1 Introduction

Mosquito populations, particularly those of the Aedes aegypti species, have a profound impact on global public health due to their role as vectors for several debilitating diseases, including dengue, Zika, chikungunya, and yellow fever (Joyce et al., 2018). These diseases pose significant health burdens worldwide (Shragai et al., 2017), with millions of cases reported annually, leading to substantial morbidity and mortality (Wang et al., 2021). The geographical distribution of these mosquito species is extensive, covering tropical, subtropical, and even some temperate regions, which exacerbates the challenge of controlling their populations and the diseases they transmit (Liu et al., 2020).

The importance of controlling mosquito populations cannot be overstated. Traditional methods, such as insecticides and environmental management, have proven insufficient in eradicating these vectors and the diseases they spread (Paixão et al., 2017). The persistence and adaptability of mosquito populations necessitate innovative and sustainable control strategies. Genetic control techniques, including the use of pathogen-blocking bacteria like Wolbachia and genome engineering-based strategies such as gene drives, have emerged as promising solutions to reduce mosquito populations and interrupt disease transmission (Kotsakiozi et al., 2017).

This study aims to evaluate the impact of genetic control techniques on mosquito populations. By synthesizing recent research findings, this study provides a comprehensive overview of the effectiveness, challenges, and future potential of these innovative control methods; covers various genetic control strategies, their implementation in different regions, and their outcomes in reducing mosquito populations and disease transmission. The scope includes analyzing the latest developments in genetic control technologies, comparing their efficacy and sustainability, and discussing the ecological and ethical considerations associated with their use. By reviewing a wide range of studies, this study will offer insights into the current state of genetic control techniques and their role in the global effort to combat mosquito-borne diseases.

2 Genetic Control Techniques

2.1 Sterile insect technique (SIT)

The Sterile Insect Technique (SIT) is a species-specific and environmentally benign method for insect population suppression. It involves mass rearing, radiation-mediated sterilization, and the release of a large number of sterile male insects into the wild. These sterile males mate with wild females, resulting in no offspring and thus reducing the population over time. SIT has been successfully used against various agricultural pests and is now being adapted for mosquito control. The technique's effectiveness in mosquito control has been demonstrated in several studies, showing significant reductions in mosquito populations (Wilke et al., 2012).

2.2 Release of insects carrying a dominant lethal (RIDL)

The Release of Insects carrying a Dominant Lethal (RIDL) is a genetic modification of the SIT approach (Lees et al., 2015). Instead of using radiation to sterilize the insects, RIDL involves releasing insects that are homozygous for a repressible dominant lethal genetic construct. This method aims to overcome some of the technical difficulties associated with conventional SIT, such as the potential negative effects of radiation on insect fitness. RIDL has shown promise in theoretical models and preliminary field trials, suggesting it could be a cost-effective and efficient method for mosquito population suppression (Alphey et al., 2011).

2.3 Gene drive systems

Gene drive systems utilize selfish genetic elements, such as homing endonuclease genes (HEGs), that can spread rapidly through a population even if they reduce fitness. These systems have the potential to drive introduced traits through a population without the need for large-scale sustained releases. Gene drive systems can target and knock out genes that are crucial for mosquito survival or reproduction, leading to population suppression or elimination. The population genetics and dynamics of these systems have been modeled to predict their impact and optimize their deployment (Alphey and Bonsall, 2014).

2.4 Wolbachia-Based Strategies

Wolbachia-based strategies involve the use of the endosymbiotic bacteria Wolbachia, which can induce cytoplasmic incompatibility (CI) in mosquitoes (Pagendam et al., 2020). This incompatibility results in the production of non-viable offspring when Wolbachia-infected males mate with uninfected females. The Incompatible Insect Technique (IIT) leverages this phenomenon for population suppression. Combining IIT with SIT (IIT-SIT) has shown high efficacy in field trials, significantly reducing mosquito populations. The integration of Wolbachia-based strategies within broader Integrated Vector Management (IVM) plans has demonstrated promising results in various settings (Zhang et al., 2015).

3 Mechanisms of Action

3.1 Genetic modification

Genetic modification techniques in mosquito control involve altering the genetic makeup of mosquitoes to either suppress their populations or replace them with genetically modified individuals that are less capable of transmitting diseases. These modifications can be classified into self-limiting and self-sustaining systems. Self-limiting systems, such as the Sterile Insect Technique (SIT) and Release of Insects carrying a Dominant Lethal gene (RIDL), are designed to reduce mosquito populations temporarily and require continuous releases to maintain their effects (Alphey, 2014). On the other hand, self-sustaining systems, such as those utilizing homing endonuclease genes (HEGs) and gene drives, aim to spread genetic modifications throughout the mosquito population permanently, potentially leading to long-term suppression or replacement (Williams et al., 2020).

