The FDA has completed the environmental review for a proposed field trial to determine whether the release of Oxitec Ltd.'s genetically engineered (GE) mosquitoes (OX513A) will suppress the local Aedes aegypti mosquito population in the release area at Key Haven, Florida. After considering thousands of public comments, the FDA has published a final environmental assessment (EA) and finding of no significant impact (FONSI) that agrees with the EA's conclusion that the proposed field trial will not have significant impacts on the environment.
[The genetically engineered mosquitoes possess a] self-limiting gene that prevents the offspring from surviving. Male modified mosquitoes, which do not bite or spread disease, are released to mate with the pest females. Their offspring inherit the self-limiting gene and die before reaching adulthood—before they can reproduce or spread disease.
[Release of the OX513A mosquitoes in both Brazil and the Cayman Islands] strongly suppressed the target wild population—by 80–95%
http://www.fda.gov/AnimalVeterinary/NewsEvents/CVMUpdates/ucm490246.htm
http://journals.plos.org/plosntds/article?id=10.1371/journal.pntd.0003864
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aedes_aegypti#Genetic_modification
Previously: Genetically-Modified Mosquito Company Expands Operations
Related Stories
A company that creates genetically-modified mosquitoes will open a new factory in Brazil as it expands operations:
Small-scale studies in parts of Brazil, Panama and the Cayman Islands suggest engineered sterile mosquitoes can reduce wild insect populations by more than 90% when released into the wild. Intrexon said the facility in Piraciciba, São Paulo, will be able to protect 300,000 people.
Aedes aegypti mosquitoes carry three viruses - Dengue, Zika and Chikungunya.
The studies were carried out by the only company currently trialling GM insects, Oxitec, based in Abingdon, Oxfordshire. Oxitec, which was spun out from the University of Oxford, was bought by US company Intrexon for $160m (£106m) in August last year. Oxitec CEO Hadyn Parry said: "As the principal source for the fastest growing vector-borne infection in the world in Dengue fever, as well as the increasingly challenging Zika virus, controlling the Aedes aegypti population provides the best defence against these serious diseases for which there are no cures."
Also at The Guardian.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 19 2016, @03:40AM
They'll monitor the population of the pest mosquitoes for a couple years, then declare victory.
It's more complicated than that though. They're messing with the whole ecosystem, so the influx of these crippled mosquitoes might depress the population of birds, fish, and other predators. That's not so easy to explain in a 20 second sound bite.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 19 2016, @03:58AM
Similar sterile mosquito releases have been done many times in the past (with irradiated mosquitoes) so any large problems probably would've been noticed.
(Score: 2) by art guerrilla on Friday August 19 2016, @11:01AM
um, there WERE/are problems, only they were dismissed or rejected as meaningful by, um, well by the people who produce the tests ! ! !
(Score: 2) by Immerman on Friday August 19 2016, @04:03AM
Will it? Or will other tiny nectar-eaters fill the abandoned niche? Possibly other species of mosquitoes that carry fewer dangerous pathogens, or that don't suck blood.
(Score: 2) by PinkyGigglebrain on Friday August 19 2016, @04:12AM
Most mosquitoes species bite. The females need the protein for their eggs, though not all bite humans. The rest of the time the females feed on nectar just like the males.
"Beware those who would deny you Knowledge, For in their hearts they dream themselves your Master."
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 19 2016, @07:53AM
They can't reproduce viable offspring and they live less than 60 days. None of these mutant ninja mosquitos will be around for long. Other species of mosquitos - preferably ones that carry acceptable diseases - will take their place. BTW, this species of mosquito is not native to FL, has only been around for a few decades and will not be missed.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 19 2016, @12:02PM
> Other species of mosquitos - preferably ones that carry acceptable diseases - will take their place.
That's the best case scenario. As you said, these mosquitoes are an invasive species. They may have altered the food chain enough that it can never return to the previous state of balance and removing these mosquitoes will cause it to careen even further out of whack. Also there is good evidence that other species carry zika too, they just aren't quite as virulent because this species bites frequently and "sips" while the others bite less often and take deep drinks.
