ArticleEvolutionary applications2018
Invasion and migration of spatially self-limiting gene drives: A comparative analysis.
Article in Evolutionary applications, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 44 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
44 citing papers in PubMed.
- Predicting the invasiveness of threshold-dependent gene drives.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
- A male-drive female-sterile system for the self-limited control of the malaria mosquito Anopheles gambiae.Nature communications · 2025Article
- Controlling the frequency dynamics of homing gene drives for intermediate outcomes.G3 (Bethesda, Md.) · 2025Article
- Modelling daisy quorum drive: A short-term bridge across engineered fitness valleys.PLoS genetics · 2024Article
- Harnessing Wolbachia cytoplasmic incompatibility alleles for confined gene drive: A modeling study.PLoS genetics · 2023Article
- Gene drive designs for efficient and localisable population suppression using Y-linked editors.PLoS genetics · 2022Article
- Daisy-chain gene drives: The role of low cut-rate, resistance mutations, and maternal deposition.PLoS genetics · 2022Article
- Testing non-autonomous antimalarial gene drive effectors using self-eliminating drivers in the African mosquito vector Anopheles gambiae.PLoS genetics · 2022Article
- Experimental demonstration of tethered gene drive systems for confined population modification or suppression.BMC biology · 2022Article
- Insect pest management in the age of synthetic biology.Plant biotechnology journal · 2022Review
- Modeling CRISPR gene drives for suppression of invasive rodents using a supervised machine learning framework.PLoS computational biology · 2021Article
- Gene drive strategies of pest control in agricultural systems: Challenges and opportunities.Evolutionary applications · 2021Article
- A common gene drive language eases regulatory process and eco-evolutionary extensions.BMC ecology and evolution · 2021Article
- Mathematical modeling of genetic pest management through female-specific lethality: Is one locus better than two?Evolutionary applications · 2021Article
- Population genomics of invasive rodents on islands: Genetic consequences of colonization and prospects for localized synthetic gene drive.Evolutionary applications · 2021Article
- Design and analysis of CRISPR-based underdominance toxin-antidote gene drives.Evolutionary applications · 2021Article
- Double drives and private alleles for localised population genetic control.PLoS genetics · 2021Article
- Evading resistance to gene drives.Genetics · 2021Article
- Article
- Split versions of Cleave and Rescue selfish genetic elements for measured self limiting gene drive.PLoS genetics · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Recent advances in research on gene drives have produced genetic constructs that could theoretically spread a desired gene (payload) into all populations of a species, with a single release in one place. This attribute has advantages, but also comes with risks and ethical concerns. There has been a call for research on gene drive systems that are spatially and/or temporally self-limiting. Here, we use a population genetics model to compare the expected characteristics of three spatially self-limiting gene drive systems: one-locus underdominance, two-locus underdominance and daisy-chain drives. We find large differences between these gene drives in the minimum release size required for successfully driving a payload into a population. The daisy-chain system is the most efficient, requiring the smallest release, followed by the two-locus underdominance system, and then the one-locus underdominance system. However, when the target population exchanges migrants with a nontarget population, the gene drives requiring smaller releases suffer from higher risks of unintended spread. For payloads that incur relatively low fitness costs (up to 30%), a simple daisy-chain drive is practically incapable of remaining localized, even with migration rates as low as 0.5% per generation. The two-locus underdominance system can achieve localized spread under a broader range of migration rates and of payload fitness costs, while the one-locus underdominance system largely remains localized. We also find differences in the extent of population alteration and in the permanence of the alteration achieved by the three gene drives. The two-locus underdominance system does not always spread the payload to fixation, even after successful drive, while the daisy-chain system can, for a small set of parameter values, achieve a temporally limited spread of the payload. These differences could affect the suitability of each gene drive for specific applications.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.