3.2 Population suppression

Population suppression strategies focus on reducing the number of mosquitoes in a given area. Traditional methods like SIT involve releasing sterilized male mosquitoes to mate with wild females, resulting in no offspring and a subsequent decline in the mosquito population. Modern genetic approaches have improved upon this by using techniques such as RIDL, where mosquitoes are genetically engineered to carry a dominant lethal gene that causes death in offspring, thereby reducing the population more effectively. Another promising method involves the use of HEGs, which can spread rapidly through a population and disrupt essential genes, leading to population decline (Windbichler et al., 2011).These suppression strategies have shown potential in both laboratory and field trials, although their long-term ecological impacts require further study.

3.3 Population replacement

Population replacement strategies aim to replace wild mosquito populations with genetically modified ones that are less capable of transmitting diseases. This can be achieved by introducing genes that confer resistance to pathogens such as malaria or dengue virus. Gene drive systems, particularly those based on CRISPR/Cas9 technology, have been developed to enhance the inheritance of these resistance genes, ensuring that they spread rapidly through the population. For instance, gene-drive rescue systems have been designed to maintain the functionality of essential genes while spreading the desired modifications, thereby ensuring the survival and propagation of the modified mosquitoes (Figure 1) (Adolfi et al., 2020). These strategies hold promise for long-term disease control, but their implementation requires careful consideration of potential ecological and evolutionary consequences (Nazareth et al., 2020). In summary, genetic control techniques offer innovative solutions for mosquito population management through genetic modification, population suppression, and population replacement. Each approach has its unique mechanisms and potential impacts, necessitating thorough evaluation and monitoring to ensure their efficacy and safety in real-world applications (Alphey, 2014).

Figure 1 Efficient population modification gene-drive rescue system in the malaria mosquito Anopheles stephensi (Adopted from Adolfi et al., 2020) Image caption: a Swap strategy for Cas9/gRNA-mediated cassette exchange. Two plasmid-encoded gRNAs (top) guide cleavage in the genome of the white-eyed nRec mosquito line (khnRec–)8 (middle), leading to the excision of a fragment including the DsRed eye (3xP3) marker and the two antimalarial effectors m2A10 and m1C311. The HDR template plasmid (bottom) carries homology arms flanking either cut site, promoting the insertion of a GFP-marked donor template that carries a recoded portion of the kh gene followed by the 3′-end sequence of the An. gambiae kh gene including the 3′UTR (A.gam.3′) to minimize homology. b The insertion of this unit restores kh gene function while creating a sequence (khRec+) that is uncleavable by the endogenous drive components. c The Reckh gene-drive includes an An. stephensi codon-optimized Cas9 driven by the germline-specific vasa promoter from An. stephensi and a gRNA (gRNA-kh2) directed to the fifth exon of the unmodified kh+ gene (top) regulated by the ubiquitous promoter of the An. stephensi U6A gene8. The cut in the kh gene of the Reckh mosquito germline can be repaired by drive integration via HDR (homology-directed repair) or by the less desirable EJ (end-joining) pathway (bottom). HDR results in the integration of the drive cassette that maintains kh gene function at the integration site (khRec+), while EJ usually causes the formation of loss-of-function alleles (kh−). When function is lost in both copies of the gene, individuals with white eyes are produced. kh, kynurenine hydroxylase gene; attP, φC31 recombination site; U6A, RNA polymerase-III promoter; gRNA, guide RNAs; Cas9, Cas9 open reading frame; vasa, vasa promoter; 3xP3, eye-marker promoter; GFP, green fluorescent protein; dominant marker gene. The horizontal dimension of the mosquito heads at the eyes in the images is ~1 mm (Adapted from Adolfi et al., 2020)

Adolfi et al. (2020) found that using a gene-drive system in mosquitoes can effectively target and replace specific gene sequences, potentially providing a method to combat vector-borne diseases like malaria. The researchers utilized a Cas9/gRNA-mediated cassette exchange strategy to insert a GFP-marked donor template, restoring the function of the kh gene while rendering it resistant to the gene drive. This approach involved creating a homology-directed repair (HDR) template to promote precise integration and maintain gene function. They demonstrated that the insertion of this unit can be accurately achieved, with the potential for disrupting gene function through end-joining (EJ) pathways. This innovative method could significantly impact the genetic control of mosquito populations, providing a pathway to reducing the transmission of malaria by impairing the reproductive capabilities of the mosquito vectors.

