#not kindred

[danceofarrowandteeth]

I am a thief.

[mammoth-clangen]

So, first off, as a paleontologist… thank you for that rant. It’s been driving me up the wall that people are going “oh look we revived the dire wolf using gray wolves!!” Even if you ignore the whole issue of de-extinction wolves aren’t even the closest living relative! Jackals and African wild dogs are more closely related to it, and they aren’t anywhere close to being in the same genus.

And of course, de-extinction is a whole other issue. Why are they so focused on the mammoth? At least the thylacine went extinct about a hundred years ago so the niche could still be there. But still, why focus on them? If you want to de-extinct something, why not focus on, oh I don’t know, the northern white rhino which still has two living members for sequencing and who have a living subspecies.

And further more, it’s genuinely cruel to bring most of these back. You think a wooly mammoth that lived in the last glacial maximum would be happy in todays climate that is consistently getting hotter? You think the dodo would appreciate the fact that it’s one habitat has been mostly destroyed? You think the thylacine would enjoy trying to outcompete the dingos that have moved into its niche? No. They wouldn’t.

For the mammoths, it’s especially cruel since they are herd animals and you’d need to clone a lot of them at one time for them to be happy.

And I mean, look. I’d be lying if I said I didn’t want to see these creatures alive. As unlikely as it is, I keep a sliver of hope that the thylacine might still be out there. But that doesn’t mean de-extinction is good. Like it or not, they went extinct for a reason. Yes, that reason may be because of humans, but it is still a reason. You bring them back and they’ll go extinct again unless they are given extreme protection.

They need to focus on living creatures or, if they are desperate to bring something that’s completely extinct back, focus on creatures that have gone extinct within the last two decades.

Ugh, sorry for the mini rant but as someone who understands extinction (including the current Anthropocene mass extinction), bringing things back is not the way to go. I can point to multiple genuses that went extinct for a good reason.

Hello fellow palaeontologist! 🤝 My area of study was actually Dromornithid ichnotaxonomy but carnivorans are holding me hostage nowadays, it seems...

Unfortunately, you have fallen prey to another (thankfully, less insidious) piece of misinformation! Dire wolves aren't wolves, but they are no more closely related to Jackals or African Wild Dogs!

Aenocyon is an outgroup to all wolf-like canids, jackals included!

I've seen the Aenocyon/Lupulella/Lycaon relatedness touted often, and am guilty of repeating it myself before I re-read the paper.

A possible reason for this confusion that African jackals are considered the most basal of the extant, wolf-like canids; as seen on the cladogram above.

Therefore, the ~5.7million year old common ancestor of Aenocyon and the wolf/jackal/dhole lineage would likely have looked more like a jackal. Then Aenocyon convergently evolved a very wolfish skeleton because of their similar lifestyles!

This is also why I chose to reconstructed my Aenocyon with a shoulder patch, seeing many canids seem to have some sort of cape marking.

The 2021 paper that concluded the dire wolf isn't a wolf at all, is unfortunately paywalled :/ Without full access to the paper it's hard to be sure exactly where Aenocyon fits within the larger Canidae family tree (if they discussed it at all), but the abstract describes them as having "an early New World origin".

It seems they were a true outgroup to modern wolf-like canids, being the earliest branching member of Canina! They're not too different from sabercats, in that way.

Also if anyone is following the ongoing edit war on the Dire Wolf Wikipedia page, I beg you to ignore the "taxonomy based on morphology" section. It is only useful as a historical reference for how we used to view Aenocyon dirus as Canis dirus for a long time. Current science supports these morphological similarities being convergent, contrary to what Colossal Lies are being told...

---

I already partially addressed Mammoths (and the issues with their herds inbreeding) in this other ask, but I do agree completely with your points.

Having the GMO wolves raised without another older wolf or dog parental figures is frankly, just cruel. Any vet will tell you hand-reared and imprinted animals are significantly more prone to behavioural issues down the line. Mammoths would be worse again, because unlike Romulus and Remus, there is no chance of even having a twin to keep them company.

And yes; What could possibly go wrong with bringing back a polar-adapted, woolly proboscidean, into a world where even winters are getting progressively warmer?

