黄色直播 the authors:听 is the founder of Editing Nature, Yale University. is a University Research Professor at 黄色直播. is Director of Research and Professor of Pathology at 黄色直播. is a PhD candidate in Microbiology and Immunology at 黄色直播.
Every year, according to the World Health Organization (WHO). This is why mosquitoes are considered one of the deadliest living creatures on the planet 鈥� not because they are lethal themselves, but because many of the viruses and parasites they transmit are.
Consider, for example, dengue fever. This mosquito-borne virus is a leading cause of hospitalization and death among children and adults in several countries in Asia and Latin America. In 2016, member states in three of the six WHO regions .
In the absence of an effective vaccine for dengue fever, Zika fever, chikungunya and other mosquito-borne diseases, researchers have developed genetic strategies to reduce mosquito populations. One such strategy involves the release into the wild of genetically modified (GM) mosquitoes that express a lethal gene 鈥� a strategy believed to have little impact on the overall DNA of wild populations of mosquitoes.
As an interdisciplinary group of authors, we generally support technologies that can reduce human disease and suffering. However, given our combined expertise in science, governance and ethics we have concerns that recent decisions to deploy GM mosquitoes have not been made responsibly.
Genetically modified mosquitoes
The transfer of new genes from GM organisms to wild or domesticated non-GM populations is a key criticism of GM crops like soybean and corn. There are concerns that the introduction of GM genes into non-target species could have .
Oxitec, a company that spun out of research at Oxford University in the early 2000s, developed and trademarked GM (also known as strain OX513A of Aedes aegypti). These male GM mosquitoes have what the company describes as a 鈥渟elf-limiting鈥� gene, which means that when these so-called friendly mosquitoes mate, their offspring inherit the self-limiting gene which is supposed to prevent them surviving into adulthood.
In theory, when these mosquitoes are released in high numbers, a dramatic reduction in the mosquito population should follow.
Changes to the gene pool
According to research published by Oxitec researchers in 2015, field trials involving recurring releases of Friendly鈩� mosquitoes demonstrated . In these field trials, experiments were not performed to assess whether GM mosquitoes might persist in the wild.
A recent study from the Powell lab at Yale University has since confirmed that . They were able to breed with native mosquitoes and thereby introduce some of their genes into the wild population.
The Yale researchers found that mosquitoes captured at six, 12 and up to 30 months post-release carried DNA from the GM mosquito population, thereby disproving 鈥�.鈥�
It appears that between five and 60 per cent of the captured mosquitoes post-release contained genetic sequences inherited from the Friendly鈩� mosquitoes. Importantly, the number of mosquitoes identified as still containing DNA derived from GM mosquitoes declined between the 12-month and 27-month capture periods specifically, perhaps indicating that the offspring of GM mosquitoes might be less fit in nature after all. This remains to be shown conclusively.
Unknown potential impacts
Meanwhile, the impact of mosquitoes carrying these new genes remains largely unknown. One significant worry is that a new breed of mosquito might emerge that is more difficult to control. These new genes could also potentially alter evolutionary pressures on viruses carried by mosquitoes, like dengue fever, in unpredictable ways. This includes potentially increasing their virulence or changing their host-insect interactions. These are hypothetical risks that have been raised by scientists, and reflect the need for further study.
Thus, like GM soybean or corn, there is with as yet unknown consequences.
Field trials involving the release of GM organisms are typically designed to evaluate safety and efficacy, to assess possible impact on food networks, and to ensure that there is no (or minimal) undue harm to the environment or human health. Put simply, field trials are meant to assess potential harms associated with genetic technologies and to provide opportunities to minimize these harms before moving forward with more large-scale releases.
This raises two important questions: Given that of the GM mosquito population was expected to survive, shouldn鈥檛 Oxitec have made plans to assess the risk of gene transfer to wild populations during their initial trials? And shouldn鈥檛 the Brazilian government have required such an assessment as part of the regulatory approval process, ?
Instead, with approval from Brazilian authorities, . This was done without the benefit of planned risk assessment and without proper public consultation.
Oxitec reports having used leaflets, social media, carnival parades and community meetings to inform the public of their research. and, in our view, the people living in the vicinity of this release had more than a right to be informed of the plans. They also had a in relevant decision-making.
On the basis of presumed success in Brazil where mosquito populations were reduced 鈥� a consequential has yet to be demonstrated 鈥� plans have been made to extend field trials to other jurisdictions, including .
To date, regulatory and public pushback the release of GM mosquitoes in the Florida Keys. But Oxitec hopes to eventually secure approval from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to perform field trials and assess release of a that causes lethality only in female mosquitoes, as another means to collapse wild populations.
Regulating genetic modification
In the end, minus the (the journal is looking into ), the finding that offspring of GM mosquitoes could survive in the wild remains undisputed. This illustrates the importance of careful decision-making and adequate oversight of field trials involving the release of GM organisms. Careful decision-making requires open venues for informed and deliberative public dialogue, engagement and empowerment.
Genetic modification technologies need to be more transparent, as do the scientific processes for evaluating their risks, especially where the rights and needs of affected communities can inform technology development. With more robust and nuanced regulatory processes governing the development and release of GM organisms, it should be possible to benefit from these technologies without harming or disenfranchising the communities that are the intended beneficiaries.
Mosquito-borne illnesses cause immense human suffering, and we should continue to develop technologies to reduce that suffering. At the same time, we must be equally dedicated to designing scientific processes that are safe, ethical and just.
which features includes relevant and informed articles written by researchers and academics in their areas of expertise and edited by experienced journalists.
黄色直播 is a founding partner of The Conversation Canada, an online media outlet providing independent, high-quality explanatory journalism. Originally established in Australia in 2011, it has had more than 85 commissioning editors and 30,000-plus academics register as contributors. A full list of articles written by 黄色直播 academics can be found on听