4 Case Studies

4.1 Case study: Aedes aegypti control in Brazil

In Brazil, the control of Aedes aegypti, the primary vector for dengue, Zika, and chikungunya viruses, has been a significant public health challenge. Various genetic control techniques have been employed to mitigate the spread of these diseases. One notable approach involves the release of genetically modified mosquitoes designed to reduce the population of Aedes aegypti through the introduction of lethal genes. This method has shown promise in reducing mosquito populations and, consequently, the incidence of mosquito-borne diseases. The success of these interventions in Brazil underscores the potential of genetic control techniques in managing mosquito populations and reducing disease transmission (Figure 2) (Garcia et al., 2019).

Figure 2 Pyrethroid resistance in two Wolbachia-infected strains (wMelBr and wMelRio) and three field Aedes aegypti populations (Tubiacanga, Jurujuba and Urca) (Adopted from Garcia et al., 2019) Image caption: The susceptible strain Rockefeller was used as a calibration control. A) Mortality profile of Ae. aegypti adult females exposed to the pyrethroid deltamethrin. B) Allelic frequency of population samples; numbers above bars indicate the sum of ‘resistance genotypes’ to pyrethroids, In blue NaVS (1016 Val+ + 1534 Phe+), in orange NaVR1 (1016 Val+ + 1534 Cyskdr) and in red NaVR2 (1016 Ilekdr + 1534 Cyskdr) (Adapted from Garcia et al., 2019)

Garcia et al. (2019) found that two Wolbachia-infected Aedes aegypti strains, wMelBr and wMelRio, and three field populations from Tubiacanga, Jurujuba, and Urca displayed varying levels of resistance to the pyrethroid insecticide deltamethrin. The study revealed that mortality rates among these populations differed significantly when exposed to deltamethrin, indicating varying degrees of resistance. Additionally, the allelic frequency analysis showed a high prevalence of resistance-associated genotypes (NaVR1 and NaVR2) in the field populations compared to the susceptible Rockefeller strain. This variation suggests that Wolbachia infection and genetic background contribute to the observed differences in resistance levels. The findings underscore the complexity of managing insecticide resistance in mosquito populations and highlight the potential role of Wolbachia as a factor influencing resistance dynamics. Understanding these interactions is crucial for developing effective vector control strategies to combat diseases transmitted by Aedes aegypti.

4.2 Case study: Anopheles gambiae control in Africa

Anopheles gambiae is the primary vector for malaria in Africa, and controlling its population is crucial for malaria prevention (Crawford et al., 2017). Genetic control techniques, such as the release of genetically modified mosquitoes carrying genes that confer resistance to malaria parasites or reduce mosquito fertility, have been explored as innovative strategies to combat malaria. These interventions aim to either reduce the mosquito population or render the mosquitoes incapable of transmitting the malaria parasite. The implementation of these techniques in various African countries has demonstrated varying degrees of success, highlighting the need for continued research and optimization of genetic control methods to achieve sustainable malaria control (Amlalo et al., 2022).

4.3 Case study: Wolbachia infections in Australia

In Australia, the introduction of Wolbachia bacteria into Aedes aegypti populations has been a groundbreaking approach to controlling mosquito-borne diseases. The wMel strain of Wolbachia has been successfully established in local mosquito populations in northern Queensland, leading to a significant reduction in the transmission of dengue and other arboviruses. Studies have shown that Wolbachia-infected mosquitoes exhibit altered gene expression, particularly in genes related to immunity and metabolism, which contributes to their reduced ability to transmit viruses (Figure 3) (Hugo et al., 2022). The long-term stability of Wolbachia in mosquito populations and the sustained reduction in dengue incidence underscore the effectiveness of this biocontrol strategy. This case study highlights the potential of Wolbachia infections as a sustainable and effective method for controlling mosquito-borne diseases in Australia (Carvalho et al., 2015).

