目的 评估植物源驱避剂诺卡酮对白纹伊蚊的驱避效果。方法 三节管筛选空间驱避实验设置20%、10%、5%浓度诺卡酮溶液各3组重复和1组空白对照，每组选取40只羽化后5~8 d的未吸血雌性白纹伊蚊，三节管处理侧用不同浓度诺卡酮溶液浸润处理纱网，对照侧用无水乙醇。各组蚊虫分别移入三节管中间腔室，覆绿绒布后打开两侧挡板，10 min后关闭挡板记录两侧蚊虫数，并计算相对趋避率。选择相对趋避率较高的诺卡酮溶液进行衣物面料所用驱避剂药效实验，设5个重复，每个重复选取600只羽化后3~5 d的未吸血成蚊（雌雄各300只）。处理组面料按7.5 ml/500 cm²药量浸泡后静置48 h，对照组为未处理同批面料，面料覆盖测试手套背面40 mm × 40 mm的观察窗。5位志愿者佩戴测试手套伸入蚊笼，记录30 min内蚊虫刺探次数，该时段无任何刺探为完全防护合格，并于静置5 d、7 d后分别复测持效性直至失效。人手涂肤蚊笼实验设5个重复，每个重复选取300只羽化后3~5 d的未吸血雌蚊。志愿者手背标记50 mm × 50 mm区域，与测试手套40 mm × 40 mm观察窗重合，涂抹1.5 μl/cm²诺卡酮溶液后2 h，志愿者佩戴测试手套暴露处理区域，手伸入蚊笼，记录2 min内蚊虫刺探次数，之后每小时测试1次，以首次出现刺探为失效标准，并记录有效防护时间。采用Mann-Whitney U检验分析三节管筛选空间驱避实验空白条件下两侧蚊数差异，卡方检验分析不同浓度组实验组与空白条件下蚊数差异。结果 三节管测试结果显示，空白条件下对照侧和处理侧的蚊虫数比值为15/15，两侧的差异无统计学意义（Z = 0.145，P > 0.05）。5%、10%、20%浓度诺卡酮的相对驱避率分别为26.1%、26.1%和57.7%，与空白对照（50.0%）差异无统计学意义（χ² = 3.112 1、3.112 1、0.331 4，P > 0.05）；20%诺卡酮与5%、10%诺卡酮的相对驱避率差异均有统计学意义（χ² = 4.978、4.978，P < 0.05）。衣物面料所用驱避剂药效评价实验结果显示，20%诺卡酮处理后静置48 h的面料符合完全防护标准，且药效保护时长为5 d。人手涂肤蚊笼实验结果显示，20%浓度的诺卡酮的平均有效保护时间为2.4 h。结论 在衣物面料所用驱避剂药效评价实验中，20%浓度的诺卡酮对白纹伊蚊具有完全保护效果。

Objective To evaluate the repellent effect of the plant-derived repellent nootkatone against Aedes albopictus. Methods In the spatial repellency screening assay using three-part tubes, three replicates each of 20%, 10%, and 5% nootkatone solutions were tested, together with one blank control. For each group, 40 female Ae. albopictus mosquitoes (5 to 8 days post-emergence without blood feeding) were selected. The treatment side of the three-part tube was fitted with a mesh screen impregnated with the respective nootkatone solutions, while the control side was treated with absolute ethanol. Mosquitoes were introduced into the central chamber of the three-part tube, which were covered with green flannels. Then, the partitions to both sides were opened. After 10 minutes, the partitions were closed, and the number of mosquitoes in each side was recorded to calculate the relative repellency rate. The nootkatone solutions with a relatively higher repellency rate were selected for subsequent fabric efficacy and human hand topical application cage tests. For the fabric efficacy evaluation, five replicates were conducted, each utilizing 600 adult mosquitoes (3 to 5 days post-emergence without blood feeding, including 300 males and 300 females). Fabrics in the treatment group were immersed in the repellent at a dose of 7.5 ml/500 cm² for 48 hours, while the control group used untreated fabric from the same batch. The fabric was used to cover a 40 mm × 40 mm observation window on the back of test gloves. Five volunteers wore the gloves and inserted their hands into mosquito cages, and the number of mosquito probing attempts within 30 minutes was recorded. The criterion for complete protection was absence of any probing during this period. The residual efficacy was re-tested on days 5 and 7, and so forth, until protection failed. For the human hand topical application cage test, five replicates were performed, each using 300 female mosquitoes (3 to 5 days post-emergence without blood feeding). A 50 mm × 50 mm area on the back of a volunteer’s hand, aligning with the 40 mm × 40 mm observation window on the test glove, was marked. The volunteer wore a test glove exposing the treated area 2 hours post-treatment with nootkatone solution at a dose of 1.5 μl/cm², inserted their hands into the cage, and the number of probing attempts within 2 minutes was recorded. This test was repeated hourly, with the first occurrence of a probing event defined as the failure criterion, and the duration of effective protection was recorded. For the spatial repellency screening assay using three-part tube, Mann-Whitney U test was used to analyze the difference in mosquito distribution between the two sides under blank control conditions, and chi-square test was used to analyze differences between experimental groups (different concentrations) and the blank control. Results The spatial repellency screening assay using three-part tube showed a 15/15 mosquito distribution ratio between the control and treatment sides under blank conditions (Z = 0.145, P > 0.05). The relative repellency rates of 5%, 10%, and 20% nootkatone were 26.1%, 26.1%, and 57.7% against Ae. albopictus mosquitoes, respectively, with no statistically significant differences compared to the blank control (χ² = 3.112 1, 3.112 1, 0.331 4; P > 0.05). The repellency rate of 20% nootkatone was significantly different from that of both 5% and 10% nootkatone (χ² = 4.978, 4.978; P < 0.05). The fabric efficacy evaluation demonstrated that fabric treated with 20% nootkatone for 48 hours provided complete protection, with a protective duration of 5 days. The human hand topical application test indicated that the average effective protection time was 2.4 hours for 20% nootkatone. Conclusion In the fabric efficacy evaluation, 20% nootkatone provides a complete protection against Ae. albopictus.