Introduction
The fascination with species revival
A couple of weeks ago, I discussed the sobering topic of the 6th mass extinction and its implications. Today’s post shifts focus to a more optimistic, yet controversial subject: de-extinction, the effort to bring back extinct species. In the world of science fiction, the idea of resurrecting extinct creatures has long captured our imagination—from Michael Crichton’s Jurassic Park, where dinosaurs are brought back to life, to Margaret Atwood’s MaddAddam trilogy, which explores genetic engineering and the revival of ancient beings.
Yet, these once-fictional concepts are inching closer to reality, thanks to groundbreaking advances in biotechnology. De-extinction, the science of bringing back extinct species or engineering living organisms to resemble them, stands at the forefront of contemporary scientific endeavors. These projects aim to merge the past with the future in a bold quest to rewrite the narrative of biodiversity loss.
Beyond bringing back the dead
The goals of de-extinction (aka resurrection biology, or species revivalism) extend beyond the reviving of lost species. It aims to advance scientific understanding of genetics and evolution, conserve endangered species by enhancing genetic diversity, and restore ecosystems by reintroducing ecological functions that vanished with these species. At its core, de-extinction seeks to amend the irreversible harm caused by human activities. It offers a potential tool in the broader strategy of ecological conservation.
The role of cutting-edge technology in de-extinciton
Fueling these endeavors are innovative technologies such as CRISPR-Cas9 gene editing, cloning, and advanced reproductive techniques. These technologies could enable the direct resurrection of species for which genetic material is available. Alternatively, scientists aim to modify the genomes of living species to resemble their extinct counterparts. The complexity and novelty of these techniques underscore the pioneering nature of de-extinction research.
A collaborative endeavor
Crucial in the quest for de-extinction is the collaboration between academic labs, private companies, and conservation organizations. Together, these entities explore the limits of current technology, confront ethical and ecological dilemmas, and envision a future where de-extinction could redefine humanity’s relationship with nature. De-extinction research promises to restore lost biodiversity and challenges us to reconsider our stewardship of the natural world.
The Science Behind De-Extinction
A fusion of disciplines
The science behind de-extinction is a sophisticated confluence of genetics, conservation biology, and biotechnology. Central to these endeavors are four primary techniques: cloning, genetic engineering, selective breeding, and total genome synthesis. Each offers unique contributions to the overarching aim of de-extinction.
de-extinction through cloning: the initial steps
Cloning is often considered the cornerstone of de-extinction methods. It aims to produce a genetically identical replica of the extinct species from preserved cells or DNA. Cloning gained significant attention following the successful cloning of Dolly the sheep in 1996. This accomplishment set a precedent for similar attempts with species like the woolly mammoth and the Pyrenean ibex. Despite its promise, cloning faces notable challenges. These include the degradation of ancient DNA and the necessity for closely related species to serve as surrogate hosts.
De-extinction through total genome synthesis: a future concept
Total genome synthesis is the most speculative and futuristic of the de-extinction methods. It proposes creating entire genomes of extinct species from the ground up. While still only theoretical, this approach would enable the revival of species for which no viable DNA samples exist, using sequenced data from preserved specimens or inferred from related species.
Total genome synthesis seems to provide a means of producing exact replicas of species that have long vanished. However, even when this technique is mastered, perfect reconstruction of the genome from an extinct species may remain elusive. DNA degradation over time impedes the precise sequence determination of ancient genomes. This would necessitate the use of living species’ genomes as scaffolds for ancient DNA fragments. As a result, even with total genome synthesis, de-extinct species will likely differ genetically from their historical counterparts.
De-extinction through genetic engineering: precision and potential
Given the limitations of producing an accurate genome of an extinct species, de-extinction efforts might best focus on replicating specific genotype-to-phenotype pathways rather than attempting to synthesize genomes from scratch. This process can be thought of as de-extinction through genetic engineering. The idea is to introduce phenotypes from extinct species into current ones, leveraging CRISPR-Cas9 and similar gene-editing technologies for precision.
Such tools enable scientists to insert genes or alter DNA sequences. For example, this could potentially allow elephants to acquire wooly mammoth characteristics conducive to Arctic survival. Genetic engineering’s ambition highlights its pivotal role in the de-extinction narrative, offering a blend of restoration and innovation. This targeted approach acknowledges the inherent limitations of current technology and the complex interplay between genotype, phenotype, and environment in resurrecting extinct species.
