Welcome to the new version of CaltechAUTHORS. Login is currently restricted to library staff. If you notice any issues, please email coda@library.caltech.edu
Published February 7, 2012 | Supplemental Material + Accepted Version
Journal Article Open

Confinement of gene drive systems to local populations: A comparative analysis

Abstract

Mosquito-borne diseases such as malaria and dengue fever pose a major health problem through much of the world. One approach to disease prevention involves the use of selfish genetic elements to drive disease-refractory genes into wild mosquito populations. Recently engineered synthetic drive systems have provided encouragement for this strategy; but at the same time have been greeted with caution over the concern that transgenes may spread into countries and communities without their consent. Consequently, there is also interest in gene drive systems that, while strong enough to bring about local population replacement, are unable to establish themselves beyond a partially isolated release site, at least during the testing phase. Here, we develop simple deterministic and stochastic models to compare the confinement properties of a variety of gene drive systems. Our results highlight several systems with desirable features for confinement—a high migration rate required to become established in neighboring populations, and low-frequency persistence in neighboring populations for moderate migration rates. Single-allele underdominance and single-locus engineered underdominance have the strongest confinement properties, but are difficult to engineer and require a high introduction frequency, respectively. Toxin–antidote systems such as Semele, Merea and two-locus engineered underdominance show promising confinement properties and require lower introduction frequencies. Killer-rescue is self-limiting in time, but is able to disperse to significant levels in neighboring populations. We discuss the significance of these results in the context of a phased release of transgenic mosquitoes, and the need for characterization of local ecology prior to a release.

Additional Information

© 2011 Elsevier Ltd. Received 15 February 2011; Received in revised form 25 October 2011; Accepted 27 October 2011; Available online 9 November 2011. The authors would like to thank Catherine Ward for advice on modeling, Charles Taylor for helpful discussions on mosquito dispersal, and the editor and two anonymous reviewers whose constructive comments have greatly improved the manuscript. John M. Marshall was supported by grant number DP1 OD003878 to Bruce A. Hay from the National Institutes of Health, and by a grant from the Medical Research Council, UK.

Attached Files

Accepted Version - nihms337769.pdf

Supplemental Material - mmc1.pdf

Files

mmc1.pdf
Files (2.6 MB)
Name Size Download all
md5:324b82e25dfa80ba1b491c47755d22dd
404.1 kB Preview Download
md5:4c3dc657d7fb37c56a868a258bcd4a5a
2.2 MB Preview Download

Additional details

Created:
August 22, 2023
Modified:
October 24, 2023