• Todd Bonzalez@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    30
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    They have actually exhaustively studied this, and they offer zero benefit, they aren’t even a good food source for any known animal.

    The risks associated with mosquito eradication are extremely low.

    That’s like the only bug that’s like that. The rest are crazy important to their ecosystems.

    • Rooskie91@discuss.online
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      18
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      3 months ago

      This is just plain false. Them and their eggs are an important food source for all kinds of aquatic animals and birds. Also, their larva remove contamins for water.

      Even logically this doesn’t make sense. What’s more likely: every insect is extremely important except one, or humans are wrong (as we so often are) about one species of insect?

      • psud@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        The specific mosquito species that carries malaria isn’t all that important. Other mosquitos will occupy it’s niches. That’s the mosquito people want to eradicate

    • Gloomy
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      Sounds like massive human bias at play. Any source?

      • Shard@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        3 months ago

        They don’t feed exclusively on mosquito larvae/eggs. They can easily switch to another source.

        • tiredofsametab@fedia.io
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          3 months ago

          I wonder how much has been studied about the ability of the other species to proliferate enough to make up and not be eaten out of existence. The mosquitos existing may not be the limiting factor on the population size of other species.