De-extinction through back breeding: recapturing lost traits
Finally, back breeding is the most achievable, though least precise method of species resurrection. It involves the selective breeding of living species for ancestral characteristics across multiple generations. This strategy aims to gradually enhance these characters until the offspring closely resemble the extinct species. Back breeding is central to projects aiming to recreate the phenotypes of animals like the aurochs (wild ancestor of domestic cattle) and the quagga (a plains zebra subspecies) through their present-day relatives, showcasing its utility in efforts to recover lost phenotypic diversity.
Moving forward
The advancement of these technologies, is propelling the concept of de-extinction from the realm of fantasy towards the cusp of reality. It heralds not only the potential return of extinct species but also marks a new chapter in conservation and our understanding of life’s enduring adaptability.
Bringing Back the Woolly Mammoth
The mammoth de-extinction endeavor
De-extinction projects span a range of species, each with its unique history, challenges, and scientific intrigue. The most high profile of these projects is an attempt to bring back the woolly mammoth. This endeavor not only aims to revive aspects of an extinct species but also seeks to address contemporary ecological challenges, such as climate change, by restoring lost Arctic ecosystems.
Collaborative scientific efforts
This initiative is a collaborative endeavor between industrial and academic labs. On the industrial side, Colossal Laboratories, co-founded by tech entrepreneur Ben Lamm and renowned geneticist George Church, aims to create a mammoth-elephant hybrid by integrating DNA sequences responsible for cold resistance and other mammoth traits into the genome of the Asian elephant.
At Harvard University, the Woolly Mammoth Revival Team, also led by Dr. George Church, focuses on the genetic engineering aspects necessary for de-extinction. Dr. Church’s work in developing precise gene-editing technologies has been pivotal, not only in advancing the woolly mammoth project but also influencing a wide range of applications in medicine and biology. His contributions underscore the scientific feasibility of de-extinction and its potential to restore lost ecosystems.
Breakthroughs and challenges
In a recent breakthrough, documented in a biorXiv preprint, Colossal Biosciences successfully transformed Asian elephant skin cells into induced pluripotent stem cells. This was achieved by adopting successful techniques used for other species. These cells could enlighten elephant biology, guide the generation of stem cells for other endangered species, be used to clone an Asian elephant, and in theory be genetically manipulated to resurrect a mammoth.
While this represents a major milestone, in mammoth de-extinction many challenges remain. Technical hurdles to be overcome include developing methods for the extensive amounts of genome editing required, successful elephant cloning techniques, and implementing their plan of bringing a mammoth-elephant hybrid to term in a surrogate African elephant mother. Not to mention the ethical implications of creating and releasing hybrid animals into the wild.
Successes in the De-extinction Movement
The pyrenean ibex: a Milestone attempt at de-extinction
Although as of yet there are no truly de-extincted species, there have been some partial successes. One involved the attempted de-extinction of the Pyrenean ibex, a subspecies of the Iberian ibex that inhabited the Iberian Peninsula. This species was once plentiful but went extinct from over-hunting in the 19th and 20th centuries. In an effort to resurrect this subspecies, scientists transferred nuclei from cells of the last living individual into domestic goat egg cells. Despite impregnating 208 goats, only one pregnancy came to term. The cloned ibex, born in 2003 with a lung defect, lived for a mere seven minutes. Despite its brief life, the birth marked a significant accomplishment in de-extinction efforts.
The gastric-brooding frog
Another partial success involved the gastric-brooding frog. This unique frog, extinct since 1983, was remarkable in giving birth through its mouth. In this case, Australian scientists generated a gastric-brooding frog embryo using 40-year-old preserved tissue. To accomplish the resurrection, researchers used a procedure known as somatic cell nuclear transplantation. It involved replacing nuclei from egg cells of the great barred frog with those of the gastric brooding frog. Although the resulting embryos didn’t grow into tadpoles, this work shows potential for bringing back the extinct species.
Back breeding de-extinction projects: aurochs and quaggas
Other partial successes involve back breeding. One such case involves the ancestor of domestic cattle known as the auroch. This species was once widespread across Eurasia and is featured in European cave paintings. Nevertheless, it became extinct in 1627 in Poland due to overhunting. Its genetic legacy persists in modern cattle, however, prompting attempts to resurrect it through selective breeding. An early effort produced the Heck cattle, a breed that has been introduced to nature preserves across Europe. This breed does not closely resemble the auroch, however.
