Recreating Woolly Mammoths: Good, Bad, or Other?

[iwakar]

One of many articles available on the story: http://news.discovery.com/animals/woolly-mammoth-cloned-111205.html

Within 5 years, a woolly mammoth will likely be cloned, according to scientists who have just recovered well-preserved bone marrow in a mammoth thigh bone. Japan's Kyodo News first reported the find.

...

Grigoriev and his team, along with Japan's Kinki University, have announced that they will launch a joint research project next year aimed at recreating the enormous mammal, which went extinct around 10,000 years ago.

They've been openly talking about this since 2005 and it's looking more and more like it is going to happen. They've solicited zoos for reproductive tissue from dead elephants to fill in the missing links for the cloning process. They're even working on recreating the species' habitat.

What do you think about this? Is this progress? Is this dangerous? Is this ethical? Is this inevitable?

 

[Randomnity]

Cool! If it actually works, that is. Standard caveats with cloned animals apply of course, and then a few others from the obviously suboptimal storage of the mammoth genetic material. But would be cool.

 

[Stanton Moore]

I think they'll make a hairy franken-elephant.

 

[Halla74]

One of many articles available on the story: http://news.discovery.com/animals/woolly-mammoth-cloned-111205.html



They've been openly talking about this since 2005 and it's looking more and more like it is going to happen. They've solicited zoos for reproductive tissue from dead elephants to fill in the missing links for the cloning process. They're even working on recreating the species' habitat.

Interesting find!!!

What do you think about this?

I think scientists should focus more effort on projects that will improve human life, rather than bastardize the lives of animals long since deceased.

Yes, it would be novel as hell to see a wooly mammoth here on Earth, but it would be a crime to every animal broguht forth from that cloning project and those born out of it as progeny.

Is there a chance that having a means to "bring back" extinct life forms (animals and hopefully plants/insects/fungi too) ala DNA manipulation/cloning/etc. will identify new therapies for extant life forms? Yes. But the potential risks could very well outweigh the potential benefits just the same.

Is this progress?

Depnds on the context, right?

Progress for cloning technology? = YES
Progress for DNA research? = YES
Progress for New Therapies? = MAYBE
Progress for Mankind? = TBD
Progress for the Greater Good? = TBD

My thoughts on human nature are at times not idealistic.
This is one of those situations where I can't help but grimace when imagining its outcomes...

Is this dangerous?

Again, a context issue.

Dangerous for the keepers of the mammoths? = YES!!!
Dangerous that hybridized mammoth/pachyderm DNA results in toxic genetic mutations that endanger elephant populations? = TBD
Dangerous for humans when our DNA is egregiously altered to our own detriment? = TBD

Is this ethical?

I'm no expert on ethics.

I will say this though.

It seems damn irrepsponsible to re-create a species as massive and magnificent as the wooly mammoth, when our little industrialized world is incapable of maintaining sufficient habitat (let alone habitat without poachers, man-made dangers, etc.)

If we could create a massive mammoth park out of the bulk of unused land in a state such as Montana or North Dakota, then I'm more OK with it.
Creatures that size need sufficient terrain to flourish and prosper.
Breeding them out of the past and stuffing them in zoo exhibits is a shitty and terrible thing to do.

Is this inevitable?

YES.



-Alex

 

[Stanton Moore]

I agree with the contents of the preceding post^^

The only benefit I can see, is that we will have progressed the technology for the reproduction of extinct species, and at the rate we're going now, tigers, polar bears, and many others that I can't name, will die out. At least we could preserve such animals' DNA and use it in the future. Of course, there won't be any room anymore, so the whole exercise may be futile.
Quick! Somebody write a novel!

 

[Quinlan]

I think it's great.

Just remember blah blah something about chaos.

 

[iwakar]

I'm no expert on ethics.

I will say this though.

It seems damn irrepsponsible to re-create a species as massive and magnificent as the wooly mammoth, when our little industrialized world is incapable of maintaining sufficient habitat (let alone habitat without poachers, man-made dangers, etc.)

If we could create a massive mammoth park out of the bulk of unused land in a state such as Montana or North Dakota, then I'm more OK with it.
Creatures that size need sufficient terrain to flourish and prosper.
Breeding them out of the past and stuffing them in zoo exhibits is a shitty and terrible thing to do.

Well, the habitat is being created in a tundra in Russia. I think they're solid on the free space.

