Bringing Giant Tortoises Back From Extinction

fizzysister writes "The BBC reports that scientists at Yale are intending to resurrect an extinct species of Galapagos tortoise, the Geochelone elephantopus. Unfortunately, not in the style of Jurassic Park, so no tortoise-based theme parks just yet. They will, however, be using genetic profiling of living tortoises that carry some of the elephantopus genes, to select the most appropriate of these to mate and thus eventually (after a century or more) create a generation of 'pure' Geochelone elephantopus individuals."

Comments

useful study animal

[damn_registrars]

Can someone explain the value of these giant tortioses in objective, real terms?

There are a few things that would be useful about bringing back an extinct tortoise.

For one, it allows the animal to reclaim its place in the ecosystem. I don't have information on what caused the extinction of this tortoise, but I know of certain mammals that are fond of killing slow-moving things. If the tortoise went extinct not by natural selection, then it may have left a void in its natural ecosystem that could have downstream effects on stability of the same.

Though perhaps more tangible is that some of these tortoises could live 150+ years. If we want to study aging and what mechanisms could prolong a healthy life, then something that lives extraordinarily long would be quite valuable. Of course we could study old trees, but we have more in common with other vertebrates.

Re:useful study animal

[timster]

What is behind your assumption that extinction by natural selection (as opposed, I assume, to human activity) is better for an ecosystem? Isn't evidence of ecological catastrophes of all sizes common in the fossil record?

Re:useful study animal

[damn_registrars]

What is behind your assumption that extinction by natural selection (as opposed, I assume, to human activity) is better for an ecosystem?

Generally natural selection takes out a species when it either no longer fills is niche in the ecosystem, or the niche no longer exists. If external forces (such as humans) knock a species out of existence, then the ecosystem is out of balance due to the loss of that species.

Isn't evidence of ecological catastrophes of all sizes common in the fossil record?

Ecological catastrophes are a good question. However, when something like that happens (be it asteroids, volcanoes, plate tectonics, etc), there are usually a very large number of species eliminated from an area at once. Yes, the ecosystem will come back, but it generally re-emerge with much different flora and fauna than what it had prior.

Catastrophes happen in the record, yes. But individual extinctions of species due to non-natural events are of a different scale and could have dramatic effects on a delicate, semi-isolated ecosystem such as the Galapagos.

Re:useful study animal

[Endo13]

If the tortoise went extinct not by natural selection, then it may have left a void in its natural ecosystem that could have downstream effects on stability of the same.

And how else would they go extinct? Humans are as much a part of natural selection as anything else. The very definition of natural selection dictates that some species will become extinct while others (humans for example) become obscenely populous.

Re:useful study animal

[damn_registrars]

And how else would they go extinct?

Going extinct because something enjoys killing you is dramatically different than going extinct because you are not able to compete effectively for resources.

The giant tortoises seemed to be doing pretty well for resources in their environment, until a new animal showed up that enjoyed killing them.

Humans are as much a part of natural selection as anything else

Couldn't that reasoning be used to justify humans driving any animal to extinction that they don't like? What if I have something against timberwolves? Could I start killing them on sight and claim natural selection?