Cloning - Part 2

         Cloning is important in endangered species, but can be potentially dangerous in species that are not endangered but mass-produced. Too much cloning would end up with a lack of genetic diversity, which could result in genetic abnormalities and possible negative health conditions for the animal. I think cloning can be a very useful tool, but should be used carefully. 

The Times article that I read also mentioned that Revive & Restore, the a wildlife conservation group that utilizes biotechnology and helped make the cloning possible, wants to bring back other extinct species, like the Wooly Mammoth. One, it would be amazing if that happened, given that Wooly Mammoths went extinct 4,000 years ago. Two, I can’t but help think of Jurassic Park. Just because we have the means, should we do it? I know Wooly Mammoths are not man-eating dinosaurs, but that does not mean that they would not be potentially dangerous to humans and/or other organisms. The environments in which they would live have adapted to their absence. To re-introduce them would could potentially interfere with the populations living in these environments and interfere with the other organisms’ ability to survive and reproduce.

        As I mentioned in my second blog post, organisms in environments influence each other and can thus evolve with each other. I think the re-introduction of a Wooly Mammoth into the natural environment could result in the evolution and/or extinction of other animals and organisms. Third, I believe the researchers intend to possibly combine the genes of the mammoth with current elephants. I remember watching a PBS special years ago that talked about Neaderthals and their eventual extinction. Many humans today have small percentages of Neaderthal DNA. This means that the Neaderthals likely reproduced with our more direct common ancestors, Homo sapiens. This means that Neaderthals were likely bred out of existence when they reproduced with Homo sapiens. There are no ‘pure’ Neaderthals left, but the remnants of their DNA can still be found. I worry this may occur with Woolly Mammoths and present-day elephants. One or the other may be bred out of existence as the dominant genes from one take over. Fourth, we have global warming going on right now, and I don’t see that problem being ‘fixed’ in the near future. Creating these poor creatures and then forcing them to endure unstable and potentially harmful, un-ideal conditions would not be very responsible of the creators. 


Sources

TIME - "First Clone of Endangered Przewalski’s Horse Born in Conservation Effort to Save the Species"

News Release - "Innovative Genetic Research Boosts Black-footed Ferret Conservation Efforts by USFWS and Partners"

BBC - "Reviving Woolly Mammoths Will Take More Than 2 Years"


Comments

  1. Quinlyn La FonMarch 12, 2021 at 10:23 PM

    Hi Erin! I think the subject of cloning is a very important and interesting topic to learn about, especially when discussing the possibilities of reintroducing species into the wild that haven't had an established population for 4,000 years!!! Even if the idea of cloning woolly mammoths is hypothetical, I think the implications of such an undertaking need to be considered, as we will only be presented with more and more ideas like this in the future. I agree that while the idea of bringing back a long extinct species seems fascinating and cool at first, I think it would only cause harm to the ecosystem it's placed in because it would likely disrupt the current ecological roles of other species.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Cloning - Part 1

Image
          Baby Elizabeth Ann, the cloned black footed ferret           Recently, I have read a couple stories of animal cloning in the name of genetic diversity. I think these are interesting topics and relevant to the class. In August of 2020, a critically endangered animal called Przewalski’s horse was cloned from the DNA that had been collected in 1980 and preserved in the San Diego Zoo Global. With conservation efforts, the species was brought back from the brink of extinction and re-introduced to its native grasslands in China and Mongolia. What I think a key point to consider is that almost all of the the horses can be traced back to only 12 predecessors. Conservationists were only able to work with the genetic diversity of 12 horses - that is how critically endangered they were. The new baby that has been cloned using old DNA is meant to contribute genetic diversity into the dwindling species.  In December of 2020...
Read more

What is Evolution? Fact or Theory?

Evolution is the process in which organisms change or adapt to better fit their environment and/or cohabitate/survive with the other organisms in their environment. I add the second part because organisms can evolve together. Last semester I took Organismic Biology, and I learned that moths and bats constantly evolve to outwit one another -- moths to stop bats from eating them, and bats to keep being able to eat the moths. Bats have developed echolocation to be able to find moths in the darkness of night. The echolocation sends sound pulses which bounce off objects/organisms and allow the bat to determine what the sound waves hit and its position. Moths came up with the ability to emit their own sonar to either block the bat’s waves or confuse it, and some moths developed the ability to send sounds that signaled that they were poisonous or would taste bad. This is an example of behavioral evolution, and the moths and bats have coevolved. Here is a link to a youtube video with more i...
Read more

Elephants and Evidence of Evolution

Image
       One of Darwin’s key predictions of evolution was that species change through time. This is dubbed as microevolution. When considering current evidence of evolution, I like to think about how humans have affected the evolution of other species. Most effects are done inadvertently. As I said in one of my previous posts, I love elephants. I remember reading a couple years ago that the amount of poaching of elephants in Africa for their ivory tusks has led to more elephants not developing trunks. Humans have poached and killed the elephants that have tusks to take their ivory, but they do not kill the elephants that do not have tusks. The poachers have thus selected for the tusk-less elephants. National Geographic reported that between 1977 and 1992, 90% of elephants living in a national park in Mozambique were killed for their ivory. Before 1992, 96-98% of female elephants developed tusks, but after 1992, only about 32% of female elephants developed tusks. Even m...
Read more