(Score: 2) by ese002 on Saturday August 20 2016, @01:07AM
It's more complicated than that though. They're messing with the whole ecosystem, so the influx of these crippled mosquitoes might depress the population of birds, fish, and other predators.
You might have a point if Aedes aegypt were native to region where the crippled mosquitoes are being released. However, they are not. Thus native plants and animals are not in any way dependent on Aedes aegypt. If you could somehow exterminate Aedes aegypt from Florida, the worst what would happen is the ecosystem would more closely resemble what it was before Aedes aegypt was introduced.
(Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 19 2016, @03:44AM
Why bother, if "the proposed field trial will not have significant impacts on the environment."
(Score: 3, Interesting) by PinkyGigglebrain on Friday August 19 2016, @03:46AM
80-95% reduction of mosquitoes in Brasil and the Cayman islands. That does not sound like "no significant impact".
I am all for reducing the spread of things like malaria and Zika but I also realize that while mosquitoes might be considered a pest to humans they are also an important food source for a large host of creatures such as dragonfly, fish and humming birds to name a few. Wiping out 80% of them in an area might cause issues with the other species that prey on them directly and those further up the food chain.
Does anyone know off hand if there was any kind of follow up study in Brasil and Cayman to see how the rest of the ecosystem did the following years?
"Beware those who would deny you Knowledge, For in their hearts they dream themselves your Master."
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 19 2016, @03:53AM
80-90% of the disease-carrying mosquitoes. There are other mosquitoes and plenty of other insects. The studies were recent, so there probably wouldn't be a detailed follow-up on anything besides the mosquito population.
(Score: 2) by PinkyGigglebrain on Friday August 19 2016, @04:07AM
Not all mosquitoes are dangerous, even within a single species only a small number are carriers. If it was otherwise there would be a much higher infection rate because of them.
And not all mosquito predators are generalists, some are more dependent on specific species than others. The follow on impact might be minimal but then again it might not be. I worry that nobody looked beyond the direct impact of their plan and not on how it will effect the rest of the ecosystem in the longer term.
"Beware those who would deny you Knowledge, For in their hearts they dream themselves your Master."
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 19 2016, @07:58AM
Not all mosquitoes are dangerous, even within a single species only a small number are carriers.
Any female mosquito of a species that can carry a particular disease can become a carrier. They become a carrier by biting an animal (including humans) that have the disease in question.
(Score: 3, Funny) by sjames on Friday August 19 2016, @07:25AM
Let's just hope it doesn't jump a shark...
(Score: 2) by sjames on Friday August 19 2016, @07:29AM
Gotta wonder, why is the FDA involved? What the hell would they know about environmental impacts?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 19 2016, @09:23AM
Whenever we introduce another way for targeted annihilation of a specie with humongous number of members which has a quick life cycle and produces generations fast, whatever the method we use, there will always be a small number of "wacky" survivors which will avoid the fate we prepared for them and then next generation will consist only of their offspring, immune to our clever trick.
So the best we can do is to keep their numbers under control by introducing another specie which co-evolves with them by preying upon them, or somehow steer their evolution differently, e.g. to change their behavior to loath biting humans, or to gain ability to lay eggs without needing blood for that - such an amendment would benefit those mosquitoes which avoid humans, because aiming on humans is a death risk for little buggers.
(Score: 2) by maxwell demon on Friday August 19 2016, @02:08PM
Given that the actual goal is to get the deceases under control, a temporary reduction might be all that's needed: Fewer mosquitoes infect fewer humans and animals, who then in turn give the infection on to fewer mosquitoes even when the number of mosquitoes grows again. And before the virus spread grows again, there's time to develop better cures targeting the decease itself, to prevent it from getting such a problem again.
The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 19 2016, @02:15PM
The "clever trick" in this case is sex.
If the females develop resistance to sex, then they'll only be better adapted to be married to a human.