A current effort known as the Tauros Programme is an international endeavor to bring back the breed. its aim is to accurately recreate the aurochs by starting with primitive cattle breeds. The Uruz Project, initiated by the True Nature Foundation, represents an alternative effort to recreate the aurochs. It employs a more efficient breeding strategy that incorporates genome editing. These goal of these initiatives is to “rewild” the ecosystems where aurochs once lived through the introduction of these similar breeds.
Possibly the most exciting attempt at “de-extinction by back breeding”, however, involves a zebra cousin known as the quagga. The so-called Quagga Project, aims at recreating the quagga’s appearance through selective breeding of Burchell’s zebras. This initiative was started by Reinhold Rau in 1987. Its goal is not to produce genetically identical quaggas but to mimic their distinctive brown body and reduced striping. In this case, significant progress has been made. Within three generations, many zebras closely approximate the quagga’s tan body color and striping pattern. This effort demonstrates promising strides towards restoring the quagga phenotype.
Charting the path forward
These endeavors highlight the gradual but promising progress in the de-extinction movement. While true de-extinction has yet to be realized, these partial successes offer insights into the challenges and potential of using biotechnology to revive extinct species and restore biodiversity.
Additional De-Extinction Projects
Other species proposed for de-extinction abound, with greater or lesser prospects. They include the Irish elk, the cave lion, the tarpan, the woolly rhinoceros, the cave bear, the moa, and the elephant bird. We will focus here on some of the more fleshed out projects (so to speak!)
Revive & Restore’s de-extinction projects: pioneering conservation through biotechnology
Bridging conservation and biotechnology
Revive & Restore is an innovative organization that blends conservation and biotechnology to tackle the pressing issue of species extinction. At its core, Revive & Restore is dedicated to leveraging the latest advancements in genetic science to preserve and restore endangered and extinct species. This includes a wide array of strategies, from genetic rescue and habitat restoration to developing pioneering techniques for the de-extinction of species that have disappeared.
Through collaborations with scientists, conservationists, and technologists, Revive & Restore aims both to bring back lost species and to enhance the genetic diversity and resilience of currently endangered ones. Their work represents a bold step forward in the conservation field, showcasing the potential to repair some of the ecological damage caused by human activity and to prevent future losses by integrating cutting-edge science with traditional conservation methods.
The passenger pigeon de-extinction project
Revive & Restore is involved in a number of de-extinction and genetic rescue projects. One of these is the task of reviving the passenger pigeon, once one of North America’s most abundant birds. As they state on their website “Passenger Pigeon isn’t simply a model species; it quite possibly is the most important species for the future of conserving the woodland biodiversity of the eastern United States.”
The organization plans to employ genetic engineering techniques akin to those proposed for resurrecting the wooly mammoth by Colossal Biosciences. The strategy involves starting with the band-tailed pigeon, a species closely related to the passenger pigeon. By comparing the genetic material and phenotypes of both species, they aim to genetically modify the band-tailed pigeon to exhibit passenger pigeon characteristics. This approach highlights the challenge of using genetic engineering to restore biodiversity and replicate specific behaviors and ecological roles.
Reviving the heath hen
Another de-extinction project Revive & Restore is undertaking is to revive the heath hen. This bird was once common in the eastern United States, but became extinct in 1932. In this case, they will integrate DNA sequences specific to the heath hen into the genome of its relative, the prairie chicken.
Beyond de-extinction: preserving critically endangered species
Revive & Restore’s vision goes beyond the scope of de-extinction, however. They argue that genetic rescue should be used to prevent extinction as well as reverse it. They plan to integrate their genetic procedues into broader conservation efforts of critically endangered species.
One of their notable achievements in this regard includes the successful cloning of a black-footed ferret on December 10, 2020, marking the first cloning of an endangered species in the U.S. This ferret, cloned from a specimen cryopreserved in 1988, could enhance the genetic diversity of its species, significantly descended from only seven ancestors. This approach not only aids in genetic diversity but also paves the way for using biotechnology to combat diseases threatening the ferrets.
Similarly, their work with Przewalski’s horse, the only remaining truly wild horse species, involved cloning the first horse of its kind from cells stored since 1980, introducing vital genetic variation back into a population founded by just 12 individuals. The birth of cloned foals Kurt in 2020 and Ollie in 2023 highlights the potential of cloning in conservation.
Revive & Restore’s other initiatives include developing genetic technologies for bird conservation, creating synthetic alternatives to horseshoe crab blood, supporting coral reef biotechnology, and biobanking DNA from endangered species, demonstrating the organization’s broader commitment to leveraging genetics in conservation.
