Efforts to resurrect woolly mammoths via DNA and surrogate elephants are underway–whether we like it or not. Some say cloned mammoths could provide a highly nutritious protein source, while others see the move as a prelude to a Jurassic Park-like disaster.
Scientists are working to bring back woolly mammoths
The woolly mammoth was a hairy mammal that was roughly the same size as modern African elephants, with males standing between 8.9-11.2 feet and weighing up to 6 metric tons. Mammoths went extinct roughly 4,000 years ago, when the species last traversed Mainland Siberia, Yahoo reported.
Now a Texas-based startup, Colossal Biosciences, has raised $75 million this year from buyers and plans to use genetic engineering to work with salvaged mammoth DNA and Asian elephants – the closest cousin to the extinct animals – to resurrect a woolly mammoth from extinction.
Colossal Biosciences believes it will take roughly six years to successfully achieve a successful reproduction of a woolly mammoth.
“We are working towards bringing back species who left an ecological void as they went extinct,” Colossal told NPR back in 2021 when the project was first announced. “As Colossal actively pursues the conservation and preservation of endangered species, we are identifying species that can be given a new set of tools from their extinct relatives to survive in new environments that desperately need them.”
Mega-source of protein
Another argument for bringing back the woolly mammoth is that it could create a massive supply of healthy meat protein.
Pasture-raised mammoth would have a good ratio of omega-3 to omega-6 fats, making it a good dietary choice, says Holly Whitelaw, director of Regenerative Food and Farming.
Bringing mammoths back will help reduce climate change?
The head of the project for Colossal is Harvard University genetics professor George Church, known for his pioneering work in genome sequencing and gene splicing. He suggests that reviving the species could play a role in combating climate change.
The argument is that after woolly mammoths disappeared, the accumulated snow, with its insulating properties, meant the permafrost began to warm, releasing greenhouse gases.
Whitelaw agrees with the idea that the absence of mammoths in the Arctic left an ecological void. Roaming animals, Whitelaw says, are healthy for soil; they distribute seeds and microbes as they wander. The healthier the Arctic soil, the more grassland it supports, and the more carbon is removed from the atmosphere.
However, other scientists disagree that the mammoths would have any effect on improving climate change.
“There is virtually no evidence in support of the hypothesis that trampling of a very large number of mammoths would have any impact on climate change,” says Love Dalén, a professor in evolutionary genetics at the Stockholm-based Centre for Palaeogenetics, “and it could equally well, in my view, have a negative effect on temperatures.”
Just because we can resurrect woolly mammoths, should we? Many scientists say “no.”
Just because you can do something, doesn’t mean you should, many scientists say.
“I don’t want to see mammoths come back,” said Beth Shapiro, a paleogeneticist at the University of California, Santa Cruz, and author of How to Clone a Mammoth: The Science of De-Extinction. “It’s never going to be possible to create a species that is 100% identical. But what if we could use this technology not to bring back mammoths but to save elephants?”
Why not help sustain other endangered species instead?
Some scientists say that rather than trying to resurrect a long-extinct species, efforts would be better spent on those still living now that are at risk of extinction.
“If you can create a mammoth or at least an elephant that looks like a good copy of a mammoth that could survive in Siberia, you could do quite a bit for the white rhino or the giant panda,” said Joseph Frederickson, a vertebrate paleontologist and director of the Weis Earth Science Museum in Menasha, Wisconsin.
Driven to extinction: The fate of large species
There are two schools of thought when it comes to certain life forms on earth going extinct: Either a preventable tragedy or nature eliminating what’s necessary through evolution. When it comes to woolly mammoths, many believe in the latter.
While humans have eaten and hunted many species into extinction, on the whole, larger species have been more at risk than smaller ones for a number of reasons.
Among the factors is the fact that larger animals take longer to reproduce and reach maturity than smaller ones. Most cannot easily change their diet or habitat, making them slower to adapt to a fast-changing world, according to the World Wildlife Foundation. This is all a key component of Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution. And of course, humans play a major role in habitat loss and poaching, as well as inducing climate change and polluting the environment. It’s estimated that more than 1,000 larger species of mammals and birds will become extinct over the next century.
