
Engineering the Extinction of 40 Species of Mosquitoes - olalonde
http://rockstarresearch.com/engineering-the-extinction-of-40-species-of-mosquitoes/
======
zachrose
This links to Janet Fang's article in Nature:
[http://www.nature.com/news/2010/100721/full/466432a.html](http://www.nature.com/news/2010/100721/full/466432a.html)

The thesis of that article is that nothing of ecological significance would
happen without mosquitos, but the examples given don't seem even close to
conclusive.

We know many species of fish and birds that eat mosquitos and mosquito larvae.
From a few minutes of internet surfing, it doesn't seem like anyone knows
whether other insects would take their place or and how quickly that would
happen.

IANA biologist, but maybe fish and birds can survive a couple months while
something takes the place of the comparatively short-lived mosquito? In any
case this whole idea seems totally under-researched.

~~~
esturk
From the first article, it mentioned that we have eradicated similar disease
vectors like screwworm and melon fly before, so what have been the
environmental impact of that so far?

~~~
jacquesm
What percentage of the next level up on the food chain lives off mosquitoes?
What percentage lives of screwworms and Melon flies?

I have no idea about the answers, but if there is a significant difference
there then that might be where trouble could come from.

The problems really start at the reservoir hosts, the mosquitoes are just the
transmitters. Controlling the reservoir hosts might be more feasible than
eradicating 40 species of mosquito, it sounds like a very ambitious plan to
me.

Panama had only 2 problematic species around the (prospective) canal zone.

Eradicating those mosquitoes to allow construction of the canal to proceed
without the crews succumbing to Malaria or Yellow Fever was a huge success:

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_measures_during_the_cons...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_measures_during_the_construction_of_the_Panama_Canal)

~~~
mapt
Does the fact that we have done this thousands of times now, accidentally,
without any knowledge of the species being affected, make it any better?

Does the fact that essentially all of the interspecific dependencies in the
temperate and Arctic zones have shifted completely in response to simple
climate change since the last glaciation, make it any better?

~~~
coldtea
> _Does the fact that we have done this thousands of times now, accidentally,
> without any knowledge of the species being affected, make it any better?_

It sure does not. After all, tens of thousands of species have gone extinct in
our watch. Who knows how many of those were due to having done "this".

> _Does the fact that essentially all of the interspecific dependencies in the
> temperate and Arctic zones have shifted completely in response to simple
> climate change since the last glaciation, make it any better?_

Nope. And I seriously doubt they have shifted "completely".

------
NIL8
I live in a mosquito infested area and I have had malaria. Personally, I would
love to see the end of all mosquitoes, even if it meant losing a few fish
species.

However, even with an incredible amount of research and preparation,
eliminating mosquitoes would have an untold number of effects. One effect
would most certainly be the exponential growth of the human population. This
could be a more difficult pest than mosquitoes.

~~~
derekp7
This is actually addressed in the article. If people are reasonably certain
that all their children will survive to adulthood, they tend to have fewer
children.

~~~
MisterBastahrd
Supply and demand, I guess. A higher survival rate is going to mean more
competition for resources. Increased competition yields higher prices. Higher
prices usually mean parents decide to have less kids. Of course, I think
industrialization plays a huge role too. If you have a family in an agrarian
third world country, then more kids equal more labor, and as long as that kid
is healthy and productive, having him is a net positive for income.

~~~
im3w1l
But there are less children, less teenagers, less everything, so your
hypothesis doesn't hold water.

Let me put forth another hypothesis. Lower mortality means investing in your
children has a lower risk. This means you can invest more in your children.
Further, lower mortality means lower risk that all your children die, so you
don't need to get lots of children for "diversification".

~~~
MisterBastahrd
I don't think you understand how population growth works.

------
hansjorg
Radiolab recently did a bit on this (Kill 'em all):

[http://www.radiolab.org/story/kill-em-
all/](http://www.radiolab.org/story/kill-em-all/)

------
king_jester
Every time I read an article about this kind of thing, the big selling point
usually refers to political and economic ease of eliminating a species of
mosquito compared to other trying to fix distribution of medicine and
improving infrastructure and health care access.

This seems kind of backwards to me. Wouldn't working on the distribution
problem be more effective than eliminating mosquito species? Obviously this is
a much more difficult problem, but improvements in this area have benefits
beyond disease elimination and treatment. That such things are difficult to
achieve via current philanthropy efforts seems to highlight such philanthropy
as flawed and in need of adjustment.

------
qwerta
Article quotes 6 digits numbers to exterminate mosquitoes over large areas. I
believe that is within reach of local governments. Even Kickstarter campaign
could fund it. So the question is more when, rather then if.

------
Camillo
According to the article, only a small fraction of mosquito species carry
diseases harmful to humans. Are there predators that depend solely or mainly
on those specific species for food? Could other species take up the disease
vector role if the currently harmful species were eliminated?

------
DustinCalim
I don't think it's possible right now for us to predict how the world would
change if there were no mosquitos. I expect they play some important role that
we don't yet understand. Bees come to mind

~~~
andrewchoi
One of the takeaways of the article for me was that it's a small subset of all
mosquito species that are conveying this disease. I'm not an ecologist, but
wouldn't the elimination of one sort of (disease vector) mosquito lead to a
different (non-disease vector) species taking over the niche in the ecosystem?

~~~
nn3
Some other mosquitos would likely take over the "human" niche yes

But if the Malaria parasite is gone they may not be infected. If it's not gone
the parasite would eventually adapt to the new mosquitos.

------
jrkelly
Oxitec are the ones to follow in this space. Really awesome work:
[http://www.oxitec.com](http://www.oxitec.com)

------
coldtea
> _Engineering the Extinction of 40 Species of Mosquitoes_

Hmm, to me it sounds like:

Screw science (which takes time), let's apply half-learned stuff in real life
instead and see what sticks.

E.g let's apply what little we know to extinguish mosquitoes we don't like,
despite not fully knowning the ecological consequences of our actions.
Hopefully we won't have to deal with the mess (or there won't be a mess).

After all we did something similar before. If you do something once and it
turned out OK, then even if you don't understand it, it will always come out
OK in any other context, right?

------
ISL
“What a pity that Bilbo did not stab that vile creature, when he had a
chance!'

Pity? It was Pity that stayed his hand. Pity, and Mercy: not to strike without
need. And he has been well rewarded, Frodo. Be sure that he took so little
hurt from the evil, and escaped in the end, because he began his ownership of
the Ring so. With Pity.”

~~~
afarrell
A warm sentiment to be sure, but wonder if it also applies to the orcs
marching across the Pelennor, whom you know are intending or enslaved to deal
death. Do they also deserve pity and mercy? If not, then why do mosquitos?

~~~
ISL
In the quote above, Gandalf only advises that one should not strike without
need. In the cases of both mosquitoes and orcs, it's not at all clear that
xenocide is requisite to ensure the safety of humans or the many dwellers of
Middle Earth.

------
ricardobeat
"Engineering a major environmental fuck-up"

