New Issue: Science’s Impossible Questions. Read Now

DEET Beaters

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


New mosquito repellents work more than three times as long as DEET, currently the most widely used such chemical and the gold standard by which to judge alternatives. Researchers discovered them using an artificial neural network, which they first trained by supplying it with the molecular structures of 150 known repellents. The neural network then scanned a library of roughly 2,000 untested piperidines, compounds related to the active ingredient in black pepper that can ward off insects. Human volunteers then wore arm patches impregnated with the best candidates and held their arms motionless in cages filled with roughly 500 mosquitoes for one minute each day. While DEET repelled mosquito attacks for an average of 17.5 days, some of the new compounds lasted for up to 73 days, scientists at the University of Florida and the U.S. Department of Agriculture found. Buzz about the findings in the May 27 Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA.

Charles Q. Choi is a frequent contributor to Scientific American. His work has also appeared in The New York Times, Science, Nature, Wired, and LiveScience, among others. In his spare time, he has traveled to all seven continents.

More by Charles Q. Choi
Scientific American Magazine Vol 299 Issue 2This article was published with the title “DEET Beaters” in Scientific American Magazine Vol. 299 No. 2 (), p. 34
doi:10.1038/scientificamerican0808-34c

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe