyl but oxide on wood surface against Anopheles stephensi, 2015–2016 Days after spraying Concentrations Control Concentration 1 Concentration 2 Concentration 3 Concentration 4 T o ta l D e a d M o r ta lity ± S E T o ta l D e a d M o r ta lity ± S E T o ta l D e a d M o r ta lity ± S E T o ta l D e a d M o r ta lity ± S E T o ta l D e a d M o r ta lity 1 49 46 93.9 ± 2.5 50 50 100.0 ± 0.0 51 51 100.0 ± 0.0 51 51 100.0 ± 0.0 40 3 7.5 5 50 42 84.0 ± 2.2 50 45 90.0 ± 0.0 50 50 100.0 ± 0.0 50 50 100.0 ± 0.0 40 5 12.5 15 51 51 100.0 ± 0.0 50 47 94.0 ± 2.5 50 47 94.0 ± 2.5 50 48 96.0 ± 2.3 40 2 5 30 49 49 100.0 ± 0.0 49 49 100.0 ± 0.0 49 49 100.0 ± 0.0 49 47 95.9 ± 2.4 40 2 5 45 51 39 76.5 ± 2.2 50 40 80.0 ± 3.2 50 40 80.0 ± 3.2 51 45 88.2 ± 5.8 40 3 7.5 60 49 34 69.4 ± 1.8 50 38 76.0 ± 2.5 50 38 76.0 ± 2.5 50 42 84.0 ± 2.4 40 2 5 75 50 35 70.0 ± 2.4 50 38 76.0 ± 4.2 50 38 76.0 ± 4.2 50 38 76.0 ± 4.2 40 4 10 90 50 31 62.0 ± 4.7 50 34 68.0 ± 2.0 50 32 64.0 ± 3.3 50 33 66.0 ± 2.4 40 0 0 105 50 23 46.0 ± 4.1 50 30 60.0 ± 1.3 50 30 60.0 ± 1.3 50 28 56.0 ± 3.6 40 1 2.5 120 50 25 50.0 ± 2.3 50 23 46.0 ± 3.0 50 23 46.0 ± 3.0 50 26 52.0 ± 1.2 40 2 5 J Arthropod-Borne Dis, December 2017, 11(4): 469–481 F Nikpour et al.: Evaluation of … 478 http://jad.tums.ac.ir Published Online: December 30, 2017 Discussion At present, pyrethroids are being used for IRS and in mosquito nets and various products worldwide (3). There is no alternative insecticide for the treatment of nets other than pyrethroids synergistic nets. Among products being evaluated by the Pesticide Evaluation Scheme (WHOPES) were mos- quito nets containing a pyrethroid and a com- pound of an unrelated class (e.g. chlorfenapyr or pyriproxyfen) and clothianidin IRS formu- lated with or without pyrethroid (27–28). Deltamethrin+PBO for use in IRS, has been a proposed product in order to overcome the appearance of resistance. This combined prod- uct could be used as a vector control tool in country programs. This tool is highly recom- mended in countries that are in elimination phase or have reported insecticide resistance due to vector control strategy being a key strategy. The results of this study showed that alt- hough mortality rates in different concentra- tions of deltamethrin+PBO decreased during 120 days after treatment, mortality rate in day 120 in all of them was higher than deltame- thrin without PBO (Figs. 2–5). Regardless of surface type, there was also an eligible dif- ference in mortality rate between deltame- thrin without PBO (Con 1) and deltamethrin+ PBO= 1:10 (Con 4) concentration against An. stephensi field strain (P< 0.0001). There- fore, it can be concluded that PBO had a positive effect on the efficacy of insecticide. Exito-repellency effect of deltamethrin may be the reason for different mortality rates (90– 100%) between different surfaces and concen- trations in the first month of the study. The study on plaster surfaces showed a significant difference between mortality rate on Con 1 and Con 4 on both days 1 and 120 after treatment, but this difference was only significant in day 1 on cement, thatch and wood surfaces. This results is in line with the study in Benin that evaluated PermaNet 3.0 (deltame- thrin+PBO) against pyrethroid-resistant An. gambiae and Cx. quinquefasciatus in an experimental hut. They found a negligible dif- ference between the mortality rate of Per- maNet 2.0 (deltamethrin) and PermaNet 3.0 before and after the 20 times washing (29). In some researches in African countries which was proved kdr and metabolic resistance, tricomponent of LLIN were used. These nets include pyrethroid+PBO and