De-Extinction

Abstract

De-extinction projects for species such as the woolly mammoth and passenger pigeon have greatly stimulated public and scientific interest, producing a large body of literature and much debate. To date, there has been little consistency in descriptions of de-extinction technologies and purposes. In 2016, a special committee of the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) published a set of guidelines for de-extinction practice, establishing the first detailed description of de-extinction; yet incoherencies in published literature persist. There are even several problems with the IUCN definition. Here I present a comprehensive definition of de-extinction practice and rationale that expounds and reconciles the biological and ecological inconsistencies in the IUCN definition. This new definition brings together the practices of reintroduction and ecological replacement with de-extinction efforts that employ breeding strategies to recover unique extinct phenotypes into a single “de-extinction” discipline. An accurate understanding of de-extinction and biotechnology segregates the restoration of certain species into a new classification of endangerment, removing them from the purview of de-extinction and into the arena of species’ recovery. I term these species as “evolutionarily torpid species”; a term to apply to species falsely considered extinct, which in fact persist in the form of cryopreserved tissues and cultured cells. For the first time in published literature, all currently active de-extinction breeding programs are reviewed and their progress presented. Lastly, I review and scrutinize various topics pertaining to de-extinction in light of the growing body of peer-reviewed literature published since de-extinction breeding programs gained public attention in 2013.

Gene Editing in Life Sciences

“…Need to Resurrect Species, What Species to Bring Back: Thanks to works of science fiction like Steven Spielberg's adaptation of Michael Crichton's Jurassic Park, the idea of de-extinction became one of the greatest links between science and the public. While most scientists laugh at the idea of resurrecting multiple species of dinosaur, the premise of de-extinction from a scientific lens gradually became more popular, especially through the TEDx-Extinction event where a plan to bring back the passenger pigeon was introduced to the world [13]. Since then, many more projects to safely reintroduce extinct species into their natural habitats have been proposed, and while large scale de-extinction is nearly impossible to get right, reviving a population by means of natural selection could be possible.…”

Spaceship Earth Revisited: The Co-Benefits of Overcoming Biological Extinction of Experience at the Level of Person, Place and Planet

“…Briefly, de-extinction utilizes advances in synthetic biology, genetic engineering and reproduction technologies to revive currently extinct species (or hybrids inclusive of traits of extinct species-e.g., woolly mammoth genes incorporated into Asian elephant embryos) and reintroduce them to areas that might resemble their former habitats [125]. Rewilding was originally defined as restoring "Big Wilderness" by focusing on a top-down approach whereby keystone species and large animals are provided ample space and corridors for sustainable movements [126]; today, rewilding is defined more broadly as the "restoration of wildness" [127] wherein wildness refers to the autonomy of natural process that are characteristic of scales ranging from vast wilderness areas to vacant lots in an urban environment.…”

An agent‐based model determining a successful reintroduction of the extinct passenger pigeon

“…In 2003, The Great Passenger Pigeon Comeback became one of the first de‐extinction projects in the world. One of the goals of this movement is to restore the passenger pigeon and someday release it back into the wild (Novak, 2018b). DNA was obtained from a passenger pigeon and sequenced.…”