[Externet]

The disappearance of a specie does affect the survival of their predators, and changes populations of other related and predated.

What ecological bad could come if all mosquitoes cease to exist ? Less frogs and salamanders perhaps ? Would that trigger a major disruption in ecology ?

[md65536]

Externet, on 12 December 2011 - 02:20 AM, said:

The disappearance of a specie does affect the survival of their predators, and changes populations of other related and predated.

What ecological bad could come if all mosquitoes cease to exist ? Less frogs and salamanders perhaps ? Would that trigger a major disruption in ecology ?

http://www.gizmag.co...mosquito/20668/
Quote: "a scientific consensus forming that the complete eradication of mosquitoes would have limited, if any, adverse environmental effects"

But it also says: "The humble mosquito, and the deadly diseases it carries, is estimated to have been responsible for as many as 46 billion deaths over the history of our species. That staggering number is even more frightening in context - it means that mosquitoes are alleged to have killed more than half the humans that ever lived." To me that says that mosquitoes have a pretty big direct influence on humans!, and wiping them out will have major consequences, including the intended consequences of saving lives but also unintended consequences that we'd better be prepared to deal with, which I doubt we will be!

[CharonY]

I am not quite sure how certain the consensus really is and how well it is supported by data.
This article, which is the basis for the claim more like an opinion piece to me Nature link. It was definitely written up by a non-expert (actually, student report was the first thing that came to my mind).

For instance, inside the article there is this:

Quote

"Mosquitoes are delectable things to eat and they're easy to catch," says aquatic entomologist Richard Merritt, at Michigan State University in East Lansing. In the absence of their larvae, hundreds of species of fish would have to change their diet to survive. "This may sound simple, but traits such as feeding behaviour are deeply imprinted, genetically, in those fish," says Harrison. The mosquitofish (Gambusia affinis), for example, is a specialized predator — so effective at killing mosquitoes that it is stocked in rice fields and swimming pools as pest control — that could go extinct. And the loss of these or other fish could have major effects up and down the food chain.
Many species of insect, spider, salamander, lizard and frog would also lose a primary food source. In one study published last month, researchers tracked insect-eating house martins at a park in Camargue, France, after the area was sprayed with a microbial mosquito-control agent¹. They found that the birds produced on average two chicks per nest after spraying, compared with three for birds at control sites.

But then later the author concludes:

Quote

With many options on the menu, it seems that most insect-eaters would not go hungry in a mosquito-free world. There is not enough evidence of ecosystem disruption here to give the eradicators pause for thought.

The eradication of mosquitos are likely to be beneficial to humans in a direct way, however, the ecological consequences are most likely insufficiently explored.

This post has been edited by CharonY: 13 December 2011 - 05:53 PM

[esavagee]

You may have to consider the numbers of livestock that would no longer be affected by diseases passed to they by mosquito's. If, for example, you consider grazing cattle if their numbers increased there would be more food for humans, but impact land use. Maybe areas of grassland would have to be managed etc. decreasing the natural habitat of other organisms.

Also, consider what would happen to the animals that naturally prey upon mosquito's and their larvae.

[slavenenco]

i think it would be a chain reaction, i don't agree that any species would benefit from disappearance of another in a long run

[esavagee]

slavenenco, on 1 March 2012 - 10:50 PM, said:

i think it would be a chain reaction, i don't agree that any species would benefit from disappearance of another in a long run

i agree.

what about the recent article http://www.wired.com...rrentPage%3Dall that suggests putting polar bears (which could be a species about to disappear (if you go by some theories) in antarctica?

would this be a good or a bad influence by man on the disappearance of a species and its affects on other animals?

just wondering whether that could be a thing to consider with this subject.

[Anders Hoveland]

The disappearance of a sub-species can also have a profound ecological impact.



Image: http://faculty.south...S%20%20we24.jpg

Some controversial biologists question the potential impact of the displacement of certain ethnicities by other ethnicities. For example, the ethnic Malay are displacing the Dayak from the island of Borneo. The different ethnicities appear to have very different types and degrees of impact on the island's rainforest.
http://abcnews.go.co...id=81441&page=1

This post has been edited by swansont: 30 April 2012 - 01:41 PM
Reason for edit: copyright - modified image tag to link

[JohnStu]

Externet, on 12 December 2011 - 02:20 AM, said:

The disappearance of a specie does affect the survival of their predators, and changes populations of other related and predated.

What ecological bad could come if all mosquitoes cease to exist ? Less frogs and salamanders perhaps ? Would that trigger a major disruption in ecology ?

Not a lot I gotta say if all mosquitoes cease to exist. The swamps do not associate well with the other environments anyways such as forest, plains, flood plains, hills, grassland, rivers. The cloest to swamp I can think of is jungle. Which is highly inhabitable to humans and most other mammals, unless terraformed that is.