The expanding scope of Colossal Biosciences
Broadening de-extinction horizons beyond the mammoth
While initially focused solely on the mammoth, Colossal Biosciences has broadened its de-extinction efforts to include the thylacine and the dodo.
The thylacine de-extinction project
The Tasmanian tiger, or thylacine, was a carnivorous marsupial native to the Australian mainland, Tasmania, and New Guinea, that went extinct in the 20th century. The thylacine’s unique ecological role and the mystery surrounding its behavior make it a compelling candidate for de-extinction.
The reintroduction of the thylacine, an apex predator, could significantly benefit the ecosystems it once roamed. Apex predators like the thylacine are crucial for maintaining the health of their environments, and their absence can lead to negative cascading effects throughout the food chain, affecting various species and ecological systems.
Historically, large apex predators were common worldwide for millions of years. However, their decline, largely due to human impact, has been one of our most detrimental effects on natural ecosystems. Studies have shown that the loss of these predators has widespread negative consequences across marine, terrestrial, and freshwater environments globally.
For this project, Colossal Biosciences has joined forces with The University of Melbourne’s Thylacine Integrated Genetic Restoration Research lab (TIGRR, ha!) run by Andrew Pask. The thylacine genome was sequenced from a preserved specimen and reconstructed using the genome of the Tasmanian devil as a reference. In this case “de-extinction” will be conducted through the genome modification of the fat-tailed dunnart, one of the thylacine’s nearest living relatives.
Reviving the dodo
As noted on the Colossal website, in the dodo extinction story, “the only stupid animals are humans.” Before human interference, the flightless dodo bird sustained its population with just one egg per year, thanks to the lack of natural predators on Mauritius. As a result, however, it was vulnerable to invasive species brought by humans, such as rats, goats, pigs, deer, and macaques, which preyed on its eggs, leading to the dodo’s extinction around 1690.
Beth Shapiro, CSO of Colossal, teamed up with Tom Gilbert and John Fjeldså from the University of Copenhagen to extract DNA from a dodo skull and sequence the its genome, achieving about 50X coverage. Host cells/genomes to carry out the de-extinction will come from the Dodo’s closest living relative, the nicobar pigeon.
While mammoth and thylacine de-extinction projects are touted for their potential ecological benefits, the purpose of reviving the dodo is less clear, given its habitat’s issues with invasive species. The dodo project seems driven more by its symbolic value, aiming to showcase biotechnology’s potential to counter extinction with an iconic example. Despite the ethical debates, the prospect of seeing a living dodo captures the imagination, highlighting the intrigue at the intersection of conservation and technology.
Supporting endangered species
Like Revive & Restore, Colossal is extending its de-extinction techniques to save critically endangered species. They are collaborating with BioRescue to clone the northern white rhinoceros, aiming to increase genetic diversity in the surviving population through gene editing.
Dinochickens???
The genesis of the dinochicken project
And what about the revival of more ancient species, say…a dinosaur? Renouned paleontologist Jack Horner‘s “chickenosaurus” or “dinochicken“project is a fascinating endeavor within the field of evolutionary biology and genetic engineering. The approach he proposes is somewhat different from other de-extinction projects. His aim iis to genetically engineer a chicken to express dormant ancestral traits of theropod dinosaurs. Appropriately, Horner served as inspiration for lead character Dr. Alan Grant in the Jurassic Park films. Moreover, he was technical advisor for the first five Jurassic Park films and made a cameo appearance in Jurassic World.
The dinochicken project is based on the concept that birds are modern-day descendants of dinosaurs, specifically theropods, the group that includes the T. rex and velociraptor. In fact, birds are not just dinosaur relatives, they are actually dinosaurs. Therefore, this undertaking seeks to use a modern dinosaur to restore the phenotype of ancient ones!
Horner’s project focuses on activating ancient DNA sequences that were silenced in chickens to bring out physical characteristics reminiscent of their dinosaur ancestors. These include teeth, long tails, and arms instead of wings. This approach doesn’t actually involve bringing specific dinosaur species back to life. Rather, it seeks to demonstrate how deeply the characteristics of extinct theropods are embedded within the genome of modern birds.
The Dino-Chicken project serves multiple purposes. It is a proof of concept for evolutionary biology, a test of our understanding of genetics and developmental biology, and a means of sparking public interest and discussion about the possibilities of genetic manipulation. Moreover, it highlights the incredible path taken by life on Earth and the interconnectedness of species through deep time.
