Return of the Genome

[TeeDee]

A random conversation has helped create this thread - so interested in what others may think - who will side with Jeff Goldblum and who will side with Richard Attenborough , the Pro's , Cons and general vibe.

So I was just trying to remember the name of the Tasmanian Tiger/Wolf - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thylacine , and it came up if we had the ability to somehow recreate them via Gene shenanigans should we???

The last Thylacine died in 1936 which in terms of history , is pretty much yesterday.

Moves are afoot to recreate the Woolly Mammoth -https://www.popularmechanics.com/science/animals/a42708517/scientists-reincarnating-woolly-mammoth/

So I guess following this line of thought would you be in favour , if science allows us too do so , to bring back the dead species from History ?

Any caveats or restrictions?

Just interested in what peoples thoughts are.

 

[hughtrimble]

So I guess following this line of thought would you be in favour , if science allows us too do so , to bring back the dead species from History ?

Humanity as a whole does not treat extant species with sufficient respect, so that needs to change before extinct species are brought back. I fear they would become just another zoo exhibit, or fancy menu item. I can't see a species being brought back for the animals' sake; it would only be for human gain or profit. I therefore vote no.

 

[Falstaff]

Think Hugh has nailed it, there's enough issues with folk wanting to reintroduce existing species. Nature and environment are very complex issues, with lots of unforeseen outcomes.
Beavers and pine martens maybe, but predators like wolves ?- I'd like to sleep safe in my tent!

 

[HorseGuy]

We've been doing something similar with selective breeding for years and look at all the freakish breeds of cats and dogs that has created with all the health issues and discomfort those poor creatures have to endure in their own bodies. Humans trying to play god never seems to end well but it's inevitable we'll do it anyway. That's just how some people are wired.

 

[demented dale]

I am sure that there are more pressing matters we should be focusing on but I vote yes to mammoths, dinosaurs and the dodo. bring everything back. Lets make Earth the maddest planet in all the universe, xxxx

 

[Pattree]

Hmmmm. Colossal Biosciences have admitted that they haven’t created a dire wolf, just a slightly genetically modified grey wolf.

It is highly improbable that any extinct animal that has not had a living example in the last two hundred years, could be recreated (as was Dolly the sheep).

DNA analysis can recognise relationships between animals that are thousands of years extinct but that is very different from extracting a complete genome.

Should we do it? Well, it’s interesting. A privately financed attempt to return the hylacene (Australian pouched wolf) would be both an achievement and fascinating.

Maybe, if we were to lose a species that had a significant impact on its environment we might have to attempt it. I would hope that we’d recognise its decline before its extinction - a pollinating wasp, a microscopic worm, a wheat. That might be worthwhile.

 

[HorseGuy]

I am sure that there are more pressing matters we should be focusing on but I vote yes to mammoths, dinosaurs and the dodo. bring everything back. Lets make Earth the maddest planet in all the universe, xxxx

For some reason your comment brought up the image of Elon Musk riding around on an AI controlled cyborg enhanced T-rex.

 

[Tengu]

Its not going to happen.

A certain, rather dull, series of films has put the public off.

 

[TeeDee]

So do you see intervening when a species is on the brink of extinction as Man dabbling?
What about species of Rhino that are near extinction levels?

I appreciate that is a slightly different tangent - but from the comments above I feel the subject has veered off somewhat or we are conflating topics.

If we have a responsibility ( ?? maybe we don't ?? ) to act as good stewards to all species to provide viable gene pools by potential scientific intervention - how different would that be to resurrect a species IF you could??

If species are being reintroduced to areas where they no longer naturally exist is that not another sort of human intervention??

< somewhat asked as Devils advocate - which I do on occasion as I maybe on the fence >

 

[Tengu]

I, personally, think its a good idea.

But with care, and say, a limit of things that we have habitat for.

I have heard someone (the sort who was knowledgeable about the subject and should have known better) say that re-introduction programmes dont work.

The Great Bustard, here in Wiltshire, seems to have attained a self sustaining level.

And the Beavers seem pretty busy.

 

[Broch]

The problem with re-introductions is that often the whole ecosystem has usually changed so the species causes problems or fails to survive. So, for example, the pine marten (lovely animal) eats ground nesting birds eggs. The supporters say the pine martens and the birds evolved together so can coexist; those against say the ecosystem has changed from the natural evolution period and, without lynx, wolf, bear etc., the pine martens spend more time on the ground hunting birds eggs.

We have a dreadful habit of only supporting the preservation of 'pretty' or 'dramatic' species in this country because money only comes with public support. Yet there are rare species far more in need of help.