Figure 3 Histology of Wolbachia infection in the Aedes aegypti wAlbB2-F4 strain (Adopted from Hugo et al., 2022) Image caption: Wolbachia infection was observed across mosquito organs/tissue types by immunofluorescence analysis (IFA) using a rabbit polyclonal antibody against the Wolbachia surface protein (WSP) as the primary antibody and Alexa Fluor 488-conjugated donkey anti-rabbit antibody as the secondary antibody. DNA was stained using DAPI. (A) Example of whole body section showing IFA staining. (B-E) High resolution images of Wolbachia staining in oocytes, midgut, salivary gland and heads, respectively. (F) Quantification of Wolbachia staining density. Staining areas were quantified by image analysis and expressed as a ratio of Wolbachia staining over DAPI staining for each organ/tissue. The median staining densities differed significantly between groups (Kruskal-Wallis statistic = 95.37, N = 124). P values are reported for comparisons where medians differed significantly by Dunn’s multiple comparison test (α = 0.05, 21 comparisons). Green, Wolbachia,. Blue DNA. h, head. f.m., flight muscles. m, midgut. o, ovary. ooc, oocyte. p, proboscis. s.g., salivary glands. t.g., thoracic ganglia. Scale bars: A: 1.00 mm, B, D: 0.10 mm. C, E: 0.25 mm (Adapted from Hugo et al., 2022)

Hugo et al. (2022) found that Wolbachia infection is present across various mosquito organs and tissues, as evidenced by immunofluorescence analysis. Using specific antibodies against the Wolbachia surface protein, the study demonstrated distinct Wolbachia staining in organs such as the oocytes, midgut, salivary glands, and heads. Quantitative analysis revealed significant differences in Wolbachia density across tissue types, with the highest concentrations found in the salivary glands and ovaries. This differential distribution suggests that Wolbachia may play varied roles in different mosquito tissues, potentially influencing the host's biology and its capacity to transmit diseases. The significant variation in staining density underscores the importance of tissue-specific studies in understanding Wolbachia’s impact on mosquito physiology and pathogen interference, offering insights that could inform vector control strategies.

5 Ecological and Evolutionary Impacts

5.1 Ecological consequences

The introduction of genetic control techniques to manage mosquito populations can have significant ecological consequences. One of the primary concerns is the impact on local ecosystems, particularly on predators and competitors of mosquitoes. For instance, the reduction or elimination of mosquito species such as Anopheles gambiae could affect the food web, as these mosquitoes are preyed upon at various life stages by numerous predators. However, studies suggest that most predators of Anopheles gambiae are generalists and do not rely exclusively on this species, indicating that the ecological impact might be mitigated by the availability of alternative prey (Collins et al., 2018).

Moreover, the reduction in mosquito populations could lead to competitive release, where other mosquito species or insects might fill the ecological niche left vacant by the targeted species. This phenomenon has been observed in previous mosquito control interventions, where the identity and relative abundance of species in the ecosystem changed, but the overall biomass available to predators remained relatively constant (Selvaraj et al., 2020). Therefore, while the ecological consequences of genetic control techniques are complex, they may not necessarily lead to drastic disruptions in local ecosystems.

5.2 Evolutionary implications

The evolutionary implications of genetic control techniques are profound and multifaceted. One of the key concerns is the potential for resistance development. For example, the use of homing endonuclease genes (HEGs) in Anopheles mosquitoes can drive introduced traits through a population rapidly, even if they reduce fitness. However, the interaction between ecological factors and genetic properties can influence the outcomes, such as population suppression or the loss of the HEG. This highlights the importance of considering evolutionary dynamics when deploying genetic control strategies. Additionally, the high genetic diversity observed in natural mosquito populations, such as Anopheles gambiae, poses a challenge for the design and implementation of gene-drive systems. The presence of numerous single nucleotide polymorphisms and complex population structures can affect the spread and stability of introduced genetic traits (Miles et al., 2017). This genetic variability can lead to the emergence of resistant alleles, which could undermine the effectiveness of gene drives and other genetic control methods.

Furthermore, the use of gene drives and other genetic modifications can have long-term evolutionary impacts on mosquito populations. For instance, the introduction of transgenes through engineered underdominance or killer-rescue systems can lead to the persistence or eventual elimination of these traits, depending on various ecological and genetic factors (Edgington et al., 2018). The potential for gene flow between populations and the spread of resistance alleles must be carefully monitored to ensure the sustainability of these interventions. In conclusion, while genetic control techniques offer promising solutions for mosquito population management, their ecological and evolutionary impacts must be thoroughly evaluated. Understanding the interactions between ecological dynamics and genetic properties is crucial for the successful and sustainable implementation of these strategies. Continuous monitoring and adaptive management will be essential to mitigate potential negative consequences and enhance the effectiveness of genetic control methods in reducing mosquito-borne diseases.