[CharonY]

Quote

The disappearance of a sub-species can also have a profound ecological impact.

I hope you are aware that the the depicted warblers are all different species (and not that closely related at that)?

[jorge1907]

Innumerable species have disappeared and life has accomodated well enough. Loss of mosquitoes (and there are multiple species) or even the emotionally-appealing polar bear may indeed have effects not anticipated, but neither seems obviously of great impact. In any case, I'd stick to "effect" rather than the subjective "benefit".

The polar bear policy is as much political as technical (remember the weeping little girl "testifying to congress) and to this point is based more on anticipated loss of habitat rather than population data.

This post has been edited by jorge1907: 27 April 2012 - 01:29 PM

[Arete]

JohnStu, on 16 April 2012 - 04:39 AM, said:

Which is highly inhabitable to humans and most other mammals, unless terraformed that is.

Ahhh... rainforests (aka "jungles") are the most biodiverse terrestrial ecosystems on the planet. Thus an inordinate number of mammals both not only inhabit them, but are endemic to them. http://www.scienceda...70808132022.htm http://forestry.abou...est_diversi.htm

Wetlands (aka "swamps") also harbor huge levels of diversity. http://www.bgci.org/...e/article/0437/ http://www.iucn.org/...ld-Wetlands-Day They are also one of the most productive systems on the planet - playing functional roles in erosion control, flood prevention, water filtering an pollutant absorption, nurseries for commercially important marine species,etc. http://www.epa.gov/b...importance.html

I'd strongly argue than intact, functioning wetland and rainforest ecosystems are far more valuable than the "terraformed" land that usually replaces them, both in therms of conservation value and provided ecosystem services.

[Ophiolite]

jorge1907, on 27 April 2012 - 01:26 PM, said:

Loss of mosquitoes (and there are multiple species) .......may indeed have effects not anticipated, but neither seems obviously of great impact.

Do you know how many mosquitoes are eaten? Do you how many animals depend upon eating the animals that eat the mosquitoes? Have you heard of food chains? Or ecology? Do you detect sarcasm in my post? Is the Pope Catholic?

[jorge1907]

I detect sophomoric individual wthout much knowledge of the subject - or will you answer these questions for us. Please read the context offer, my sophomoric freind.

This post has been edited by jorge1907: 27 April 2012 - 05:46 PM

[Arete]

I suspect Ophiolite was suggesting that the questions posed were difficult to answer given the available evidence, and as such your conclusion was speculatory/premature. See here:

http://www.nature.co...ll/466432a.html

One of the key points fromt he article :

".... entomologist Joe Conlon, of the American Mosquito Control Association in Jacksonville, Florida. "If we eradicated them tomorrow, the ecosystems where they are active will hiccup and then get on with life. Something better or worse would take over."

Mosquitoes have occupied their niche as a blood feeding parasite for more than 100 million years. Open an ecological niche up and more often than not something else will fill it. There's no knowing if that something else might make you wish for the mosquitoes again.

[Ophiolite]

jorge1907, on 27 April 2012 - 05:41 PM, said:

I detect sophomoric individual wthout much knowledge of the subject - or will you answer these questions for us. Please read the context offer, my sophomoric freind.

No you were dealing with someone who does have some education in the topic and was dismayed by the cavalier ignorance displayed in relation to the impact in breadth and depth of any change within the biosphere. Arete has given a single example of the concerns that should rightly be voiced whenever we impose a change on the biosphere. We may get away with it, but assuming that we shall get away it is dangerous, unethical thinking.

[ewmon]

In addition to their biomass (apparently, greater than that of caribou in the north) and their place in the food web in their adult form, also consider their impact in their larval stage. And if you miss their soothing, melodic sounds , then you can find them here.

[questionposter]

Externet, on 12 December 2011 - 02:20 AM, said:

The disappearance of a specie does affect the survival of their predators, and changes populations of other related and predated.

What ecological bad could come if all mosquitoes cease to exist ? Less frogs and salamanders perhaps ? Would that trigger a major disruption in ecology ?

Personally I don't really care if I lose a few drops of blood in an entire year especial considering most of the time I don't even notice, but how much it would effect the environment would depend on how much animals and plants are dependent on mosquitoes as food. Though any actual just extinction of a species will have some effect on the environment, at least eventually, or there will be something that did/didn't happen because of it. Maybe mosquitoes can help pollinate flowers or certain plants or their existence in the water helps fish in some way or feeds them.

Also, how would you get rid of mosquitoes anyway? If you used pesticides you'd kill too many other insects in the process, if you poisoned the water you kill many fish and just make hte water unhealthy in general, if you used a virus it would eventually mutate and spread to other species, any attempt to actually eradicate an entire species would end up causing more harm than good anyway.

This post has been edited by questionposter: 30 April 2012 - 12:30 PM