Submitted by BeefTeaser t3_z2ymie in askscience

I have recently seen a spate of articles about genetically engineered mosquitos introduced to reduce the population (for disease control), such as this one.

If we know that many small reptiles, amphibians, and birds eat mosquitos for food, how do we know reducing populations won't hamper food availability?

6

Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

Orgot t1_ixmbq5j wrote

We can infer that it will do less damage than broadly spraying chemicals or draining wetlands. A quick Google search found lots of animals that eat them, but none that rely on them exclusively. A few boreal orchids seem to depend on them as pollinators more than any other insect. Given that they kill more humans than any other non-human animal, adding a few more bog orchids to the list of species we're driving to extinction probably won't derail these mitigation efforts.

9

d0uble_h3lix t1_ixmmk22 wrote

I’ll add that the goal is not to reduce or eradicate these mosquito populations forever. The pathogens they carry have been transmitting through them so consistently for so long that they’ve evolved to require existing in the mosquitos at least temporarily as part of their life cycle. That requirement is a point of weakness. If transmission can be greatly reduced, or even completely broken, even for just 1 or 2 generations of mosquitos without completely eradicating the mosquitos, then they can be allowed to recover but the pathogen may be greatly reduced for much longer or even eliminated from the chain entirely.

7

Deinocerites t1_ixmy0v3 wrote

Also, gm mosquitoes, or other forms of sterile insect technique only targets a single species of mosquito. In this case it’s Aedes aegypti, which can vector numerous human pathogens. Many mosquito species aren’t a risk for human diseases and won’t be targeted. They will persist and continue to be a food source in the ecosystem.

3