What if we could see a mammoth walking across the tundra again, or a dodo roaming the forests of Mauritius? The idea of de-extinction—reviving species that have long disappeared—has captured public imagination for decades, thanks to films like Jurassic Park. But beyond fiction, how close are we really to making it happen? And, perhaps more importantly, should we even try?
These were the questions tackled at a special Royal Society British Science Week event featuring three leading thinkers in the field:
-
Professor Mike Benton, a paleontologist from the University of Bristol who reconstructs what long-extinct creatures looked like.
-
Professor Beth Shapiro, an evolutionary biologist at the University of California, Santa Cruz, and author of How to Clone a Mammoth.
-
Professor George Church, a Harvard geneticist known for pioneering work in reading and rewriting genomes.
Hosted by Lucy Cooke, the discussion took the audience on a thrilling ride through the science, ethics, and imagination surrounding the possibility of reviving extinct animals.
The Science Behind De-Extinction
The conversation opened with George Church introducing gene editing—the powerful set of technologies that allow us to write, edit, and transform DNA. From agriculture to medicine, gene editing is already shaping the world around us. Could the same methods be applied to bring back species like the mammoth or dodo?
Beth Shapiro explained the nuts and bolts of ancient DNA research. DNA degrades after death, breaking into fragments, but under the right conditions—such as in frozen permafrost—surprising amounts can be preserved. Scientists can then piece these fragments together using modern relatives (like elephants for mammoths or pigeons for dodos) as genetic templates.
The technical hurdles are enormous. While cloning techniques like those used to create Dolly the sheep work for mammals, birds remain a major challenge due to their complex reproductive biology . As Beth put it, “We don’t know how to clone a bird… yet.”
What Could We Bring Back?
Naturally, audience polls lit up with interest in iconic species: the dodo, mammoths, thylacines, and even dire wolves. Mike Benton pointed out that bringing back something as large and ecologically disruptive as a dinosaur is beyond possibility, but recently extinct species—those with surviving close relatives—are more realistic candidates .
Beth even revealed a scoop: the dodo genome has been fully sequenced by her team and is awaiting publication .
Interestingly, George Church argued that mammals may be the easiest starting point—not because they’re simple, but because the tools for working with them are more developed. Rats, often used as lab models, might even be the first de-extincted animal before the dodo gets its second chance at life .
Why Do It At All?
The conversation repeatedly returned to the crucial question: should we bring species back?
For some, the prospect is ecological. Could a cold-adapted elephant help restore the tundra and reduce methane emissions by trampling snow and reviving lost ecosystems ? Could proxies for extinct species reinvigorate habitats that have grown unbalanced in their absence ?
For others, the focus is on technology itself. De-extinction research drives new methods for biodiversity preservation, helping endangered species today. As Beth put it, “We don’t need to bring species back from extinction to capitalise on the technologies for the purposes of biodiversity” .
The Ethical Quagmire
With every promise comes peril.
-
Conservation distraction: Could de-extinction give people the false impression that extinction isn’t permanent, weakening support for protecting habitats ?
-
Commercial exploitation: Might wealthy collectors or industries farm revived animals for profit rather than ecological restoration ?
-
Biohazards: What if we accidentally revive dangerous viruses lurking in ancient genomes ?
The panel acknowledged these concerns but argued that, historically, humanity has taken risks with transformative technologies—from vaccines to cloning—and often reaped enormous benefits.
Beth summed it up: “The risks of not exploring these tools may be greater than the risks of using them. These could be tools that stop future extinctions” .
A Glimpse of the Future
George Church ended on a note of optimism. The pace of scientific progress is exponential, with costs falling millions-fold in just the last decade. The money flowing into projects like Colossal Biosciences—a company raising millions to pursue mammoth revival—signals growing public excitement and investment.
The panel’s verdict? De-extinction is less about resurrecting the past and more about safeguarding the future—leveraging cutting-edge genetics to preserve biodiversity, restore ecosystems, and rethink humanity’s role as stewards of life on Earth.
Watch the Full Conversation
This blog post only scratches the surface of a truly fascinating discussion. From the science of gene editing to the ethics of conservation, the debate captures the blend of wonder, caution, and urgency surrounding one of the most exciting scientific frontiers of our time.
đ„ Watch the full Royal Society event “Can We Bring Animals Back from Extinction?” here and join the conversation using #BritishScienceWeek.
No comments:
Post a Comment