| There is a link in another thread to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sterile_insect_techniq... . That list suggests that the technique is an effective way of holding an insect population down in general, but not a good way of eliminating it entirely. Furthermore, the trials involving Aedes, Anopheles, and Culex are particularly unpromising: > Culex quinquefasciatus / Myanmar / 1967 -- population eliminated > Culex quinquefasciatus / Florida / 1969 -- population eliminated > Culex pipiens / France / 1970 -- population "reduced" > Anopheles albimanus / El Salvador / 1972 -- population reduced "below detection level" > Culex quinquefasciatus / Delhi / 1973 -- population "reduced" > Culex quinquefasciatus / Delhi / 1973 (?) -- population unaffected > Aedes aegypti / Kenya / 1974 -- no long-term effect > Anopheles albimanus / El Salvador / 1977-1979 -- significant reduction, but eradication prevented by immigration > Culex tarsalis / California / 1981 -- "no population reduction" So, in 9 trials the first 5 were whole or partial successes and the last 4 failed. (I have no idea what the story is with the two ~simultaneous trials in Delhi.) That's not great and the trend is ugly. I tend to suspect the reason mosquitoes show up in this list with so many failures is precisely the fact that people hate them and significant efforts have already been devoted to their extermination. This strategy can't work over the long term -- either the population is wiped out quickly or not at all. |