Skip to main content

How genetically engineered moths could save billions in crop damage losses

The Diamondback Moth: Pest Control Without Pesticide

Scientists have created genetically engineered moths and released them into the wild. Before you start fretting about the insect version of Jurassic Park, however, it’s for our own good. At least, when it comes to feeding the planet.

Recommended Videos

No, the moths aren’t designed to be some lab-grown future foodstuff. Instead, researchers from Cornell University have worked with scientists from biotech company Oxitec to find environmentally friendly ways to limit the damage caused to crops by the diamondback moth, which can add up to billions of dollars in losses. Their answer? Genetically engineer your way out of the problem.

“We are interested in using genetic engineering of an insect species to help manage pest populations without the use of additional insecticides,” Anthony Shelton, professor of entomology at Cornell, told Digital Trends. “The ‘self-limiting’ technology we used is a vast improvement over the sterile insect technique, developed in the 1950s and promoted by Rachel Carson in her seminal book, Silent Spring.”

Moth closeup of face 1
David Castro / EyeEm / Getty Images

That approach of insect control involves releasing large numbers of sterile insects into the wild. The sterile male insects then compete with wild males to mate with females, which subsequently produce no offspring. The result is a reduction in the next generation’s population. This work takes the same broad approach, but with genetic engineering in place of sterilization using X-rays.

“Two genes – a self-limiting gene and a marker gene – were introduced into the insect, such that it can pass them onto offspring just like any other gene,” said Dr. Neil Morrison, agricultural lead for Oxitec. “After the release of these male moths, the self-limiting gene prevents their female offspring from surviving. So with sustained releases of self-limiting males, the number of pest females declines, leading to pest suppression. [The] marker gene – for a protein that is visible under suitable light – [meanwhile] allows us to monitor the moths in the field. The self-limiting moths are non-toxic and non-allergenic.”

In their research so far, the team has demonstrated that introducing these “self-limiting” male insects into the pest population causes it to collapse. They have also shown that these males have similar dispersal and longevity in the field as compared with a non-engineered strain.

“Combining these two studies suggests that ‘self-limiting’ male insects can be released in a field to manage the pest population without the use of insecticides,” Shelton continued. “Additional field studies are needed to verify this result under different agronomic conditions.”

A paper describing the work was recently published in the journal Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology.

Luke Dormehl
Former Digital Trends Contributor
I'm a UK-based tech writer covering Cool Tech at Digital Trends. I've also written for Fast Company, Wired, the Guardian…
BYD’s cheap EVs might remain out of Canada too
BYD Han

With Chinese-made electric vehicles facing stiff tariffs in both Europe and America, a stirring question for EV drivers has started to arise: Can the race to make EVs more affordable continue if the world leader is kept out of the race?

China’s BYD, recognized as a global leader in terms of affordability, had to backtrack on plans to reach the U.S. market after the Biden administration in May imposed 100% tariffs on EVs made in China.

Read more
Tesla posts exaggerate self-driving capacity, safety regulators say
Beta of Tesla's FSD in a car.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) is concerned that Tesla’s use of social media and its website makes false promises about the automaker’s full-self driving (FSD) software.
The warning dates back from May, but was made public in an email to Tesla released on November 8.
The NHTSA opened an investigation in October into 2.4 million Tesla vehicles equipped with the FSD software, following three reported collisions and a fatal crash. The investigation centers on FSD’s ability to perform in “relatively common” reduced visibility conditions, such as sun glare, fog, and airborne dust.
In these instances, it appears that “the driver may not be aware that he or she is responsible” to make appropriate operational selections, or “fully understand” the nuances of the system, NHTSA said.
Meanwhile, “Tesla’s X (Twitter) account has reposted or endorsed postings that exhibit disengaged driver behavior,” Gregory Magno, the NHTSA’s vehicle defects chief investigator, wrote to Tesla in an email.
The postings, which included reposted YouTube videos, may encourage viewers to see FSD-supervised as a “Robotaxi” instead of a partially automated, driver-assist system that requires “persistent attention and intermittent intervention by the driver,” Magno said.
In one of a number of Tesla posts on X, the social media platform owned by Tesla CEO Elon Musk, a driver was seen using FSD to reach a hospital while undergoing a heart attack. In another post, a driver said he had used FSD for a 50-minute ride home. Meanwhile, third-party comments on the posts promoted the advantages of using FSD while under the influence of alcohol or when tired, NHTSA said.
Tesla’s official website also promotes conflicting messaging on the capabilities of the FSD software, the regulator said.
NHTSA has requested that Tesla revisit its communications to ensure its messaging remains consistent with FSD’s approved instructions, namely that the software provides only a driver assist/support system requiring drivers to remain vigilant and maintain constant readiness to intervene in driving.
Tesla last month unveiled the Cybercab, an autonomous-driving EV with no steering wheel or pedals. The vehicle has been promoted as a robotaxi, a self-driving vehicle operated as part of a ride-paying service, such as the one already offered by Alphabet-owned Waymo.
But Tesla’s self-driving technology has remained under the scrutiny of regulators. FSD relies on multiple onboard cameras to feed machine-learning models that, in turn, help the car make decisions based on what it sees.
Meanwhile, Waymo’s technology relies on premapped roads, sensors, cameras, radar, and lidar (a laser-light radar), which might be very costly, but has met the approval of safety regulators.

Read more
Waymo, Nexar present AI-based study to protect ‘vulnerable’ road users
waymo data vulnerable road users ml still  1 ea18c3

Robotaxi operator Waymo says its partnership with Nexar, a machine-learning tech firm dedicated to improving road safety, has yielded the largest dataset of its kind in the U.S., which will help inform the driving of its own automated vehicles.

As part of its latest research with Nexar, Waymo has reconstructed hundreds of crashes involving what it calls ‘vulnerable road users’ (VRUs), such as pedestrians walking through crosswalks, biyclists in city streets, or high-speed motorcycle riders on highways.

Read more