3 ms·

> But at the 18-month mark, the population began to recover, returning to nearly pre-release levels. That's the whole point. Scientists have to build in "rent-

> But at the 18-month mark, the population began to recover, returning to nearly pre-release levels. That's the whole point. Scientists have to build in "rent-seeking" properties into the "solution" so that the company can make money in perpetuity. Nobody is interested in solving mosquito problem once and for all.

chmod775 6y ago
No. That's just how this works. Because modified males can't have offspring down the line, only females who mate unmodified males produce offspring, selecting for females who would mate with such. This might even hurt a company selling such a solution, because if they released a second batch, nobody would mate with them. Obviously this only works if modified males show any external characteristics. But even without all that, at some point the modified populace is going to die off, since that was the point, leaving only unmodified ones, before finally recovering.
- mrep 6y ago
  From the article: "The genetically engineered males carry a gene that passes to their offspring and kills female progeny in early larval stages. Male offspring won’t die but instead will become carriers of the gene and pass it to future generations. As more females die, the Aedes aegypti population should dwindle."
  - irae 6y ago
    Exactly. Your quote does not invalidate the previous statement at all. Per evolution basic theory, the gene most adapted to the environment and which produces more offsprings, survives. Therefore, offsprings of unmodified mosquitos have twice the chance to reproduce, as both males and females can reproduce and both will yield unmodified males and females. I wouldn't know the rate, but even if slowly, unmodified strain will come back, unless extinct. There need be no female preference for this to happen, but of course if they evolve to detect modified males it would accelerate the rate which modified mosquitos get extinct.
wildmanx 6y ago
> Scientists have to build in "rent-seeking" properties Nitpick: That's not what science is about. You are talking about engineering. Science is a knowledge-seeking endeavor. Observe, build a theory, run experiments to refute or refine your theory. Engineering is a constructive endeavor. Using knowledge acquired from science (see above), build something that solves a practical problem.

chmod775 6y ago

No. That's just how this works. Because modified males can't have offspring down the line, only females who mate unmodified males produce offspring, selecting for females who would mate with such. This might even hurt a company selling such a solution, because if they released a second batch, nobody would mate with them. Obviously this only works if modified males show any external characteristics. But even without all that, at some point the modified populace is going to die off, since that was the point, leaving only unmodified ones, before finally recovering.

mrep 6y ago
From the article: "The genetically engineered males carry a gene that passes to their offspring and kills female progeny in early larval stages. Male offspring won’t die but instead will become carriers of the gene and pass it to future generations. As more females die, the Aedes aegypti population should dwindle."
- irae 6y ago
  Exactly. Your quote does not invalidate the previous statement at all. Per evolution basic theory, the gene most adapted to the environment and which produces more offsprings, survives. Therefore, offsprings of unmodified mosquitos have twice the chance to reproduce, as both males and females can reproduce and both will yield unmodified males and females. I wouldn't know the rate, but even if slowly, unmodified strain will come back, unless extinct. There need be no female preference for this to happen, but of course if they evolve to detect modified males it would accelerate the rate which modified mosquitos get extinct.

wildmanx 6y ago

> Scientists have to build in "rent-seeking" properties Nitpick: That's not what science is about. You are talking about engineering. Science is a knowledge-seeking endeavor. Observe, build a theory, run experiments to refute or refine your theory. Engineering is a constructive endeavor. Using knowledge acquired from science (see above), build something that solves a practical problem.