other group of insecticides with different mechanisms of action such as pyrole chlorfenapyr or neon- icotinoid. They found tricomponents had more insecticidal activity than one component LLIN on pyrethroid-resistant An. gambiae, Ae. aegypti, An. funestus and Cx. quinque- fasciatus (30–33). A study conducted on a pyrethroid resistant strain of Cx. pipiens (3.8 to 38.4 folds) eval- uated mixture of pyrethriod larvicides and PBO (20). They found PBO suppressed re- sistance to pyrethroid insecticides (>90%) in field populations indicating that oxidases and/or esterases play an important role in the reduction of pyrethroids toxicity. Another survey conducted to assay larviciding impact of a mixture of stock solution of PBO and deltamethrin in 6:1 ratio on resistant strains (4–21 folds) of Ae. aegypti, An. culicifacies, An. stephensi, An. vagus, Cx. tritaeniorhyn- chus, Cx. pipiens, revealed that PBO sup- pressed resistance between 75–95% (26). It can be concluded that lower mortality rate indi- cates resistance which can result in better ef- ficacy of PBO. Although, in this study, we had 91% mortality rate in the tested strain which was not resistance strain but significant differences were found in mortality rates be- tween some concentrations (Figs. 2–5). Both above mentioned studies used technical PBO under laboratory condition, but we applied a formulated product under semi-field condition. These differences may also affect the results. Several study results revealed that mortal- ity rate in non-sorbent (wood) and sorbent sur- J Arthropod-Borne Dis, December 2017, 11(4): 469–481 F Nikpour et al.: Evaluation of … 479 http://jad.tums.ac.ir Published Online: December 30, 2017 faces (mud, thatch, plaster and cement) had no significant differences in mortality rate. The absorption rate on different surfaces (wood, plaster, mud and cement) had notable variability in mortality rate on parous surfac- es, as have been reported in other studies (21, 34) but the result of this study revealed differences in absorption rate on parous sur- faces in different concentrations (Con 1 and Con 3 and Con 4) (Tables 1–4) which can be the effect of PBO. It seems that the moderate and high concentration of PBO (Con 3 and Con 4) had effected the high level of mortality rate on the first day of treatment however in Con 1, the high level of mortality started on day 15 of treatment. These results indicated that the presence of synergist has led to a de- crease in absorption therefore resulting in high mortality rate from the beginning of treatment in comparison with absence of synergist (Con 1). Conclusion In conclusion, considering that the strain of An. stephensi used in this study was not re- sistance strain and the PBO could not result in significant difference in mortality rate after day 120, however the results suggest that the combination of deltamethrin+PBO can be more effective in mortality rate of resistant An. stephensi. Also PBO was observed to be more functional on porous substrates, while higher concentration of PBO seems to be more effective. However, more studies on the strains with higher resistant ratio can prove our results. This method can be considered as a new tool for malaria vector control, alt- hough more studies are recommended under field condition. References 1. WHO (2015) Global Technical Strategy for Malaria 2016–2030. World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland, pp. 4–5. 2. WHO (2009) World Malaria Report 2008. World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland. 3. WHO (2008) Report of the 11th WHOPES Working Group Meeting, Review of: Spinosad 7.48% DT, Netprotect®, Duranet®, Dawaplus®, ICON Maxx®. World Health Organiza- tion, Geneva, Switzerland. 