Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40555377›Full record

ReviewOpen biology2025

The challenge of measuring mosquito flight performance: going beyond sterile insect technique and into transgenic and gene drive-based approaches.

Paola Najera, Christian E Ogaugwu, Tyler F Chan, Raja Babu Singh Kushwah, Zach Adelman

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Open biology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Paola NajeraTexas A&M University, College Station, TX, USA.
Christian E OgaugwuDepartment of Entomology, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX, USA.
Tyler F ChanTexas A&M University, College Station, TX, USA.
Raja Babu Singh KushwahDepartment of Entomology, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX, USA.
Zach AdelmanDepartment of Entomology, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-5901-7171

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Invasive insects inflict global costs of more than 70 billion USD annually by destroying crops and spreading disease-causing pathogens. Sterile insect technique (SIT), an insect population control method, involves the irradiation or chemical sterilization of insects to produce sterile males that are mass-released. SIT has proven effective in reducing populations of the Mediterranean fruit fly, Mexican fruit fly and screwworm fly. In the past decade, efforts to improve SIT with transgenic approaches have increased, including the development of potentially highly invasive gene drive transgenes. Determining flight capability is vital to the success of any insect control programme, and various flight assays can be used to analyse insect dispersal, flight behaviour and the mechanics behind flight. However, traditional flight assays such as mark-release-recapture become more challenging with transgenic or gene drive arthropods due to ecological concerns, while assays such as wind tunnels or flight mills/arenas may not capture the full range of flight abilities. This review seeks to cover current flight assays and their limitations as well as the requirements for flight assays to establish comparative flight ability for genetically modified insects to better prioritize strains prior to any potential field-based releases.

Indexed as

CulicidaeFlight, AnimalGene Drive TechnologyMosquito ControlPest Control, BiologicalAnimalsAnimals, Genetically ModifiedMaleTransgenesflight assaysgene drivemark–release–recapturesterile insect technique

Identifiers

PMID40555377
PMCPMC12187402

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.