Mounting challenges
The Dinochicken project, while conceptually thrilling, confronts significant practical obstacles. The project kicked off with high hopes in 2014, buoyed by funding from George Lucas and Jack Horner’s optimistic estimate of completion within 10 years for under $5 million, Yet, a decade later, there has been little progress. Moreover, indications are that the initial funding has been depleted, as the team has been seeking additional funds through a GoFundMe campaign. Unfortunately, this effort has managed to secure less than $10,000, significantly underachieving against a goal of $300,000. These shortfalls highlight the daunting challenges inherent in such ambitious endeavors.
The Aldabra Rail: a Case of “Natural De-extinction”
The Aldabra rail, a flightless bird from Aldabra Island, exemplifies nature’s own de-extinction process. The island was submerged around 136,000 to 118,000 years ago, eradicating the original rail population. However, the species surprisingly recolonized the island and evolved flightlessness anew. This suggests a natural reboot of the species, marking an extraordinary case of a species effectively self resurrecting after extinction.
The Aldabra rail is a prime example of a species appearing to “reincarnate” through convergent evolution, mirroring the natural process of filling ecological niches left by extinct species. Such organisms have been given the name “Elvis taxon” by Erwin and Droser in 1993, The concept of Elvis taxa is more common among fossil invertebrates. However, the Aldabra rail stands out as a clear vertebrate demonstration of this phenomenon.
This instance of natural de-extinction underscores the ability of nature to self-correct and fill ecological voids with new, yet strikingly similar species. Moreover, it shows that beyond these human efforts at ecological de-extinction, nature continuously works towards its own balance. In some cases this may involve reintroducing functionally comparable species through evolutionary processes.
Weighing the Implications of De-extinction
Potential benefits for ecosystems, genetic diversity and endangered species
The concept of de-extinction and its application through modern biotechnologies has positive implications for conservation and biodiversity. As we discussed for the thylacine and wooly mammoth, de-extinction could complement traditional conservation efforts by restoring species that have been lost to history, thereby contributing to the richness of biodiversity and the resilience of ecosystems. Such efforts underscore the potential of de-extinction technologies not only to bring back extinct species but also to leverage their ecological roles for environmental benefits.
Moreover, the genetic technologies developed for de-extinction projects offer valuable tools for enhancing the genetic diversity of endangered species. By introducing genetic variability that has been lost due to population bottlenecks and habitat fragmentation, these technologies can help increase the resilience of species facing the threat of extinction, thereby supporting broader biodiversity conservation goals.
Practical and Ethical Considerations
However, the pursuit of de-extinction also raises concerns about resource allocation and the potential to detract from conservation efforts aimed at species currently at risk. The considerable financial and scientific resources required for de-extinction could be argued to be better spent on protecting the habitats of endangered species and preventing further losses of biodiversity. There is also the ethical question of whether humanity has the right to bring back species that it played a role in extinguishing, and the ecological question of whether reintroduced species would find suitable habitats and ecological niches in today’s changed environments.
Furthermore, the introduction of de-extinct species into contemporary ecosystems carries uncertainties regarding their interactions with existing species and the potential for unintended consequences. These ecosystems have continued to evolve in the absence of the extinct species, and reintroductions could disrupt current balances, illustrating the complexity of using de-extinction as a tool for ecological restoration.
Furthermore, the ethical debate extends to the welfare of the de-extinct species themselves, particularly in cases where the animals might not have a suitable habitat to return to, leading to a life in captivity or in environments where they cannot thrive. This brings into question the balance between the allure of de-extinction and the fundamental goals of conservation, which aim to protect ecosystems and ensure the survival of species in their natural habitats.
The Future of De-extinction
Technological advances and ethical questions
The future of de-extinction is poised at the intersection of rapid technological advancements, evolving ethical considerations, and the increasing importance of public engagement, funding, and regulatory oversight. As the science behind de-extinction progresses, with breakthroughs in genetic engineering, synthetic biology, and reproductive technologies, the potential to bring back extinct species or recreate their genetic traits becomes more tangible. However, these technological advancements also raise ethical questions, necessitating a careful examination of the reasons for pursuing de-extinction, the potential ecological impacts, and the welfare of de-extinct species.