4. WHO (2012) Vector Control Advisory Group. World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland. 5. Raeisi A, Gouya MM, Nadim A, Ranjbar M, Hasanzehi A, Fallahnezhad M, Sakeni M, Safari R, Saffari M, Mashyekhi M, Ahmadi Kahnali A, Mirkhani V, Almasian E, Faraji L, Paktinat Jalali B, Nikpour F (2013) Determination of malaria epidemio- logical status in Iran’s malarious ar- eas as baseline information for im- plementation of malaria elimination program in Iran. Iran J Public Health. 42(3): 326–333. 6. WHO (2016) World Malaria Report 2016. World Health Organization, Gene- va, Switzerland, p. 136. 7. Zaim M, Manouchehri AV, Cochrane AH (1993) Role of Anopheles culicifacies and An. pulcherrimus in malaria transmission in Ghassreghand (Ba- luchistan), Iran. J Am Mosq Con- trol Assoc. 9(1): 23–26. 8. Vatandoost H, Oshaghyi MA, Abai MR, Shahi M, Yaghoobi F, Baghaii M, Hanafi-Bojd AA, Zamani G, Town- son H (2006) Bionomics of Anophe- les stephensi Liston in the malarious area of Hormozgan Province, south- ern Iran. Acta Trop. 97(2): 196–203. 9. Hanafi-Bojd AA, Azari-Hamidian S, Vatan- doost H, Charrahy Z (2011) Spatio- temporal distribution of malaria vec- tors (Diptera: Culicidae) across dif- J Arthropod-Borne Dis, December 2017, 11(4): 469–481 F Nikpour et al.: Evaluation of … 480 http://jad.tums.ac.ir Published Online: December 30, 2017 ferent climatic zones of Iran. Asian Pac J Trop Med. 4 (6): 498–504. 10. Vatandoost H, Hanafi-Bojd AA (2012) In- dication of pyrethroid resistance in the main malaria vector, Anopheles stephensi from Iran. Asian Pac J Trop Med. 5(9): 722–726. 11. Vatandoost H, Nateghpour M (1999) Sta- tus of insecticide resistance in Anoph- eles culicifacies (Diptera: Culicidae) in Ghasreghand district, Sistan and Baluchistan Province, Iran. Acta Med Iran. 37(3): 128–133. 12. Zaim M (1987) Malaria control in Iran, present and future. J Am Mosq Con- trol Assoc. 3(3): 392–396. 13. Bakhshi H, Abai MR, Amin Gh, Zolfi R, Pirmohammadi M, Bakhshi A, Tagh- inezhad F, Moosa-Kazemi SH (2014) Larvicidal Properties of Botanical Extracts of Lawsonia inermis against Anopheles stephensi. Adv Infect Dis. 4: 178–185. 14. Gorouhi MA, Vatandoost H, Oshaghi MA, Raeisi A, Enayati AA, Mirhendi H, Hanafi-Bojd AA, Abai MR, Salim- Abadi Y, Rafi F (2016) Current Sus- ceptibility Status of Anopheles ste- phensi (Diptera: Culicidae) to Differ- ent Imagicides in a Malarious Area, Southeastern of Iran. J Arthropod Borne Dis. 10(4): 493–500. 15. N’Guessan R, Corbel V, Akogbéto M, Rowland M (2007) Reduced efficacy of insecticide-treated nets and indoor residual spraying for malaria con- trol in pyrethroid resistance area, Benin. Emerg Infect Dis. 13: 199– 206. 16. Corbel V, N’Guessan R, Brengues C, Chandre F, Djogbenou L, Martin T, Akogbéto M, Hougard JM, Rowland M (2007) Multiple insecticide re- sistance mechanisms in Anopheles gambiae and Culex quinquefasciatus from Benin, West Africa. Acta Trop. 101(3): 207–216. 17. Verschueren C (2006) Why effective insec- ticide resistance management is im- portant. Public Health Journal. Bayer Environmental Science. 18: 5–7 18. Pennetier C, Bouraima A, Chandre F, Piameu M, Etang J, Rossignol M, Sidick I, Zogo B, Lacroix MN, Yadav R, Pigeon O, Corbel V (2013) Efficacy of Olyset® Plus, a new long-lasting insecticidal net incor- porating permethrin and piperonyl- butoxide against multi-resistant malar- ia vectors. PLoS One. 8(10): e75134. 