I would say it is good to do both. But to be realistic you need to know if your insecticide is used as larvicide or adulticide...

To my knowledge, diagnostic adult WHO tests are not the best way to measure resistance level. Better to do different exposure times (different doses) to obtain Dose - mortality curves and calculate LD50 (and then RR50 if you compare a resistant vs a susceptible population).

Hope this helps

JP

Hello!

Both are fine depending on your question/hypothesis. With the test tube, if you have only one dose, you can estimate the LT50. You can also prepare yourself the impregnated papers with different doses. With the larval bioassay, it's easier to measure the LC50....both information are good to know!

Also, you can use the bottle assay from CDC:

http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/wbt/resistance/assay/bottle/index.htm

All the best,

or topical assays as used in Marcombe et al 2009 (BMC genomics) ...

(Hi rodolphe ;)

Follow previous answer. It's better find previous report/ information in your local area , However, found strains exhibited high levels of resistance report in many areas in your country, better to try topical application directly. All the best...

Thanks to all of you for advices. I will think about and try new stuff as CDC bottle. Do you know if sometimes papers made by WHO could be unefficient on a susceptible strain like Rockfeller or Bora or the dosage need to be re evaluated? Thanks again for your answers.

You may opt to use Bottle Bioassay by william Brogdon, procedures available on line

By topical application

From my experience, WHO diagnostic papers tend to be very efficient on susceptible strains like Bora or Rockfeller. In certain cases (Permethrin papers (0.75%) tested on Bora strain if I remember well), the diagnostic doses were too strong to estimate an accurate LT50.