This story where GMO mosquitoes being released brought this to mind:
http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/millions-gmo-insects-set-loose-florida-keys-28466177
I’ve read about introduced animals that have unintended consequences. When have introduces species worked as theorized?
Granted that mosquitoes are native to Florida and might not be considered an introduced species but my question is still there.
Does eradicating Screwworm in the US count?
I wouldn’t think so, since the sterile males were members of a species that was already present.
The species of mosquito that is being controlled, Aedes aegyptii, is not native to the US.
The Wikipedia article mentions quite a few intentional introductions but doesn’t really talk about their success rates. Still would be a good place to start if you wanted to do some research.
When I lived in Hawaii, I sure heard about the failures there. One example is ferrets. They were brought in to address the rat problem. Now they have a rat and a ferret problem.
Soybeans and rice are both “introduced” in the sense that they’re being cultivated in many places other than their native habitats. They’ve worked out pretty well.
Kudzu, on the other hand, not so much.
Honey bees were intentionally brought over from Europe during the 1600s. Granted the bees themselves aren’t doing so hot these days (colony collapse disorder) but you don’t usually hear them being blamed for ruining the North American environment.
According to this article, they were not only intentionally introduced but sometimes with a good deal of effort to spread them throughout the continent.
Pheaseant and chuckar, both game birds seem to have been successfully introduced. Arguably the mustang would be considered by some to be a success.
Say, rather, Kudzu, on the other hand, waaaaay toooooooo much!
OTOH, they are already here, so the plan being considered doesn’t really involve introducing them. Just introducing a genetically franken-modified freak version of them. From the OP’s link (bold added):
Those mosquitoes would make quite a salad bar!
I don’t quite see what the objections is. They are only going to release males, which don’t bite people. The males then compete with normal males for females, who will then lay eggs and the larva will die before they get around to biting anyone. There aren’t going to be any Peter Parker style mosquito-man people coming out of this.
I live right where Oxitec did one of their first test releases. Right across the street from some of the mosquito traps.
Our local Mosquito Research Control Unit has traps that are regularly monitored. They count for number and species. The A. aegypti population was reduced by 80% in the wake of the Oxitec experiment. I’d call that a resounding success given the local mozzies are highly resistant to DDT and other usual insecticides.
And considering that the A. aegypti species itself was an invasive species to Cayman, this is a case of one intentional introduction helping combat an invasive species population that has becomes established.
In AUS, we are fairly careful about introduced species now, because of some really bad early decisions, (rabbits, foxes, cacti) and ongoing threats from aggressive invaders (water plants, Japanese knotweed, etc)
But my whole city is full of “successful” introduced species. I’ve got introduced grass, oak tree, plum tree, apricot tree, carrots, pumpkins, beans, peas. Dogs and cats are arguable: horses, cows, sheep, goats, pigs less so.
The cacti problem was fixed with an introduced bug: the fly problem (caused by introduced beef cattle) partly fixed by introduced dung beetles, the rabbit problem partly fixed by two introduced diseases, and the blackberry problem fixed by introduced disease (although you got to kind of miss those vast blackberry thickets, and many people feel the same way about rabbits).
^
Yeah we’ve got a reasonable strike rate overall with introduced species. The Dung beetle one of the better ones, the cane toad one of the worst.
Earthworms in Ohio seemed to work out pretty well. There were once native earthworms here, but the glaciers wiped them out. Now they’re back, and good for them.
And haven’t there been species deliberately introduced for no better reason than “just because”? IIRC, the children’s book Mr. Popper’s Penguins culminates with a plan to colonize the North Pole with penguins because why not. I get the impression that that reflected a real attitude, if not a specific real plan, at the time the book was written.
That’s Rabbits into Australia.
http://www.abc.net.au/science/articles/2009/04/08/2538860.htm
They frigging flourished all right
The European starling was introduced into the US by someone who wanted to import all the birds mentioned in Shakespeare. It certainly thrived.
Coyotes in urban America seem to be doing quite well.
Mongooses.
Attempts to introduce the common dandelion to the US for food & medicine have exceeded beyond anybody’s wildest expectations.
However, it has caused big environmental problems, particularly by evicting native hole-nesting birds like bluebirds from nesting sites.
I presume that by “work” that the OP means not merely that the introduced species thrived, but that it wasn’t at the expense of native species, and didn’t cause problems for humans either.
[QUOTE=Duckster]
Coyotes in urban America seem to be doing quite well.
[/QUOTE]
There seems to be some confusion as to what is meant by “introduced species.” Usually this refers to species that have been brought to areas outside their normal range through human agency, whether intentional or non-intentional.
As I mentioned above, I wouldn’t count species that have been used for biological control of their own species, whether it occurs naturally or has previously been introduced. If it occurs naturally, than the species is not introduced; if it has previously been introduced then the release doesn’t constitute a new introduction and in any case means that the original introduction had become a pest.
With regard to coyotes 1) they are native, not an introduced species (although they have spread in part due to human modifications of the environment); 2) they cause problems in their new range such as predation on pets and livestock.