19. Fakoorziba MR, Eghbal F, Vijayan VA (2009) Synergist Efficacy of Pipronyl Butoxide with deltamethrin as py- rethroid insecticde on Culex tri- taenorhynchus (Diptera: Culicidae) and other Mosquitoe Species. Envi- ron Toxicol. 24(1): 19–24. 20. Al-Sarar AS (2010) Insecticide resistance of Culex pipiens (L.) Populations (Diptera: Culicidae) from Riyadh City, Saudi Arabia: Status and over- come. Saudi J Biol Sci. 17(2): 95–100 21. Vatandoost H, Abbasi M, Shaeghi M, Ab- tahi M, Rafi F (2009) Designing of a laboratory model for evaluation of the residual effects of deltamethrin (K-othrine WP 5%) on different sur- faces against malaria vector, Anoph- eles stephensi (Diptera: Culicidae). J Vector Borne Dis. 46: 261–267. 22. WHO (2013) Test procedures for insecti- cide resistance monitoring in malaria vector mosquitoes. World Health Or- ganization, Geneva, Switzerland. 23. WHO (1998) Test procedure for insecti- cide resistance monitoring in malaria vectors, bio-efficacy and persistence of insecticides on treated surfaces. World Health Organization, Gene- va, Switzerland. J Arthropod-Borne Dis, December 2017, 11(4): 469–481 F Nikpour et al.: Evaluation of … 481 http://jad.tums.ac.ir Published Online: December 30, 2017 24. WHO (2006) Pesticides and their applica- tion for the control of vectors and pests of public health importance. WHO/CDS/NTD/WHOPES/GCDP P/2006.1. 25. WHO (1981) Instruction for determining the susceptibility or resistance of adult mosquitoes to organochlorine, organophosphate and carbamate in- secticides Diagnostic test. World Health Organization, Geneva, Swit- zerland. 26. WHO (2016) Test procedures for insecti- cide resistance monitoring in malaria vector mosquitoes –2nd ed. World Health Organization, Geneva, Swit- zerland. 27. Hemingway J (2015) Malaria: fifteen years of interventions. Nature. 526(7572): 198–199. 28. Tungu P, Magesa S, Maxwell C, Malima R, Masue D, Sudi W, Myamba J, Pi- geon O, Rowland M (2010) Evalu- ation of PermaNet 3.0 a deltame- thrin-PBO combination net against Anopheles gambiae and pyrethroid resistant Culex quinquefasciatus mos- quitoes: an experimental hut trial in Tanzania. Malar J. 9: 21. 29. N’Guessan R, Asidi A, Boko P, Odjo A, Akogbeto M, Pigeon O, Rowland M (2010) An experimental hut evalua- tion of PermaNet® 3.0, a deltame- thrin–piperonyl butoxide combina- tion net, against pyrethroid-resistant Anopheles gambiae and Culex quin- quefasciatus mosquitoes in southern Benin. Trans R Soc Trop Med Hyg. 104: 758–765. 30. Darriet F, Chandre F (2011) Combining piperonyl butoxide and dinotefuran restores the efficacy of deltamethrin mosquito nets against resistant Anoph- eles gambiae (Diptera: Culicidae). J Med Entomol. 48(4): 952–955. 31. N’Guessan R, Corine N, Kudom AA, Boko P, Odjo A, Malone D, Rowland M (2014) Mosquito nets treated with a mixture of chlorfenapyr and al- phacypermethrin control pyrethroid resistant Anopheles gambiae and Cu- lex quinquefasciatus mosquitoes in west africa. PLoS One. 9(2): e87710. 32. Horstmann S, Sonneck R (2016) Contact bioassays with phenoxybenzyl and tetrafluorobenzyl pyrethroids against target-site and metabolic resistant mosquitoes. PLoS ONE. 11(3): e0149738. 33. Darriet F, Chandre F (2013) Efficacy of six neonicotinoid insecticides alone and in combination with deltame- thrin and piperonyl butoxide against pyrethroid‐resistant Aedes aegypti and Anopheles gambiae (Diptera: Culicidae). Pest Management Sci- ence. 69: 905–910. 34. Abtahi SM, Shaeghi M, Abai MR, Ak- barzadeh K, Vatandoost H, Ladon- ni H, Darabi H (2007) Evaluation of persistence and residual of del- tamethrin and cyfluthrin on different surfaces at Iranshahr area in Sistan and Baluchistan Province in Iran, 2004–2005. Iranian South Med J. 9: 123–130.