6 Ethical, Social, and Regulatory Considerations

6.1 Ethical issues

The deployment of genetic control techniques in mosquito populations raises several ethical concerns. One of the primary ethical issues is the potential harm to the public and the environment. Field trials of genetically modified mosquitoes must ensure that the benefits outweigh the risks and that the welfare of community members is protected, especially those not enrolled in the study. Additionally, there is a need to balance the benefits and risks of these interventions, ensuring that the local community is involved in the decision-making process to avoid exploitation and safeguard their rights and welfare (Resnik, 2014). The ethical justification for any field trial depends on a careful examination of these issues on a case-by-case basis.

6.2 Social acceptance

Social acceptance is crucial for the successful implementation of genetic control strategies. Public perception and acceptance can significantly influence the deployment of these technologies. Community engagement and education are essential to address concerns and misconceptions about genetically modified mosquitoes. Studies have shown that involving community leaders and providing transparent information about the benefits and risks can enhance social acceptance (Jones et al., 2019). Moreover, offering free treatment to people who contract mosquito-borne diseases during field trials can help build trust and support within the community (Culbert et al., 2018).

6.3 Regulatory frameworks

The regulatory frameworks governing the use of genetic control techniques in mosquito populations vary across different regions. Effective regulation is necessary to ensure the safe and ethical deployment of these technologies. National, regional, and international decisions will need to address biosafety, social, cultural, and ethical aspects of genetic control methods. Regulatory bodies must establish guidelines for the release of genetically modified mosquitoes, considering factors such as environmental impact, public health benefits, and potential risks. The development of standardized quality control methods, such as flight tests to assess the quality of sterile male mosquitoes, can also support regulatory efforts by ensuring the effectiveness and safety of released insects. In conclusion, the ethical, social, and regulatory considerations surrounding genetic control techniques in mosquito populations are complex and multifaceted. Addressing these issues through careful planning, community engagement, and robust regulatory frameworks is essential for the successful and responsible deployment of these technologies (Wang et al., 2021).

7 Future Directions and Research Needs

7.1 Advances in genetic control technologies

The field of genetic control technologies for mosquito populations has seen significant advancements in recent years. One of the most promising developments is the use of CRISPR/Cas9 systems for gene editing, which has enhanced our ability to study mosquito biology and develop genetic tools for mosquito control. This technology allows for precise modifications, such as the introduction of gene drives that can spread desirable traits through mosquito populations more efficiently than traditional methods (McLean and Jacobs-Lorena, 2016). Gene drive systems, particularly those mediated by Cas9/gRNA, have shown great potential in population modification and suppression. For instance, a gene-drive rescue system developed for Anopheles stephensi demonstrated efficient population modification in small cage trials, with up to 95% of mosquitoes carrying the drive within 5~11 generations. This highlights the potential for gene drives to achieve rapid and widespread changes in mosquito populations. Additionally, the use of homing endonuclease genes (HEGs) has been explored as a method to drive introduced traits through populations. HEGs can spread rapidly even if they reduce fitness, offering a powerful tool for population suppression or modification. These genetic elements have been modeled to understand their population dynamics and the ecological factors that influence their success (Macias et al., 2017).

7.2 Addressing challenges

Despite these advancements, several challenges remain in the implementation of genetic control technologies. One major issue is the potential for resistance to develop in mosquito populations. For example, non-functional resistant alleles can arise, which may hinder the effectiveness of gene drives. Strategies to eliminate these alleles, such as combining maternal effects with negative selection, are being developed to address this challenge. Another significant challenge is the ecological impact of releasing genetically modified mosquitoes into the environment. The long-term effects on ecosystems and non-target species need to be thoroughly assessed to ensure that these interventions do not cause unintended harm. Additionally, there are concerns about the ethical and regulatory aspects of releasing genetically modified organisms, which require careful consideration and public engagement (Becker et al., 2020). Furthermore, the fitness load associated with genetic modifications can affect the success of these technologies. Minimizing the fitness cost to mosquitoes while maintaining the desired traits is crucial for the sustainability of genetic control methods. Research is ongoing to identify and optimize genetic constructs that confer resistance to pathogens without significantly impacting mosquito fitness. In conclusion, while genetic control technologies hold great promise for reducing mosquito populations and controlling mosquito-borne diseases, addressing the challenges related to resistance, ecological impact, and fitness load is essential for their successful implementation. Continued research and collaboration across disciplines will be necessary to overcome these hurdles and realize the full potential of genetic control strategies (Riehle et al., 2003).

