Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 208

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Traditional use of mosquito-repellent plants in western Kenya and their evaluation in semi-field experimental huts against Anopheles gambiae: ethnobotanical studies and application by thermal expulsion and direct burning

Seyoum, A., Pålsson, K., Kung'a, S., Kabiru, E.W., Lwande, W., Killeen, G.F., Hassanali, A., Knots, B.G.J.·2002·Transactions of the Royal Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene

Abstract

Ethnobotanical survey in 2 communities in western Kenya revealed that the most commonly known repellent plants were Ocimum americanum L. (64.1%), Lantana camara L. (17.9%), Tagetes minuta L. (11.3%) and Azadirachta indica A. Juss (8.7%) on Rusinga Island, and Hyptis suaveolens Poit. (49.2%), L. camara (30.9%) and O. basilicum L. (30.4%) in Rambira. Direct burning of plants is the most common method of application for O. americanum (68.8%), L. camara (100%) and O. basilicum (58.8%). Placing branches or whole plants inside houses is most common for H. suaveolens (33.3 and 57.8% for the respective locations), A. indica (66.7 and 100%), and T. minuta (54.8 and 56.0%). The repellency of plants suggested by the ethnobotanical survey and other empirical information was evaluated against the malaria vector Anopheles gambiae s.s. Giles in experimental huts within a screenwalled greenhouse. Thermal expulsion and direct burning were tested as alternative application methods for the selected plants O. americanum, O. kilimandscharicum Guerke, O. suave Willd., L. camara, A. indica, H. suaveolens, Lippia uckambensis Spreng and Corymbia citriodora Hook. When thermally expelled, only H. suaveolens failed to repel mosquitoes, whereas the leaves of C. citriodora (74.5%, P < 0.0001), leaves and seeds of O. suave (53.1%, P < 0.0001) and O. kilimandscharicum (52.0%, P < 0.0001) were the most effective. Leaves of C. citriodora also exhibited the highest repellency (51.3%, P < 0.0001) by direct burning, followed by leaves of L. uckambensis (33.4%, P = 0.0004) and leaves and seeds of O. suave (28.0%, P = 0.0255). The combination of O. kilimandscharicum with L. uckambensis repelled 54.8% of mosquitoes (P < 0.0001) by thermal expulsion. No combination of plants increased repellency by either method. The semi-field system described appears a promising alternative to full-field trials for screening large numbers of candidate repellents without risk of malaria exposure.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s0035-9203(02)90084-2

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 208

Metadata

Authors
Seyoum, A., Pålsson, K., Kung'a, S., Kabiru, E. W., Lwande, W., Killeen, G. F., Hassanali, A., & Knots, B. G. J.
Venue
Transactions of the Royal Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene
Published
2002-05
Volume
96
Issue
3
Pages
225-231
ISSN
0035-9203 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1975946680
Cited by
208
References
0
FWCI
7.77
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Traditional use of mosquito-repellent plants in western Kenya and their evaluation in semi-field experimental huts against Anopheles gambiae: ethnobotanical studies and application by thermal expulsion and direct burning. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/s0035-9203(02)90084-2
The paper
Seyoum, A., Pålsson, K., Kung'a, S., Kabiru, E. W., Lwande, W., Killeen, G. F., Hassanali, A., & Knots, B. G. J. (2002). Traditional use of mosquito-repellent plants in western Kenya and their evaluation in semi-field experimental huts against Anopheles gambiae: ethnobotanical studies and application by thermal expulsion and direct burning. Transactions of the Royal Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0035-9203(02)90084-2

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.