Genetic Modification of Pest and Beneficial Insects for Pest-Management Programs - Insect Molecular Genetics - page 697

Table 14.8: Selected References on Potential Risks and Regulatory Issues Relevant to
Releasing Genetically Modified Arthropods into the Environment.

Potential social, ethical, and risk issues and possible mitigations
l The planned introduction of genetically engineered organisms: ecological considerations and
recommendations (Tiedje et al. 1989).
l Environmental risks from the release of genetically modified organisms (GMOs)—the need for molecular
ecology (Williamson1992).
l Reducing the risks of nonindigenous species introductions: guilty until proven innocent (Ruesink et al.
1995).
l Persistence and containment of Metaseiulus occidentalis (Acari: Phytoseiidae in Florida: risk assessment for
possible releases of transgenic strains (McDermott and Hoy 1997).
l North-south research partnerships: the ethics of carrying out research in developing countries. (Edeger
1999).
l Deliberate introductions of species: research needs. Benefits can be reaped, but risks are high (Ewell
et al. 1999).
l Managing risks of arthropod vector research (Aultman et al. 2000).
l Ecological and community considerations in engineering arthropods to suppress vector-borne disease
(Spielman et al. 2002).
l Reversing Wolbachia -based population replacement (Dobson 2003).
l Ethical, legal, and social issues of genetically modified disease vectors in public health (Macer 2003).
l The first releases of transgenic mosquitoes: an argument for the sterile insect technique (Benedict and
Robinson 2003).
l Biosafety and risk assessment in the use of genetically modified mosquitoes for disease control (Toure
et al. 2004).
l Reversible introduction of transgenes in natural populations of insects (Le Rouzic and Capy 2006).
l Improving the ecological safety of transgenic insects for field release: new vectors for stability and
genomic targeting (Handler et al. 2007).
l Transgenic mosquitoes and the fight against malaria: managing technology push in a turbulent GMO
world (Knols et al. 2007).
l Guidance for contained field trials of vector mosquitoes engineered to contain a gene drive system:
recommendations of a scientific working group (Benedict et al. 2008).
l Ethical, social, and cultural considerations for site selection for research with genetically modified
mosquitoes (Lavery et al. 2008).
l The effect of gene drive on containment of transgenic mosquitoes (Marshall 2009).
l The Cartagena Protocol and genetically modified mosquitoes (Marshall 2010).
l The Cartagena Protocol in the context of recent releases of transgenic and Wolbachia -infected mosquitoes
(Marshall 2011).

l

Recombination technologies for enhanced transgene stability in bioengineered insects (Schetelig et al. 2011).

l

Scientists and public involvement: a consultation on the relation between malaria, vector control and
transgenic mosquitoes (Boete 2011).

( Continued )