Take this rare fungus/smut - only 2 records in Wales but I see no campaign to stop its extinction

 

[Harold Godwinson]

I say yes for two really unthought out reasons, one, I believe when I die I will see woolly mammoth, it's a thought that makes me happy and weakens deaths grip... But if I could see them while alive all the better.

Two, I want our meddling idiotic species to reintroduce something that kicks our global bottom and makes all the idiots of the world's realise religious zealous and **** like that is a buy product of us having nothing real to worry about... Take us back to survival of the fittest... World will be a better place!!

 

[Falstaff]

Very understandable sentiments, although a fluffy elephant would not hold interest for long.
The USA already believes in survival of the fittest, and that they are the fittest...at the same time as apparently worrying that the white Anglo-saxons are being out-numbered...

But the clever folk think that the biggest risk is a global pandemic, and that Mother Nature will introduce that herself.

 

[Pattree]

May I drag out a hackneyed statistic: more than 99% of Earth’s organisms are extinct.

It is unlikely that our intervention will change much at the macro-fauna level. However it’s a challenge and our species seems unable to resist a project regardless of the hazards to our own or other species.

At the level of micro-organisms; well I think we’ve recently had a taste of what that could do if we resurrect/modify/recreate the “wrong” virus/microbe.

This IS relevant to “de-extincting” macro fauna as we would almost certainly need to recreate their micro biome if they were to survive.

 

[TeeDee]

The problem with re-introductions is that often the whole ecosystem has usually changed so the species causes problems or fails to survive. So, for example, the pine marten (lovely animal) eats ground nesting birds eggs. The supporters say the pine martens and the birds evolved together so can coexist; those against say the ecosystem has changed from the natural evolution period and, without lynx, wolf, bear etc., the pine martens spend more time on the ground hunting birds eggs.

We have a dreadful habit of only supporting the preservation of 'pretty' or 'dramatic' species in this country because money only comes with public support. Yet there are rare species far more in need of help.

Take this rare fungus/smut - only 2 records in Wales but I see no campaign to stop its extinction

View attachment 99605

So do you think it was right or wrong to reintroduce Wolves to the Yellowstone ecosystem?

 

[TeeDee]

Take this rare fungus/smut - only 2 records in Wales but I see no campaign to stop its extinction

View attachment 99605

Wales... So wet even Fungus don't want to live there....


Its a good point however - Seed stock and plant life is as important but we seem to be ok with the seed vault in Svalbard.

 

[Broch]

So do you think it was right or wrong to reintroduce Wolves to the Yellowstone ecosystem?

I think we (human kind) are arrogant enough to believe we know best - we don't, we repeatedly find how ignorant we were after the event.

Wolves in Yellowstone are generally considered to be a success - there have been improvements in the overall ecosystem structure. But the baseline they were working from was reasonable anyway - large predator competition, large herbivores, extensive landscape etc. However, the overall result has not achieved what was touted to be honest and, obviously, their spread outside the park has caused some problems.

 

[Pattree]

I think you already know that the reintroduction of wolves into Yellowstone was essential for the environment (Always presuming that humans had decided it “essential “ to maintain the former environment - that prior to their initial intervention.) The deer, living without predators were ripping out some tree species.

Of course another intervention in the Yellowstone environment is the local extinction of our own species - the one that lived there before the putty coloured folk arrived.

We have proven over and over again that we have no idea about ecological intervention and almost invariably make a mess of it.

Creating an aurochs would be an interesting achievement but hardly globally significant.

 

[demented dale]

So do you see intervening when a species is on the brink of extinction as Man dabbling?
What about species of Rhino that are near extinction levels?

I appreciate that is a slightly different tangent - but from the comments above I feel the subject has veered off somewhat or we are conflating topics.

If we have a responsibility ( ?? maybe we don't ?? ) to act as good stewards to all species to provide viable gene pools by potential scientific intervention - how different would that be to resurrect a species IF you could??

If species are being reintroduced to areas where they no longer naturally exist is that not another sort of human intervention??

< somewhat asked as Devils advocate -

So do you think it was right or wrong to reintroduce Wolves to the Yellowstone ecosystem?

Can I give my answer to that? There is no right and wrong. If the objective is to re wild an area and return it to ts natural state then the introduction of a top down predator is the only way or you might just want loads of tourists to pay to look at wolves. it really depends on what it is you want to achieve. DD xxx

 

[Broch]

As long as everything else that should be in that ecosystem is there as well, and that may include little tiny lichens, fungi, invertebrates and a whole load of other things that most people don't care about or that we have no idea of the value of. Just re-introducing one species is rarely a solution to anything.