↓ Skip to main content

Historical applications of induced sterilisation in field populations of mosquitoes

Overview of attention for article published in Malaria Journal, November 2009
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (80th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (79th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
2 policy sources
twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
148 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
186 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Historical applications of induced sterilisation in field populations of mosquitoes
Published in
Malaria Journal, November 2009
DOI 10.1186/1475-2875-8-s2-s2
Pubmed ID
Authors

David A Dame, Christopher F Curtis, Mark Q Benedict, Alan S Robinson, Bart GJ Knols

Abstract

Research on sterile mosquito technology from 1955 to the 1980s provided a substantial body of knowledge on propagation and release of sterile mosquitoes. Radiation sterilisation and chemosterilisation have been used effectively to induce dominant lethality and thereby sterilise important mosquito vectors in the laboratory. Experimental releases of chemosterilised males provided complete control of Anopheles albimanus in a small breeding population (14-15 sq km) in El Salvador. Releases of radiation sterilised males failed to control either Aedes aegypti or Anopheles quadrimaculatus in the USA. Releases of radiation-sterilised and chemosterilised male Culex quinquefasciatus in the USA and India were successful in some instances. Development of genetic sexing systems for Anopheles and improved physical separation methods for Culex have made it possible to rear and release males almost exclusively (> 99%) minimizing the release of potential vectors, the females. Factors that affected efficacy in some field programmes included reduction of competitiveness by radiation, immigration of fertilized females from outside the release zones, and inability of laboratory-bred males to perform in the wild. Despite significant progress, institutional commitments to carry the process further were generally lacking in the late 1970s and until recently. Now, with renewed interest and support for further assessment of this technology, this paper summarizes the current knowledge base, prioritizes some areas of investigation, and challenges scientists and administrators to maintain an awareness of progress, remain realistic about the interpretation of new findings, and make decisions about the sterile insect technique on the basis of informed scientific documentation. Areas recommended for priority research status include the establishment of genetic sexing mechanisms that can be transferred to other mosquito species, re-examination of radiation sterilisation, aerial release technology and mass rearing.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 186 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 3 2%
Brazil 2 1%
Portugal 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Madagascar 1 <1%
Unknown 177 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 37 20%
Researcher 37 20%
Student > Bachelor 25 13%
Student > Master 20 11%
Other 12 6%
Other 21 11%
Unknown 34 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 89 48%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 21 11%
Environmental Science 13 7%
Medicine and Dentistry 7 4%
Immunology and Microbiology 4 2%
Other 16 9%
Unknown 36 19%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 18 May 2021.
All research outputs
#4,485,241
of 22,669,724 outputs
Outputs from Malaria Journal
#1,140
of 5,540 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#15,212
of 78,992 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Malaria Journal
#9
of 49 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,669,724 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 80th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,540 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 78,992 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 49 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its contemporaries.