8 Concluding Remarks

Genetic control techniques for mosquito populations have shown significant promise in addressing the limitations of traditional control methods. These techniques can be broadly categorized into self-limiting and self-sustaining strategies. Self-limiting strategies, such as the Sterile Insect Technique (SIT) and Releasing of Insects carrying a Dominant Lethal gene (RIDL), involve the release of genetically modified mosquitoes that do not persist in the environment. On the other hand, self-sustaining strategies, such as those utilizing homing endonuclease genes (HEGs) and gene drives, aim to introduce and spread genetic modifications throughout the mosquito population. The effectiveness of these genetic control methods has been demonstrated in various studies. For instance, the use of HEGs has shown potential in driving introduced traits through mosquito populations without the need for large-scale sustained releases. Additionally, the development of late-acting dominant lethal genetic systems has been found to be more effective than early-acting lethality in controlling mosquito populations with strong density-dependent effects.

The implications of genetic control techniques for public health are profound. Mosquito-borne diseases such as malaria, dengue, and Zika virus continue to pose significant global health challenges. Traditional control methods, including insecticides and environmental management, have proven insufficient in eliminating these diseases. Genetic control techniques offer a scalable and environmentally friendly alternative that can reduce the transmission risk of these diseases. For example, the precision-guided sterile insect technique (pgSIT) has demonstrated the ability to suppress and even eliminate mosquito populations, providing a potential tool for controlling wild populations and curtailing disease transmission in a safe and reversible manner. Moreover, the use of pathogen-blocking Wolbachia bacteria and genome engineering-based mosquito control strategies further enhances the potential for reducing the burden of mosquito-borne diseases.

The development and implementation of genetic control techniques for mosquito populations represent a significant advancement in the fight against mosquito-borne diseases. While there are still challenges to be addressed, such as biosafety, social, cultural, and ethical considerations, the potential benefits of these techniques cannot be overlooked. Continued research and collaboration at national, regional, and international levels will be crucial in ensuring the successful deployment and acceptance of these innovative control methods. In conclusion, genetic control techniques offer a promising and environmentally friendly approach to mosquito population management. By leveraging advancements in molecular biology and genomics, these techniques have the potential to significantly reduce the global health burden of mosquito-borne diseases and improve public health outcomes.

Acknowledgments

Thanks to every anonymous reviewer for their hard work and feedback.

Conflict of Interest Disclosure

Author affirms that this research was conducted without any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

References

Adolfi A., Gantz V., Jasinskiene N., Lee H., Hwang K., Terradas G., Bulger E., Ramaiah A., Bennett J., Emerson, J., Marshall J., Bier E., and James A., 2020, Efficient population modification gene-drive rescue system in the malaria mosquito Anopheles stephensi, Nature Communications, 11: 26.

https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-020-19426-0

Alphey L., 2014, Genetic control of mosquitoes, Annual Review of Entomology, 59: 205-224.

https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-ento-011613-162002

Alphey L., and Alphey N., 2014, Five things to know about genetically modified (gm) insects for vector control, PLoS Pathogens, 10: 9.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.ppat.1003909

Alphey N., Alphey L., and Bonsall M., 2011, A model framework to estimate impact and cost of genetics-based sterile insect methods for dengue vector control, PLoS ONE, 6: 84.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0025384

Alphey N., and Bonsall M., 2014, Interplay of population genetics and dynamics in the genetic control of mosquitoes, Journal of the Royal Society Interface, 11: 71.

https://doi.org/10.1098/rsif.2013.1071

Amlalo G., Akorli J., Akyea-Bobi N., Akporh S., Aqua-Baidoo D., Opoku M., Frempong K., Pi-Bansa S., Boakye H., Joannides J., Osei J., Pwalia R., Akorli E., Manu A., and Dadzie S., 2022, Evidence of high frequencies of insecticide resistance mutations in aedes aegypti (culicidae) mosquitoes in urban accra, ghana: implications for insecticide-based vector control of aedes-borne arboviral diseases, Journal of Medical Entomology, 59: 2090-2101.

https://doi.org/10.1093/jme/tjac120

Becker N., Petrić D., Zgomba M., Boase C., Madon M., Dahl C., and Kaiser A., 2020, Genetic control of mosquitoes, Mosquitoes, 10: 20.

