What is de-extinction?
Hypothetically speaking—assuming one accepts a number of key genetic arguments and assumptions—the human species is fully capable of bringing back the woolly mammoth, the passenger pigeon, and the Pyrenean ibex. Not to mention a goliath’s handful of other creatures that went extinct due to a number of environmental, sociocultural (human-based) reasons.
De-extinction is the process, through cloning or selective breeding, by which the human species can fix the mistakes of their interventionist and natural past through the revival of creatures of all shapes and sizes who have long been wiped off the face of our planet.
How does de-extinction work?
As mentioned, there are two popular schools of thought regarding the precise mechanism that could be used to resurrect an extinct creature.
The less problematic, and slower, method is selective breeding. Over the course of its existence, the human species has taken to selecting desirable qualities in animals and, over time, breeding out undesirable qualities. Artificial selection is how we ended up with so many different breeds of dogs, as well as the precise breeds of cow, pig, and chicken that contribute to the feeding of seven billion people.
Selective breeding, of course, is a slow process that is affected by environmental conditions just as much as it’s affected by an animal’s innate characteristics. How, for instance, would one go about selectively breeding a woolly mammoth—a massive animal covered in fur to protect against harsh winter cold—by using Asian or African elephants—massive animals not covered in fur so as to survive in relatively warm climates—as templates?
Cloning, then, is the fastest—alongside being more scientifically and ethically complicated—method to bring back animals from the dead. To clone an animal, outside the realm of future or science fiction, one must take genetic information from two different animals, initiate meiosis, insert the now fertilized cells into a donor, and let the natural reproductive process take place.
The problem with modern cloning, however, is the same problem that has plagued the field since its inception. It’s incredibly difficult to successfully clone a large organism, and even when tests do succeed, the cloned organism has a substantially shorter lifespan than a naturally conceived organism.
Why is de-extinction important?
There exists a poster that typically begins to circulate around January, when students begin applying for or accepting admissions into high schools, colleges, and universities. This poster—and its infinite variations—features text: “Science can tell you how to clone a tyrannosaurus rex—Humanities can tell you why this might be a bad idea.”
Contrary to popular belief, scientists are not entirely devoid or sentiment or logic, and the debate over de-extinction has raged on with three distinct camps. The first argues that de-extinction is inappropriate because of quality of life concerns, etc. The second asserts that de-extinction is appropriate because it rectifies human mistakes, while providing an opportunity to learn from the animals of our past. Lastly, the camp believes that de-extinction is a bad idea, but wouldn’t it be cool if we could revive a woolly mammoth?
Opponents of de-extinction argue that it will give humanity an excuse to continue senselessly eviscerating every ecosystem on Earth. Why worry about the Sumatran tiger, if one can simply revive the organism at a later date? Proponents suggest that de-extinction would lead to numerous breakthroughs in reproductive and evolutionary science. Those who suggest that studying de-extinction would be quite interesting, but ultimately not worth the trouble it would definitely cause, continue to voice their soft opinions on message boards and newspaper columns alike.
What is the future of de-extinction?
Regardless of the arguments for and against de-extinction, a single problem remains: we haven’t figured out how to do it yet. Cloning and selective breeding are imperfect processes, not to mention selective breeding takes too long.
Furthermore, any clones of an extinct species that existed past a certain date most likely cannot be true versions of the species. The current hypothesis regarding a woolly mammoth suggests that scientists could clone a mammoth using an elephant as a surrogate—simply because there are no living mammoths to clone. The offspring of such a process would be half-elephant-half-mammoth—not technically a woolly mammoth clone.
However, in preparation for the eventual annihilation of every undomesticated species on the planet, the human species has begun harvesting genetic information from existing creatures, in order to build a DNA portfolio from which future humans will be able to, potentially, resurrect animals from the grave. The San Diego Zoo, for instance, maintains such a DNA collection.
As always, I’m excited for the truly absurd possibilities.