Slashdot Mirror
Resurrecting the Mighty Mammoth, Cheaply
somanyrobots writes with an interesting followup in the New York Times to the earlier-reported substantial reconstruction of the woolly mammoth genome: "Scientists are talking for the first time about the old idea of resurrecting extinct species as if this staple of science fiction is a realistic possibility, saying that a living mammoth could perhaps be regenerated for as little as $10 million. The same technology could be applied to any other extinct species from which one can obtain hair, horn, hooves, fur or feathers, and which went extinct within the last 60,000 years, the effective age limit for DNA." (The Washington Post article linked from the earlier post was much more skeptical, calling such an attempt "still firmly the domain of science fiction." The New York Times article, while describing the process in similar terms, also calls attention to recent advances in sequencing DNA, as well as recoding DNA for cloning.)
We may well need an army of Mammoths to fight the mutant tool-equipped space spiders from that other earlier story. $10 million is a small price to pay to save humanity from the giant space webs.
is, from the same story, relegated to second interest, for some reason, the idea of resurrecting a neanderthal, the same way as the woolly mammoth. using chimpanzee as the starting cell lineage rather than human, for ethical considerations of course
but this guy won't be dumb. somebody will have to explain to him he's not the last of his kind... he is the 50,000 year old cloned reconstruction of his kind
weird, lonely, and possible on our lifetime
very cool, very freaky
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
It's far from certain that mammoth died out simply from climate change. Take a look at this link: http://packrat.aml.arizona.edu/Journal/v37n1/vartanyan.html Mammoth survived thousands of years beyond what most people think, into historic times (1700 b.c) It was a place that man didn't reach (hmmm...coincidence?), but Wrangel Island was too small to support a large population of them. It seems that wherever man went, large animals encountered "climate change". I don't doubt that climate was an issue, but nor do I doubt that man was either.
His post assumes that we wouldn't try to establish a breeding population. If we plan on bringing back an extinct species, what moral obligation do we have to prevent its extinction when the only specimen dies? Or is it okay, since our world has moved on since the last mammoth lived? If scientists make one, should we make more and restore a population? Would today's world be a good environment for a wild population or not? Would our creations be forever destined to live in zoos?
If we create a breeding population, how do we ensure genetic diversity? I am not a bioengineer, and have no way of knowing if diversity is already included in their method (taking a living elephant's skin cell and slowly reshuffling the DNA from elephant to mammoth) by simply using cells from different donor elephants for making each new mammoth. I guess that would depend on how reshuffled the DNA gets in the process of injecting new sequences.
I prefer rogues to imbeciles because they sometimes take a rest.
Actually the price should be at least double that, because if they really want to ressurect the species, they need two, a male and a female.
Man just lived and existed, there was no idyllic eden like harmony. change occurs constantly, that ole evolution thing. Where man goes or is, change happens. Same as where these mammoths went (five tons of pachyderm beef can cause some localized disruption, just like elephants today cause deserts eventually by tearing down trees) We fought and killed and caused whoops forest fires and so on, made creeks run dirty from digging clams and mussels on the banks, caused erosion from harvesting tubers, changed the balance of the local flora by starting agriculture, took food from other animals by that same reason, ate the other animals, skinned critters to make our clothes and shelters, all of that stuff. If you mean just living feral as being in harmony, you still can, it's quite possible, just back away from the keyboard and go for it, I did it for several years, was quite a hoot actually. I consider it a large part of my education and what makes me appreciate life better and helped establish my sense of ethics and morals (not to get too schmaltzy about it). Took more than a few skills and some dam' good luck as well, nature plays no favs, you are allowed to screw up *badly* on occasion.
With that said,there are probably way more than a billion people still live close to totally feral around the planet still.
My short report on my "research experiment": The slickest thing in civilization today, one that most folks in the developed world take for granted and don't appreciate near enough, is clean running water from the tap. Everything else is nice, electricity is swell, gadgets are fun, supermarkets rock, but clean running water is *simply great*.
And I'd take a mammoth pair to add to my herd here, just give me year's notice so I can adjust the fencing a little better.....
Noah, is that you?
I hate printers.
Like I tell my kids...
It is not the cost of [insert animal here] it's the maintenance, food, license, vet shots.
Do you have any idea what your vet will charge to neuter a mammoth?
And we are talking about full-on GARBAGE bags to clean up after it, on walks.
This issue is a bit more complicated than you think.
I feel sad at a zoo cause you can't get at the tasty ones.
Why bother
bring Michael Crichton back! ... man that post anonymously button looks pretty good right now... oh well
I say don't drink and drive, you might spill your drink. Before you get behind the wheel just stop and think.
Resurrect the species will take a lot more than just two...Inbreeding probably won't be good for the species.
But I think everyone is missing the point.. they said anything about 60,000 years ago.... Well that opens the doors for some kick ass revivals. let's not just do a mammoth.
Here is my short list
Dire Wold - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dire_Wolf
Big Wolf
Diprotodon - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diprotodon
Big Marsupial
Smilidon - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smilodon
Giant Sabre Tooth Tiger Lion Thing
Haast Eagle - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haast's_Eagle
Giant Eagle
Giant Moa - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dinornis
Big Ostrich
Aepyornis - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aepyornis
Even Bigger Ostrich
Arctodus_simus http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arctodus_simus
GIANT BEAR - (Don't Tell Colbert)
43% bigger than Grizzly
For a pretty comprehensive list of what might be available see:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pleistocene_extinctions
The major problem with a mammoth would be that there would be nobody (as in other mammoths) to raise it. There is a fair chance they worked like elephants. Unless a herd of elephants accepted it (possible but unlikely), you'd end up with a completely neurotic animal that would have no social clues whatsoever.
I'm not sure you can recreate a social species. They have to learn their social structures from somewhere. They won't make them up.
Putting human kids in the wild on their own hoping them to grow up as well rounded people is naive, the same is true (in a different way) of elephants and presumably mammoths.
They should get an ethologist. Or clone something easier.
May contain traces of nut.
Made from the freshest electrons.