As for the ethical issue... I saw an interesting argument made by a scientist, which had not occurred to me, in favor of resurrecting the species. He maintains that unlike other species (dinosaurs and the like) that were believed to have been wiped out by mother nature, woolly mammoths are believed to have been wiped out by early humans (over-hunting), and as such --reviving their population would be a judicious restoration errr "righting a wrong," so to speak.

The reasoning is questionable, but provocative.

 

[BAJ]

I once read a Sci-fi novel which had grazing mammoths, but it was 10,000 years in the future.

I'm sort of an E.O. Wilson fan. One thing they do is determine rates of species loss. According to him we are in the midst of a great extinction similar to previous ones in the history of Earth. For example, the total loss of the dinosaurs one of the more well know extinctions. There were others. We are in one now which is being caused by us. Species are rapidly becoming extinct.

We come from apes which evolved on the African savannah. We are attempting to make the world like Africa savannah. We cut down trees and make lawns and agriculture. We are making the whole world into our habitat. This doesn't come from me. I'm paraphrasing E.O.Wilson again.

Further, exploitation of fossil fuels will end one day. It produces greenhouse effects. IMHO the most important research should be alternative energies and alternative economies.

We are doing pretty well. We just reached the 7 billion mark. We have some crisis coming within a century. Instead of Mammoths returning, I'm more for humans not going extinct. I'm also for us living in a world of biodiversity, rather than living in some kind "Mad Max Thunderdome" or "Waterworld" diminished kind of environment.

In addition, we probably need to learn how to terraform other worlds and expand into space. That is long term.

In the short term, we need new economies and full medical care for everyone on Earth. We need much, much, much better education as well. And we need to develop technologically, but in a more ecologically friendly way.

 

[BAJ]

Well, the habitat is being created in a tundra in Russia. I think they're solid on the free space.

As for the ethical issue... I saw an interesting argument made by a scientist, which had not occurred to me, in favor of resurrecting the species. He maintains that unlike other species (dinosaurs and the like) that were believed to have been wiped out by mother nature, woolly mammoths are believed to have been wiped out by early humans (over-hunting), and as such --reviving their population would be a judicious restoration errr "righting a wrong," so to speak.

The reasoning is questionable, but provocative.

I was typing when you were typing.

I think we did kill the Mammoths.

This may be a good project for Russia. I believe they already have medical care.

 

[Halla74]

Well, the habitat is being created in a tundra in Russia. I think they're solid on the free space.

That's but one aspect of this issue.
The entirety is far greater than habitat.

As for the ethical issue... I saw an interesting argument made by a scientist, which had not occurred to me, in favor of resurrecting the species. He maintains that unlike other species (dinosaurs and the like) that were believed to have been wiped out by mother nature, woolly mammoths are believed to have been wiped out by early humans (over-hunting), and as such --reviving their population would be a judicious restoration errr "righting a wrong," so to speak.

OK then, by that arguemnt, EVERY SPECIES EVER wiped out by mankind should be restored by virtue of cloning/DNA sequencing/recombinant DNA technology/etc.

It's not a judicious restoration at all, it's (partial) restoration of a SINGLE extinct species.

Furthermore, THEY WON'T BE TRUE MAMMOTHS. The DNA "gaps" are being filled in with ELEPHANT DNA.
So, any creatures borne out of this experiment are AT BEST HYBRID MAMMOTHS.

That being the case, there is NO "judicious restoration" because you did not RESOTRE the ORIGINAL SPECIES, but merely brought something close to its semblance back into the present day.

It's an idealistic and narrow minded take on figuratively righting the (countless) wrongs mankind as a species has caused on this planet is a VERY SHORT amount of time.

The reasoning is questionable, but provocative.

My vote for the reasoning discussed above is on "questionable."

I'll save a vote of "provocative" for more complete and better developed arguments.

Not hating, just sayin', IMHO, such technology is hardly considered past the goal of the experiment at hand.

"WOW! We fuckin' cloned mammoths!!!"

OK, great. Now what are you going to do with them?
Did anything BAD happen as a result of this?
Is this technology going to be mis-applied to many other areas?
More often than not, we only find out the answers to such questions WHEN IT IS TOO LATE.

 

[Halla74]

...FANTASTIC POST...

100% WIN!!!

 

[Rasofy]

Sounds like a huge waste of money. I don't see ethical issues though. As long as they don't put like 100 of those around to mess up the food chain, I'm ok with it.

