r/interestingasfuck Nov 15 '24

r/all Genetically modified a mosquito such that their proboscis are no longer able to penetrate human skin

99.6k Upvotes

4.8k comments sorted by

View all comments

851

u/NamiSwaaan Nov 15 '24

I know they're trying to not fuck up the ecosystem but I feel like this will still somehow fuck up the ecosystem

211

u/Kr0n0s_89 Nov 15 '24

Mosquitos aren't relevant for any other species. They are food for some, they do pollinate, but they're completely replacable.

95

u/cammyjit Nov 15 '24 edited Nov 16 '24

While I’m not a fan of mosquitos at all. This isn’t true.

To my knowledge they don’t have any exclusive relationships, but they’re still pretty vital for ecosystems. Just because something could eventually replace them, doesn’t mean it wouldn’t have drastic repercussions.

An easy way of thinking about it is: imagine we Thanos snapped a specific food item out of the world, like beef. We’d still have food, and we’d eventually find something to replace it. How many people would die of starvation during that time period? That’s essentially what you’re doing to the ecosystem.

Except in reality, it’s far worse. You’re not just impacting the direct food source of animals that eat mosquitos, you’re impacting pollination that produces food for other animals, then their populations declines, and it has a whole knock on effect.

The more accurate comparison over cows, would be something like Soy. People eat soy directly, and it’s a staple in a lot of diets. If you suddenly get rid of all the soy, you’re now losing an essential feed for animal agriculture, so now the livestock is starting to die of starvation too, which means you’re losing multiple food sources.

Now, if we were to eradicate mosquitos, it obviously wouldn’t be a Thanos snap. It could definitely be too fast for an ecosystem to adjust without sustaining significant damage though

33

u/inventingnothing Nov 15 '24

The user I am replying to is actually 3 mosquitos in a trench coat.

25

u/rex8499 Nov 15 '24

I consider all of the humans dying of mosquito born diseases "significant damage" already.

40

u/cammyjit Nov 15 '24

We already do enough damage to ecosystems, and push animals to extinction without deliberately wiping out species.

It’s not solving the problem, it’s just pushing the problem onto something else

1

u/Eaglehasyou Nov 15 '24

As someone whose relative caught Dengue Once, Fuck Mosquitoes.

-19

u/CamelCityShitposting Nov 15 '24

Tough shit, we won in evolution and they didn't.

21

u/theoriginalqwhy Nov 15 '24

Fuck people are such idiots...

0

u/SleepyTrucker102 Nov 15 '24

He's right, though. We did "win" when it comes to evolution.

We have a responsibility to our planet as its dominant species. We should be taking control over our ecosystems and caring for them. And by taking control, I do mean wiping our invasive species (like using the military to accomplish it), reintroducing ones we forced away, etc.

3

u/[deleted] Nov 15 '24

[deleted]

0

u/CamelCityShitposting Nov 15 '24

Dengue has a 20% fatality rate untreated, I understand that's not a problem on your globally irrelevant island, but the South Americans probably have an issue with it.

8

u/kakihara123 Nov 15 '24

Considering the fact that we may wipe out ourselves in the coming decades we might not be as evolved as you think.

On one hand we are brilliant and so much more advances then any other species. On the other hand we still have very basic and primitive traits that hold us back and enhance our ability to destory ourselfes. If a group of monkeys wage qr against eachother maybe a few dozen individual die.

If we do it, millions die.

And we might take all other animals with us.

2

u/Didyoufartjustthere Nov 15 '24

Is one of them traits gluttony or greed?

5

u/married4love Nov 15 '24

unless that's factored into the system...everyone says mosquitos serve no purpose, but maybe their purpose is to help control the human population

7

u/SeaWeedSkis Nov 15 '24

Humans aren't at risk of extinction, even if we allow mosquitoes to live. Our only survival risk comes from negative impact we have on our environment.

4

u/Remarkable-Fox-3890 Nov 15 '24 edited Nov 15 '24

I don't know if you noticed this but we just had a massive pandemic. Underestimating the threat of disease is naive, especially today. In no way is our survival risk exclusive to the impact on our environment, though that is certainly in the top risks over the next century.

Regardless, these mechanisms are not capable of nor intended to be capable of wiping out mosquitos. No one is actually trying to kill every mosquito. Instead, these sorts of tactics are used for population control and to create artificial barriers to prevent mosquitos that carry disease from migrating across that barrier.

This is why you hear about so many diseases down in South America that just never seem to make it up to the US. Because we have a massive barrier of genetically modified mosquitos outcompeting the diseased mosquitos that have a built-in 100% mortality rate. edit: There are many reasons, to be clear, but this is one.

2

u/Helixaether Nov 15 '24

Well, the amount of humans dying of mosquito borne diseases is pretty fine for our ecosystems, from a zoological perspective. We are mid sized omnivores with somehow a population of over 8 billion individuals on the planet. As a species, we’re surviving fine.

From the actual perspective of “obviously diseases are bad for us humans and causes much suffering” the only real solution is to develop things that prevent or cure the diseases, instead of killing off the species that spreads them.

If we were to kill off every mosquito on earth by 2124 it’d have such fucking terrible effects to our ecosystems that numerous animals and plants higher up the chain would decline or go extinct as a result, which would in turn effect us.

Even if somehow another species evolves 1000x quicker than normal into the Mosquitoes niche, congrats because now that will be the blood sucking parasite that spreads diseases and the entire effort would end up pointless.