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-92874-4_20

Carvalho D., Mckemey A., Garziera L., Lacroix R., Donnelly C., Alphey L., Malavasi A., and Capurro M., 2015, Suppression of a field population of aedes aegypti in brazil by sustained release of transgenic male mosquitoes, PLoS Neglected Tropical Diseases, 9: 64.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pntd.0003864

Collins C., Bonds J., Quinlan M., and Mumford J., 2018, Effects of the removal or reduction in density of the malaria mosquito, Anopheles gambiaes on interacting predators and competitors in local ecosystems, Medical and Veterinary Entomology, 33: 1-15.

https://doi.org/10.1111/mve.12327

Crawford J., Alves J., Palmer W., Day J., Sylla M., Ramasamy R., Surendran S., Black W., Pain A., and Jiggins F., 2017, Population genomics reveals that an anthropophilic population of Aedes aegypti mosquitoes in west africa recently gave rise to american and asian populations of this major disease vector, BMC Biology, 15: 51.

https://doi.org/10.1186/s12915-017-0351-0

Culbert N., Balestrino F., Dor A., Herranz G., Yamada H., Wallner T., and Bouyer J., 2018, A rapid quality control test to foster the development of genetic control in mosquitoes, Scientific Reports, 8: 10.

https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-34469-6

Edgington M., and Alphey L., 2018, Population dynamics of engineered underdominance and killer-rescue gene drives in the control of disease vectors, PLoS Computational Biology, 14: 71.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1006059

Garcia G., Sylvestre G., Aguiar R., Costa G., Martins A., Lima J., Petersen M., Lourenço-de-Oliveira R., Shadbolt M., Rašić G., Hoffmann A., Villela D., Dias F., Dong Y., O'Neill S., Moreira L., and Maciel-de-Freitas R., 2019, Matching the genetics of released and local Aedes aegypti populations is critical to assure Wolbachia invasion, PLoS Neglected Tropical Diseases, 13: 23.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pntd.0007023

Hugo L., Rašić G., Maynard A., Ambrose L., Liddington C., Thomas C., Nath N., Graham M., Winterford C., Wimalasiri-Yapa B., Xi Z., Beebe N., and Devine G., 2022, Wolbachia walbb inhibit dengue and zika infection in the mosquito Aedes aegypti with an australian background, PLoS Neglected Tropical Diseases, 16: 71.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pntd.0010786

Jones R., Kulkarni M., Davidson T., and Talbot B., 2019, Arbovirus vectors of epidemiological concern in the americas: a scoping review of entomological studies on zika, dengue and chikungunya virus vectors, PLoS ONE, 15: 53.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0220753

Joyce A., Torres M., Torres R., and Moreno M., 2018, Genetic variability of the Aedes aegypti (Diptera: Culicidae) mosquito in el salvador, vector of dengue, yellow fever, chikungunya and zika, Parasites & Vectors, 11: 5.

https://doi.org/10.1186/s13071-018-3226-5

Kotsakiozi P., Gloria-Soria A., Caccone A., Evans B., Schama R., Martins A., and Powell J., 2017, Tracking the return of Aedes aegypti to brazil, the major vector of the dengue, chikungunya and zika viruses, PLoS Neglected Tropical Diseases, 11: 53.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pntd.0005653

Lees R., Gilles J., Hendrichs J., Vreysen M., and Bourtzis K., 2015, Back to the future: the sterile insect technique against mosquito disease vectors, Current Opinion in Insect Science, 10: 156-162.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cois.2015.05.011

Liu Y., Lillepold K., Semenza J., Tozan Y., Quam M., and Rocklöv J., 2020, Reviewing estimates of the basic reproduction number for dengue, zika and chikungunya across global climate zones, Environmental Research, 182: 109114.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2020.109114

Macias V., Ohm J., and Rasgon J., 2017, Gene drive for mosquito control: where did it come from and where are we headed, International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 14: 6.

https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph14091006

McLean K., and Jacobs-Lorena M., 2016, Genetic control of malaria mosquitoes, Trends in Parasitology, 32: 174-176.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pt.2016.01.002

