RA&RM of Living Modified Mosquitoes

No GM population replacement strategy exists if by that one means an attempt to replace mosquitoes and their descendents with a completely novel mosquito that has been produced in the laboratory.

All proposed strategies would introduce and spread a novel gene into the progeny of existing populations by inoculation. This strategy would introduce some effector gene into a population via the release of GM mosquitoes which would spread with no a priori expectation that it would affect the allele composition or frequencies of the wild type genome otherwise.

Ideally, the result would be mosquitoes that – with the exception of the novel gene – are identical to their ancestors before the introduction of the gene. The laboratory genotype would be under selection and undergo recombination so that the genetic background of the individuals who receive the transgene would eventually become otherwise indistinguishable. The laboratory contribution would eventually be diluted out.

The effector is generally expected to interfere with a disease agent directly. Ideally, the gene would spread to all individuals in the population but this of course is untested.

The term “population replacement” suggests that the wild type populations have been supplanted or displaced by a novel mosquito population. In simple terms, mosquitoes (probably males) would be released who would mate with wild mosquitoes. A transgene would then be introduced into the descendents. The “drive” component that is often referred to is some means to increase the frequency of the transgene among the descendents to levels greater than those predicted by drift or changed fitness due to the transgene.

Because the term “population replacement” used in this discussion can and will be misunderstood, I will offer one, but I would appreciate your suggestions. I recommend avoiding “population” as the most common sense of this is of humans. Hopefully the term will convey the effect accurately but communicate to a lay audience.

Old: Population Replacement

New: Vector Neutralization

I agree with Dr. Mark. “Population replacement” is susceptible to misinterpretation. His proposal “Vector neutralization” is really coherent. However, at least in Spanish, the term vector is often used in place of “organism that transmits diseases”. Literally, these technologies are not aimed to neutralize the organisms, but their capability to transmit diseases. Then I better would use the neutralization of vectorial capability.

I agree that "Population Replacement" is misleading, and I can understand the potential confusion of just "Vector Neutralization" so a variation over Dr. Gato's proposal would be "Vector Effectiveness Neutralization"

Esmeralda Prat