Experts Challenge Colossal’s Claim: Are Dire Wolves Really Back from Extinction?

There’s a stunning white wolf gracing the cover of Time Magazine, celebrating the so-called return of the dire wolf. This legendary creature, popularized by its role in Game of Thrones, actually roamed North America over 10,000 years ago. Today, the company Colossal Biosciences has claims to its revival, announcing the birth of three puppies, Romulus, Remus, and Khaleesi, bred through advanced genetic engineering.

Despite the excitement, experts are quick to point out that these pups are not true dire wolves. Zoologist Philip Seddon from the University of Otago notes that they are genetically modified grey wolves. Colossal has been working to revive extinct species using similar techniques to target the woolly mammoth and the Tasmanian tiger.

Experts highlight significant biological differences between the new pups and the dire wolves of the Ice Age. Paleogeneticist Dr. Nic Rawlence explains that ancient DNA, critical for cloning, is highly degraded and can’t be directly copied or cloned. To create these puppies, scientists used a living grey wolf as a foundation, incorporating ancient dire wolf DNA to add specific traits.

Interestingly, researchers like Dr. Rawlence link the dire wolf’s evolutionary history back millions of years, indicating a divergence from grey wolves between 2.5 and 6 million years ago. This means the pups, while having some dire wolf features like larger skulls and specific fur traits, are hybrids. Dr. Rawlence adds, “Colossal compared the genomes of the dire wolf and the grey wolf, and from about 19,000 genes, they determined that 20 changes in 14 genes gave them a dire wolf.”

For practical purposes, the embryos were implanted in surrogate dogs, and the pups were born via planned C-section to avoid complications. Colossal, valued at $10 billion earlier this year, has secured these animals at a private facility in the northern U.S.

This emergence has sparked global interest, raising critical discussions about extinction and conservation. Dr. Rawlence warns of the dangerous message that might arise: that we can harm the environment and still bring back lost species. He reflects, “If we don’t have extinction, how are we going to learn from our mistakes?”

The scientific community is divided on this issue. Some scientists view these advancements in de-extinction as hopeful, offering lessons for biodiversity. Others remain skeptical, emphasizing the need to focus on preserving current ecosystems rather than attempting to resurrect the past.

In conclusion, while the allure of seeing a dire wolf returns captivates public imagination, the truth remains complex. As these puppies grow, they stand at the crossroads of science and ethics, reminding us that de-extinction doesn’t erase the consequences of extinction. For a deeper understanding of the implications of these developments, you can read more from sources like BBC News.

Source link