October 31, 2011
| 
2
In 2009, researchers from the biotechnology company Oxitec released over 18,000 genetically modified mosquitoes in a bid to reduce the wild mosquito population. The mosquitoes were designed so that in theory, when these modified male mosquitoes mate with wild females, the offspring would be infertile. Release enough mosquitoes and you could crash the native population.
On Sunday, the researchers released the first results from the experiment. They estimate that the 18,000 released males made up about 16 percent of the total male population. When they examined mosquito larvae a few weeks later, they found that 9.6 percent of the mosquito larvae in the area carried the new genes. The takeaway: the modified males did in fact mate with wild females. The researchers estimate that a real reduction in the wild population would require a much bigger release, though: up to 12 times the release rate of the experiment.
The research was notable for another reason: despite the fact that researchers were releasing genetically modified organisms into the wild, the research was done largely in secret. The company first announced that the tests had been conducted nearly a year after the fact. Other researchers worry that this casual approach to disclosure could create a backlash against the technology.
For more on the controversy, see our November feature story, “The Wipeout Gene,” as well as exclusive essays praising the technology and criticizing the release.
2 CommentsAdd a Comment
You must log in or register as a ScientificAmerican.com member to submit a comment.
Faster-than-light neutrinos explained? 
My genetic profile says I’d be a heroin addict
Antarctica's Erratic Climate Shaped Icefish Evolution
The bacteria in your belly Pt. 2 - Adults
Ashes, Yarmulkes and the Hijab: Communitas and Religious Symbols
Tomorrow in Charlotte: 'How the Web is Changing the Way Science Is Communicated, Taught and Done.'
YES! Send me a free issue of Scientific American with no obligation to continue the subscription. If I like it, I will be billed for the one-year subscription.
Share
Email
Print
I for one would sure like to know that someone is closely monitoring this experiment. There are drastic consequences that could result from things like this. We have no way of knowing what effect reducing the mosquito population will have in other areas. What if it suddenly results in the rodent population increasing for instance? Or what about the mutated gene itself? Has it been tested on other species to ensure it won’t mix. You did happen to put this mutated gene in a creature that feeds on blood after all. So now you have 18000 creatures that are potentially infecting other species with a mutated gene that could have catastrophic consequences. Possibly the next west Nile virus for all you know. And who’s to say that this mutated gene won’t cause even the west Nile virus itself to break into a new, deadlier strain. Don’t get me wrong. I love science and I’m all for building a better tomorrow, but I feel sometimes we hold back too much in some areas we need to step forward, and yet step forward in some areas we need to hold back. I fear this was one that should’ve held back.
Link to thisThe second sentence in the first paragraph says it all:
“The mosquitos were designed so that in theory …”
Definition – “Theory”:
1. A speculative or conjectural view or idea. 2. A system of rules, procedures, and assumptions used to produce a result. 3. An ideal or hypothetical situation (esp in the phrase “in theory”). 4. A nontechnical name for hypothesis. 5. Abstract knowledge or reasoning.
(Source: World English Dictionary)
I don’t know about the rest of you folks, but I find it extraordinarily unsettling that 18,000 genetically altered mosquitos are flying around out there; on the loose; comprised of geoengineering that was based upon speculation, assumptions, conjecture, and abstract knowledge & reasoning. There’s a reason why they call it an “experiment”: that word, defined, is: “a test, trial, or tentative procedure; an act or operation for the purpose of discovering something unknown.”
As well, there is also a reason why the “experiment” was done covertly …. I hardly need to fill that blank in, but I will for those of us that can’t/don’t/won’t do the equation: they kept it a secret in case the “experiment” went awry. For; oh – what have we here? Definition: “Secret”: a method, formula, plan, etc., known only to the initiated, the privileged, or the few.
You know, I feel compelled to arrange a Q&A session with the Shot-Callers of this little deal – but it’s a given that the identity of those individuals will most definitely be kept a “secret”, since the article states that concealing things is their natural propensity. What kind of a show are they running here?
Ask yourself this: What kind of a world has this become when it is publicly stated that secrecy was an integral constituent of an “experiment”; wherein airborne insects that can infect humans with who-knows-what, are released into the environment to travel who-knows-where ….. and the outrageous action that is laced with deception seems to be so acceptable, that it can be widely publicized, and “fly” without any ramifications for the “privileged few”?
Is anyone familiar with the movie called “The Fly”?
Link to this