Fighting Mosquitoes With GM Mosquitoes
doug141 writes "Scientists are releasing genetically modified male mosquitoes that produce flightless female offspring. The male offspring go on to wipe out another generation of females. This is similar to the way screwworms were eradicated in the U.S., except with nature itself making more of the modified males. Field trials are already underway."
Or maybe not. Actually I would be more in favor of releasing wave after wave of bats. Fruit bats preferably, they're cute!
The mosquito could become extinct in a few generations. Here's how this could play out:
Mosquitoes usually fly when fleeing danger. These flightless mosquitoes will not be in position to flee! In a situation where they could survive a whack by flying away, they will surely be killed!
Killed in enough numbers, there will be no female mosquitoes to produce the 'next generation!'
Result: Males will find it difficult to find a mate, resulting in fewer mosquitoes all together.
Folks, the mosquito could get extinct in a few years. Scary indeed.
Since clearly a lot of people didn't read the article or the link in the article that directly addresses this...
I found this on the Internet.
http://www.nature.com/news/2010/100721/full/466432a.html
[[Ecology: A world without mosquitoes
Eradicating any organism would have serious consequences for ecosystems — wouldn't it? Not when it comes to mosquitoes, finds Janet Fang.]]
Partially agreed but...at the same time... who knows what doesn't mean it wont work...or will result in problems later, just that we don't fully know...and I might argue, can't fully know until we try.
That said, I think it has a real chance of working, mostly because of how drastic of an effect this could have by shifting the reproductive cycle in such a way as to massively overpopulate males vs females. If this works for the first few generations, it could quickly put a hurting on their numbers. This leaves a couple of possibilities.
Actually.... this reminds me of some of the talk of cancer evolution....in fact, its probably a good model here. To go from being a human cell to a cancer cell generally takes not just one, but several evolutionary steps. At each of those steps, a cell line could die off (either via chance or via a cleaning mechanism designed to take out mutated cells). Chances are, if you have cancer, your body came close to cancer several times before one cell finally finds the right mutated configuration.
So the chance of developing cancer actually is dependent on the number of steps required to become cancerous, down all of the paths that it can. This is an identical situation here.... it comes down to how close the populations genetic makeup is to being able to circumvent this. If it only takes one or two mutations to make females who avoid GM males, or to produce something which compensates for the change, then.... this is unlikely to work. Similarly, if they already have the genes required to make females that are not susceptible, then this will simply make sure that they dominate.
That said, if there are no coping mechanisms already in their population, and if developing them is more than a few mutations away.... it could come damned close to eradicating them. Once their numbers are vastly smaller, it would also slow the rate of total mutations in their population, making them less likely to make it over the hurdles.
It could work.... but... what that will mean in the long term is unclear.
"I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
The article links to this Nature story that asserts that completely eradicating mosquitos would have no measurable effect on the environment. They don't really do anything but spread disease. They might have a role as a food source for other animals, but they don't appear to be very significant.
But we might be missing an important part of the chain, and wiping out the mosquitos might throw the world completely out of balance. Then again, humans have so many reasons to hate the little buggers that it still might be worth it.
Genocide Man -- Life is funny. Death is funnier. Mass murder can be hilarious.
That's exactly what they are doing. They are concentrating on one single strain of mosquito that is the only one that carries the virus. by eradicating only this one strain, they hope to eliminate the virus without eliminating the Mosquito as a species.
It's a new disease, so I expect you haven't heard of it: Malaria.
malaria accounts for 2% of deaths worldwide. most of which are children.
and secondly:RTFuckingA. the discuss that specific topic.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
MALARIA FACTS Of the 300-500 million clinical cases of malaria that occur globally each year, 90 percent of them are in Africa. Malaria is endemic in more than 90 countries. Forty percent of the world population is at risk for malaria. Ten percent of world population gets sick each year with malaria. DEATH BY MALARIA Number of fatal cases of malaria each year: over 1 million Most common age at death: 4 years Every 30 seconds, a child dies of malaria Five percent of African children are killed by malaria, almost 3,000 each day, or the equivalent of seven jumbo jets full of children crashing every day. Up to 23 percent of African infants are born with the malaria parasite.
(http://malaria.jhsph.edu/about_malaria/)
Personally, I think killing large numbers of mosquitoes is a good thing, especially considering malaria is quickly becoming resistant to the drugs used to treat it. A reduction in mosquito numbers would greatly reduce the transmission of this disease.
The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
My theory is that nature wanted plastics, and since there was no natural way to produce plastics nature created humans to make plastics. Unfortunately for nature this plan has gone slightly had some unforeseen side effects.
Thats George Carlins hypothesis.
The immediate side effect is that there will not be any mosquitoes.
No serious negative repercussions are known to exist for such an event beyond that the diet of certain types of insect predators would be affected (fortunately for such predators, their diet is not exclusively dependent on the species of mosquito that this concept intends to render extinct). The net effect upon mankind should be positive, other than possibly causing companies that make mosquito repellent to possibly go out of business.
But seriously.... did you *NEED* somebody to have to spell that all out for you? They're mosquitoes, for crying out loud... and not some vital part of the food chain on which we ourselves are part of.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=the-wipeout-gene&page=6
"Some people wonder if it is ethical—or safe—to eliminate an organism, even in just a small geographic area. Proponents argue that A. aegypti is an invasive species that has evolved to exploit a solely human niche. “Urban A. aegypti is not part of any significant food chain,” says Phil Lounibos, a mosquito ecologist at the Florida Medical Entomology Laboratory. Yet Lounibos doubts whether eliminating A. aegypti would stop dengue transmission permanently. “A previous campaign to eradicate this species from the Americas in the 1950s and 1960s, when it was the primary vector of urban yellow fever, failed miserably,” he says. The invasive Asian tiger mosquito—another good dengue vector—readily occupies niches vacated by A. aegypti. Moreover, both the Cayman and Tapachula mosquito strains, even if successful, are not permanent. Migration of mosquitoes from neighboring regions into Tapachula could foil eradication attempts and mandate frequent releases of the modified males to keep the population in check."
my associative arrays can kick your hash - TCL