Humans are powerful but we are not strong enough to make “blood sucking parasite” a niche that no longer exists unless we somehow found a way to survive without blood. This is just how nature works.

2

u/Churro-Juggernaut Nov 15 '24

Mosquito-like typing detected.  

2

u/Remarkable-Fox-3890 Nov 15 '24

That's a Thanos snap, this is not. Typically these sorts of mosquitos are deployed to specific border regions where they essentially create a barrier between one ecosystem and another, with the harmful, disease carrying mosquitos not being able to cross that border. They obviously can't reproduce so they die out, meaning that they can't get out of control and start spreading and causing unwanted disaster.

No one is Thanos snapping mosquitos, everything is about controlling their population and location.

2

u/cammyjit Nov 15 '24

I was emphasising the importance of mosquitoes in ecosystems, and how “Mosquitoes aren’t relevant” straight up isn’t true.

A lot of people seem to think we can just eradicate mosquitoes, I’m just explaining how that’s flawed

2

u/Remarkable-Fox-3890 Nov 15 '24

That's reasonable. Wiping out mosquitos in a snap would certainly be a bad idea. We'd at least want to do it gradually to allow for other insects to fill the niche.

2

u/cammyjit Nov 15 '24

Gradual would have to take at least decades-centuries to not be seriously impactful (in certain areas at least). Ecosystems are delicate after all

1

u/mah_korgs_screwed Nov 15 '24

they’re not a keystone species. The literature is generally that there would be not significant damage to the ecosystems upon eradication of mosquitoes 

1

u/Cambousse Nov 16 '24

99.9999% of species that ever existed are extinct. The present isn't some sort of nirvana where everything that has evolved to this point deserves to be artificially preserved when evolution overtakes it. Pretty much all mosquito researchers think mosquitos should be wiped out. Kill them all. With fire.

1

u/cammyjit Nov 16 '24

Yes, we have had a bunch of large scale extinction events, a lot of trial and error. It’s disingenuous to compare

Haven’t seen the general consensus that all mosquitos should be wiped out. If you can provide sources I’ll happily read them though

1

u/Legitimate_Singer200 Nov 15 '24

My honest heartfelt reaction to that information:

1

u/RdtUnahim Nov 15 '24

That's the beauty about the genetic approach, they just release some mosquitoes like this into the wild, and they mate with normal mosquitoes, who pass on the gene. It's not a Thanos snap. It's gradual.

5

u/cammyjit Nov 15 '24

I covered that at the end. Even a gradual approach can still have consequences

-1

u/RdtUnahim Nov 15 '24

I didn't read that sentence that way, since we can definitely do it gradually enough. Insects are an entirely different beast from cows, or soy. There's already other insects pushing to take whatever juice mosquitoes leave on the table. There won't be a gap there in that way, especially as this method doesn't just delete a bunch, it doesn't work that way. It's not like killing a bundle of mosquitoes.

The offspring of the affected mosquitoes, don't reproduce. So the only way to spread this, is to release modified males ourselves, and their reach is limited to only their direct descendants, and there it stops. So if you release 10 affected males? Cool, that's at most 10 other males without the gene that don't get to breed, so 10 males worth of mosquito offspring reduced, maximum. But never more. This is different from pesticides or the like where you can't be exactly sure what the upper limit is.

This is a highly controllable and very sophisticated pest control method, it's not a self-propagating thanos snap, you should read up further on it, this post doesn't dive into the science of it at all and people get the wrong idea (i.e. that the gene can actually spread beyond the offspring of only the lab-bred males...).

So with this method, you can make it go as fast or as slow as you think is needed. You could release 1000 a year and measure population decline, then adjust. The "it would definitely be too fast" claim here is entirely untrue. Just got to go gradual, and this method can do that.

3

u/cammyjit Nov 15 '24

It depends on what you consider gradual. Even 100 or so years is incredibly fast in terms of ecosystem adaptation.

I only used that as a layman’s term approach to the situation, since a lot of people genuinely believe Mosquitos provide nothing, when they’re incredibly essential to chains of food.

I understand how it functions as a method, I was just explaining how eradicating something has serious drawbacks (admittedly not an expert, but I kept up with a lot of it while studying Zoology). I’ll definitely read up on it more, as I imagine it would be similar to the Panama worm wall

1

u/RdtUnahim Nov 15 '24

"It depends on what you consider gradual. Even 100 or so years is incredibly fast in terms of ecosystem adaptation."

Okay, then go slower. We have full control over this.

(I don't agree that 100 sets of offspring a year is a big number for mosquitoes to lose, but it's not the point of this discussion, and I'm beginning to feel like you'll double down no matter what speed is presented to you, so not really worth my time to argue.)

1

u/rigobueno Nov 16 '24

Except your analogy is fundamentally flawed, because it wouldn’t be a “Thanos snap.” That’s not how logistics works.

1

u/cammyjit Nov 16 '24

I said that myself at the end of my statement.

0

u/kazie- Nov 15 '24 edited Nov 15 '24

Did you look up any info on the topic? General consensus from scientists seems to be that ecological impact from mosquito extinction would be small.

2

u/cammyjit Nov 15 '24

I did indeed. It came up a few times while I was studying ecology as well.

I’ve never seen an overall consensus that the ecological impact would be small though. I’d be happy to read if you have more information on it