The role of public engagement and funding
Public engagement will play an important role in shaping the trajectory of de-extinction efforts. As the public becomes more aware of the possibilities and pitfalls of de-extinction, their support, skepticism, and curiosity can influence government policy, funding priorities and the direction of research. Crowdfunding campaigns, philanthropic investments, and government grants are becoming vital sources of funding for de-extinction projects, highlighting the diverse ways in which these endeavors are financed. This mix of funding sources underscores the importance of transparent communication about the goals, methods, and implications of de-extinction research to build trust and foster informed support.
Evolving regulatory frameworks
Regulatory frameworks are also evolving in response to the challenges posed by de-extinction. As projects move closer to the possibility of reintroducing species into the wild, legal and regulatory guidelines will need to address a range of issues, from environmental risk assessments to the legal status of de-extinct species and their habitats. These frameworks will be essential in ensuring that de-extinction efforts are conducted responsibly, with due consideration for ecological balance, species welfare, and the interests of local communities.
Looking ahead: The integration of science, ethics, and society
The future trajectory of de-extinction will likely be shaped by a combination of scientific breakthroughs, ethical deliberations, public engagement, and regulatory developments. The integration of these factors will determine not only the feasibility of bringing extinct species back to life but also the broader implications of such endeavors for conservation, biodiversity, and human society. As we navigate these uncharted waters, the collective input from scientists, ethicists, policymakers, and the public will be crucial in guiding the responsible exploration of de-extinction’s potential contribution to a richer, more diverse planet. Be sure to visit our website Bleeding Edge Biology for more bleeding-edge topics!
References and Further Reading
For those intrigued by the possibilities of de-extinction, the intersection of conservation genetics, and the pioneering work of the entities and individuals mentioned throughout this post, here is a curated list of resources to deepen your understanding and fuel your curiosity:
Books
1. “How to Clone a Mammoth: The Science of De-Extinction” by Beth Shapiro – Princeton University Press, 2015. Shapiro, an expert in ancient DNA, delves into the technical and ecological challenges of de-extinction.
2. “The Re-Origin of Species: A Second Chance for Extinct Animals” by Torill Kornfeldt – Scribe Publications, 2018. Kornfeldt offers insights from scientists around the globe working to bring back extinct species, discussing their motivations and the implications of their work.
3. “De-extinction: The Science of Bringing Lost Species Back to Life” by Rebecca E. Hirsch – Twenty-First Century Books, 2017. Aimed at younger readers, this book introduces the concept of de-extinction, highlighting both its potential benefits and challenges.
4. “How to Build a Dinosaur” by Jack Horner – Penguin Publishing Group 2010. This book explores the potential of evolutionary biology to reverse evolution, aiming to resurrect the prehistoric past by leveraging the dinosaur genetic code found in modern birds like chickens.
5. “The Sixth Extinction: An Unnatural History” by Elizabeth Kolbert – Henry Holt and Co., 2014. Kolbert’s Pulitzer Prize-winning work provides crucial context on the ongoing mass extinction and underscores the urgency of conservation efforts.
Websites
1. The Long Now Foundation’s Revive & Restore Project Page – The Long Now Foundation supports Revive & Restore, providing a platform for discussions and updates on conservation and de-extinction efforts.
2. Revive & Restore’s Official Website – Stay updated on the latest projects and advancements from Revive & Restore, a key organization in the de-extinction field, through their website.
3. Colossal Biosciences’ Official Website – For the latest updates on projects like the woolly mammoth and thylacine de-extinction, visit Colossal Biosciences’ website.
Video
1. TED Talks on De-Extinction. A collection of TED Talks featuring scientists and researchers discussing the technology, ethics, and future of de-extinction.
2. De-Extinction: Resurrecting the Past Isaac Arthur (2018) – Explains some of the problems of de-extinction
3. Colossal’s De-Extinction Mission is Just Beginning: A Conversation with Ben Lamm SXSW 2023. Ben Lamm and Co-founder of Colossal discuss the future of de-extinction. They explore why it’s not just a big business, but vital work in the face of a changing climate.
These resources represent a starting point for anyone interested in the scientific, ethical, and practical aspects of de-extinction. Whether you’re a student, educator, researcher, or simply a curious mind, delving into these materials will provide a comprehensive overview of where we stand today, and the potential directions for the future of bringing extinct species back to life.
Your Thoughts?
It’s crucial that we navigate de-extinction armed with curiosity, open-mindedness, and a sense of responsibility. How do you feel about the potential to bring back extinct species? What considerations weigh heaviest on your mind? I invite you to share your thoughts, concerns, and hopes in the comments below or on social media.
