| Literature DB >> 33208534 |
Luke S Alphey1, Andrea Crisanti2,3, Filippo Fil Randazzo4, Omar S Akbari5.
Abstract
Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 33208534 PMCID: PMC7733814 DOI: 10.1073/pnas.2020417117
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A ISSN: 0027-8424 Impact factor: 12.779
Characteristics and examples of engineered population modification/suppression technologies
| Approach | Examples | Temporal dynamics | Geographic reach |
| Gene drives | HEG#, Medea, CleaveR | Low-threshold | Nonlocalized |
| Translocations, Underdominance#, UDMEL | High-threshold | Localized | |
| Daisy#, split-drive#, killer rescue | Self-limiting | ||
| Nondrives | SIT#, RIDL#, fsRIDL#, pgSIT# |
Two broad types of engineered approaches exist to modify/suppress populations—one requires gene drive, and the other relies on nondrive technologies. Multiple examples of these types of systems exist, which work over different timeframes, including: Low-threshold (predicted to spread from a small release), to high-threshold (predicted to spread into a population only when the transgene is present above a critical threshold), to self-limiting, which can only spread or persist in population for a short period. These systems can fall under two broad categories, from nonlocalized (predicted to spread beyond boundaries) to localized (predicted to spread within a local population). Some gene drives (and other genetic methods) can be used for population suppression, at least in some forms (indicated by #). For more details on the various examples and terminology see Dataset S1.