= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Douglas_Knight comments on How to win the World Food Prize - Less Wrong Discussion
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (30)
I don't think the core issue is difficulty in creating a gene that can survive in the wild. The core issue would be that such a intervention can wreck ecosystems in very unpredictable ways while the RIDL Oxitec approach produces a very controlled effect.
Given public fears about wrecking ecosystems with GMO's Oxitecs approach seems much more politically viable and it's not that expensive anyway.
If you think it's so easy, what gene do you propose?
One proposal is a gene for the mosquito to resist malaria. This has no ecological consequences, but it probably wouldn't wipe out malaria. This could be driven with CRISPR techniques, but I don't know if there are any such candidates.
Another proposal I have heard is sexual drive. In species with XY sex determination (some, but not all malarial mosquitoes), a male that produces only Y sperm and breeds true could wipe out the species. But this is a more complicated drive than CRISPR. RIDL+CRISPR techniques might yield a male whose daughters die young, but that might not be enough drive.
The great thing about genetic drive is that it requires the release of very few mosquitoes, so it can be done surreptitiously.
I was thinking of a virus gene that self replicates and doesn't produce issues if there one copy of the gene but produces issues if there are 1000 copies.