 

[Halla74]

Sounds like a huge waste of money.

Agreed, totally.

I don't see ethical issues though.

What about breeding an animal that is in effect doomed from the start?
Unless they reach a certain number in population, the "mammoth herd" will eventually be negatively effected by in-breeding.
I honestly don't think their lives would be very sustainable after the "honeymoon effect" of the experiment's novelty wore off.
Just my .02.

As long as they don't put like 100 of those around to mess up the food chain, I'm ok with it.

If they are in Siberia, then only crops from that region would be effected.
To my knowledge very little of the world's food supply is currently produced in Siberia.
Maybe it will be in 100 years, but not now....

 

[Totenkindly]

"WOW! We fuckin' cloned mammoths!!!"
OK, great. Now what are you going to do with them?

I guess it depends on who "owns" them now, doesn't it?
And what the basis of ownership relies on?

* waiting for the Woolly Mammoth theme park, Woolly Mammoth hats with tusks, and the huge fluttering falling sign of 'When Woolly Mammoths Ruled the Earth!' when packs of mammoths run the globe unchecked in their wild bestial lust *

Nature will find a way.

 

[iwakar]

That's but one aspect of this issue.
The entirety is far greater than habitat.

Right. However, I was strictly responding to your comment "Creatures that size need sufficient terrain to flourish and prosper." because it did not appear that you had read the link I provided detailing the location, size, and composition of the habitat.

 

[Halla74]

Right. However, I was strictly responding to your comment "Creatures that size need sufficient terrain to flourish and prosper." because it did not appear that you had read the link I provided detailing the location, size, and composition of the habitat.

OK, I see.
I did read it, honestly I did.
I immediately thought of how every little half-assed zoo has to have a LION or TIGER and keeps such great beasts in SHITTY LITTLE EXHIBITS.
The people of the world will not go to Siberia to get helicopter tours of mammoths in their natural perma-frost terrain.
No, the people of the world want to see a mammoth AS CLOSE TO HOME AS POSSIBLE.
So, mammoth-clones will quickly be exhibited in zoos far outside thier *IDEAL* terrain of the Siberian park.
Once they are bred, they will shortly after become less and less novel, and thus more and more prone to shady treatment for the sake of greed and novelty.
Don't you think so?
Maybe?
Just a little bit?

 

[Rasofy]

What about breeding an animal that is in effect doomed from the start?

''Playing God'' isn't exactly new. We've been doing it for a while. Difference is it used to have a purpose.

Unless they reach a certain number in population, the "mammoth herd" will eventually be negatively effected by in-breeding.

I'm assuming they are going to be steriles. Sounds more likely.

I honestly don't think their lives would be very sustainable after the "honeymoon effect" of the experiment's novelty wore off.
Just my .02.

Agreed.

If they are in Siberia, then only crops from that region would be effected.
To my knowledge very little of the world's food supply is currently produced in Siberia.
Maybe it will be in 100 years, but not now....

True.

 

[Halla74]

I guess it depends on who "owns" them now, doesn't it?
And what the basis of ownership relies on?

* waiting for the Woolly Mammoth theme park, Woolly Mammoth hats with tusks, and the huge fluttering falling sign of 'When Woolly Mammoths Ruled the Earth!' when packs of mammoths run the globe unchecked in their wild bestial lust *

Nature will find a way.

*Scribbles note that Jennifer is venture capitalist for Walt Disney World Mammoth Studios, LLC...***

 

[Spamtar]

Lets keep them at the beach

 

[iwakar]

OK, I see.
I did read it, honestly I did.
I immediately thought of how every little half-assed zoo has to have a LION or TIGER and keeps such great beasts in SHITTY LITTLE EXHIBITS.
The people of the world will not go to Siberia to get helicopter tours of mammoths in their natural perma-frost terrain.
No, the people of the world want to see a mammoth AS CLOSE TO HOME AS POSSIBLE.
So, mammoth-clones will quickly be exhibited in zoos far outside thier *IDEAL* terrain of the Siberian park.
Once they are bred, they will shortly after become less and less novel, and thus more and more prone to shady treatment for the sake of greed and novelty.
Don't you think so?
Maybe?
Just a little bit?

Given the extraordinary circumstances... and especially its location and invested parties, I have no doubt those holding the bill will endeavor to turn a profit on their creation.