Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

RigbyRoadIce t1_j691rkn wrote

Like? Ecologists all tend to believe eradicating malaria-susceptible mosquitos for example would not produce a significant impact on the food web in the region.

4

Mycousinvindy t1_j6983ki wrote

I mean on another post I already explained I don't pretend to know the ecology of mosquitoes. Their are a multitude of interactions between animals from their predators or plants. I know most mosquitoes don't even drink blood and a lot are pollinators. I believe only female mosquitos drink blood and their male counter part may play a role in the ecosystem. Also their larvae stage may be a major player for some aquatic species. That's off the dome, but how any of these interactions would actually effect I have no clue.

I never said we shouldn't, just that eradicating sections have ripple effects that are largely not always predictable. Accounting for all interactions within nature is nearly impossible and we can only speculate. We can agree upon hypothesis but to state you know the outcome with 100%, truth is asinine.

2

xeric t1_j69nat9 wrote

This is much safer than eradicating all mosquitos - eliminating 1 or 2 species that are really effective at transmitting malaria while allowing other species to take over that part of the ecosystem feels especially low-risk, given it could save hundreds of thousands of lives per year

2