Miles A., Harding N., Bottà G., Clarkson C., Antão T., Kozak K., Schrider D., Kern A., Redmond S., Sharakhov I., Pearson R., Bergey C., Fontaine M., Donnelly M., Lawniczak M., Kwiatkowski D., Fo M., Donnelly M., Ayala D., Besansky N., Burt A., Caputo B., Torre A., Godfray H., Hahn M., Kwiatkowski D., Lawniczak M., Midega J., Neafsey D., Loughlin S., Pinto J., Riehle M., Vernick K., Weetman D., Wilding C., White B., Pinto A., Troco A., Burt A., Diabaté A., Besansky C., Costantini C., Rohatgi K., Pinto N., Elissa N., Vernick B., Coulibaly B., Dinis J., Dinis J., Bejon J., Mbogo C., Bejon P., Donnelly C., Mawejje H., Donnelly D., Rowlan J., Stalker J., Rockett K., Drury E., Mead D., Jeffreys A., Hubbart C., Rowlands K., Isaacs A., Jyothi D., Malangone C., Kluczyski P., Vauterin P., Jeffery B., Wright I., Hart L., Kluczynski K., Kwiatkow V., Cornelius V., MacInnis B., Henrichs C., and Giacomantonio R., 2017, Genetic diversity of the african malaria vector anopheles gambiae, Nature, 552: 96-100.

https://doi.org/10.1038/nature24995

Nazareth T., Craveiro I., Moutinho A., Seixas G., Gonçalves C., Gonçalves L., Teodósio R., and Sousa C., 2020, What happens when we modify mosquitoes for disease prevention, a systematic review, Emerging Microbes & Infections, 9: 348-365.

https://doi.org/10.1080/22221751.2020.1722035

Pagendam D., Trewin B., Johnson B., Snoad N., Ritchie S., Hoffmann A., Staunton K., Paton C., and Beebe N., 2020, Modelling the Wolbachia incompatible insect technique: strategies for effective mosquito population elimination, BMC Biology, 18: 87.

https://doi.org/10.1186/s12915-020-00887-0

Paixão E., Teixeira M., and Rodrigues L., 2017, Zika, chikungunya and dengue: the causes and threats of new and re-emerging arboviral diseases, BMJ Global Health, 3: 30.

https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2017-000530

Resnik D., 2014, Ethical issues in field trials of genetically modified disease-resistant mosquitoes, Developing World Bioethics, 14: 37-46.

https://doi.org/10.1111/dewb.12011

Riehle M., Srinivasan P., Moreira C., and Jacobs-Lorena M., 2003, Towards genetic manipulation of wild mosquito populations to combat malaria: advances and challenges, Journal of Experimental Biology, 206: 3809-3816.

https://doi.org/10.1242/jeb.00609

Selvaraj P., Wenger E., Bridenbecker D., Windbichler N., Russell J., Gerardin J., Bever C., and Nikolov M., 2020, Vector genetics, insecticide resistance and gene drives: an agent-based modeling approach to evaluate malaria transmission and elimination, PLoS Computational Biology, 16: 21.

https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.01.27.920421

Shragai T., Tesla B., Murdock C., and Harrington L., 2017, Zika and chikungunya: mosquito-borne viruses in a changing world, Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 13: 99.

https://doi.org/10.1111/nyas.13306

Wang G., Gamez S., Raban R., Marshall J., Alphey L., Li M., Rasgon J., and Akbari O., 2021, Combating mosquito-borne diseases using genetic control technologies, Nature Communications, 12: 54.

https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-021-24654-z

Wilke A., and Marrelli M., 2012, Genetic control of mosquitoes: population suppression strategies, Revista do Instituto de Medicina Tropical de Sao Paulo, 54(5): 287-292.

https://doi.org/10.1590/S0036-46652012000500009

Williams A., Franz A., Reid W., and Olson K., 2020, Antiviral effectors and gene drive strategies for mosquito population suppression or replacement to mitigate arbovirus transmission by Aedes aegypti, Insects, 11: 52.

https://doi.org/10.3390/insects11010052

Windbichler N., Menichelli M., Papathanos P., Thyme S., Li H., Ulge U., Hovde B., Baker D., Monnat R., Burt A., and Crisanti A., 2011, A synthetic homing endonuclease-based gene drive system in the human malaria mosquito, Nature, 473: 212-215.

https://doi.org/10.1038/nature09937

Zhang D., Zheng X., Xi Z., Bourtzis K., and Gilles J., 2015, Combining the sterile insect technique with the incompatible insect technique: impact of Wolbachia infection on the fitness of triple- and double-infected strains of Aedes albopictus, PLoS ONE, 10: 26.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0121126