Australia To Use GM To Control Carp

mskfisher writes "Yahoo! News is running an AFP story on Australia's efforts to control the carp population using a 'male-only' gene. The gene will prevent the carp, considered a pest in Australia, from producing female offspring. The carp has wiped out some 90% of the native south Australian fish population, namely perch and bass. They do not, however, mention any ways of controlling the spread of this gene in the wild, besides the obvious death of any affected population."

Comments

Well I worry about this one

[tekiegreg]

Suppose this gene multiplies further out past Australia, we could very well see the extinction of all Carp once they all become male.

Genetic work can be beneficial, but the long term considerations must be considered, how about mass breeding/releasing of sharks in the water to eat all these carp (I know the human implications of all those sharks terrorizing humans)? Or just increased fishing programs? There's got to be another way....

Re:Well I worry about this one

[Wabin]

The gene does not cause infertility, just maleness. So it can spread. Which is in fact what they want; They can't very well introduce the gene into all of the fish out there (if they could, they would have just killed them all) so what they want to do is introduce this gene, then as it spreads, gradually the proportion of males in the population will increase. When you have all males, then the population dies. There are, of course, problems with this approach. One is the potential for accidental spread, both to other populations of carp outside Australia, and to other species.* Another is that the females who are left are likely to produce more surviving offspring (population limits in fish are not usually from the number of eggs produced). Another is that it will take a while to have huge effects, during which time mutations might arise that block this mechanism and allow female development. Such a mutation would spread rapidly (it would be highly favored by selection once the population got far off 50-50) so you would be back a square one. Biocontrol of introduced species is notoriously bad, particularly in Australia. See Cane Toads. We are exceptionally bad at foreseeing all of the downstream consequences of such manipulations of the ecosystem. A cool idea, and some great work by the scientists, but lets hope that they think long and hard before releasing these fish into the wild. *do you really think that all those extra male carp will ignore the chance for some kinky inter-species romance? It just takes one...

One Man's Pest...

[blunte]

is another man's delicacy

Kiwis don't use GM and have more fun doing it

[NewtonsLaw]

Hey, why use complex genetic engineering to control your carp population when you can have a hell of a lot more fun using medieval technology like the NZers do?

Visual Cues

[RabidChipmunk]

They should GM the carp so they look different to humans. Maybe put the Glow gene in them. The only problem would be if the change made them less attractive to the opposite sex. Eventually it would, because selection would favor females who can pick males without the gene. It would take a while though.

The trick is not to create something that is "collectable." It'll have to be ugly and taste bad, but still sexy to other fish.

Re:carp is a freshwater fish

[alsta]

So where did carp come from if it isn't indigenous anywhere? The fact of the matter is that it doesn't belong in Australia and short of this, there is no way one can cleanse the waters of the carp without killing every other living being in those waters.

The risk that somebody "smuggles" this species to Asian countries appears very small and for that to have serious effect, the carp would have to inter-breed with other species to knock whole stocks out.

COULD there be a risk? Of course. Is this option safer and more humane than others? I would like to think so. However you twist and turn this issue, the carp is killing off every other species in those waters. Australians DON'T want the carp. Since it has to go, what else do you propose that doesn't indiscriminately kill off everything else in those waters?

Re:carp is a freshwater fish

[alsta]

OK, you're for genetic manipulation and for cleansing waters of non-indigenous carp. In fact you're for this in US waters, but somehow Australians shouldn't be allowed to because it would be unfair to South East Asia?

I am oversimplifying to get your attention. However there are a few facts we need to establish here for the sake of the argument.

This procedure affects one species of carp. I don't know how many known species of carp there are, but I would venture to guess that it is in the least hundreds (probably thousands, but I am being purposely conservative) in the world. This affected carp species will have to, provided that it is properly shipped and that it adapts to the environment where it is introduced well and in large enough numbers, be predatory enough in its mating habits and inter-breed in order to take other species out as well.

Australia will have government ensuring that the male-only gene is spread, whereas we'll have say 10 guys successfully spending thousands of dollars to ship live genetically modified male carp from Australia to the US?

Again, COULD there be a problem? Yes, there could be. We could also be struck by meteorites. This species has to be erradicated by some means. Short of killing everything, what do you suggest is better than genetic manipulation, which you're in favor of elsewhere in the world?