I too, would love to see extinct animals in the wild. I'd be lying if I said I don't secretly hope for many of them to pull a coelacanth on us. But sadly, I don't think that's likely, and nor do I think we should be trying to make it happen.

---

Hank Green brought up something poignant about this dire wolf debacle, which is that extinction is not as simplistic as we imagine it to be. It's not just the death of a species.

"It's the destruction of a space in the natural environment for a species."

And that is really it, you can't just "bring back" an extinct species, because you aren't bringing their niche back with them.

Successful reintroductions of species that were locally extirpated or made entirely extinct in the wild have only worked because effort was put into securing a niche and ecosystem that had been lost.

And even well-planned, well-funded reintroductions struggle, but at least they understood the assignment.

Colossal, on the other hand, seems to think that adding back their very-roughly-wolf-shaped 'jenga block' to the ecosystem 'tower' will completely stop the collapse. But the real 'collapse' is caused by habitat destruction, and no amount of GMO wolves, mammoths or thylacines can stop that.

Bringing the species in to save the ecosystem is climbing ass-first up a tree. We need to save the ecosystem for the species. And all this is still ignoring the sad truth for a lot of extinct animals:

For many of them, there is no 'tower' to save.

[mammoth-clangen]

And I don't know if you're aware, but Apple has just announced the big return of Prehistoric Planet. And this time the theme will be glacial air and among the animals present, Homotherium ( probably Serum).

So what do you think?

YES!! I love them so much they're so Creature 🤍 I'm so glad they look like big-nose small-ear Chad-Chin Freaks. As they should ùvú

Very excited to see what they come up with, Prehistoric Planet has been pretty fun so far with a more naturalistic approach to behaviours shown c:

Though it iiiiis still a bit?? bloodless?? which is meh, let the animals be gross and bloody and dirty! Even in the hunting scenes? I really don't like the censorship in modern animal documentaries :/

Also I love how my blog has kinda become the Homotherium Detector check out this thing I made For The Bit™

Homotherium Detected

[mammoth-clangen]

Honestly cloning has limited usefulness in conservation, let alone deextinctuon. If a population has bottlenecked or fallen below the carrying threshold then cloning what's left doesn't functionally help. Even cloning a recently deceased individual might not help, depending on a lot of factors. It's annoying that it's treated like this big help to conservation when frankly well managed breeding programs are a much bigger help than cloning will ever be.

Oh don't get me wrong

There's certainly room for thoughtful, ethical cloning use in conservation!

A really great example is in Black-footed ferrets just last year. They're critically endangered partially due to reduced fertility from inbreeding depression.

Two jills (female ferrets) were cloned from historic samples of a ferret called Willa, who was captured and never reproduced in her lifetime. Because of this, reintroducing her genes helped bolster the genetic diversity of the population!

This is one of the twin ferret sisters, Antonia.

Better yet, the above ferret then went on to give birth to healthy kits! They're super cute, and being 100% ferret made the old-fashioned way (not clones), shouldn't have any of the issues that clones sometimes do.

Behold them!

But what Colossal is doing is not cloning!

I can't stress that enough! It's genetic modification, but cloning means creating a complete replicate of another animal.

Even using genetic modification has many potential applications in conservation; coding endangered species with resistance to population-devastating diseases, or using it to recode lost genetic diversity, as a few examples. But the way Colossal is using it is not to preserve endangered species. They have created, depending on your opinion:

1) a GMO grey wolf (or wolfdog, given where the white-coat gene came from).

2) a completely new transgenic species.

They claim to be filling the niche left by an extinct species, but this is honestly BS. They haven't made an extinct species, nor an endangered one. It couldn't even fill the niche if that niche was still open.

"The T. rex in this Jurassic Park is just a frog..."

-paraphrased from sparrowlucero

[mammoth-clangen]

In my opinion deextinction is a case by case tool. The northern white rhino cross species surrogacy problem? Hell yeah. The moa? Sure, bring em back - emu can be farmed relatively easily, and New Zealand has both a major interest in farming (we have domesticated deer, like not tamed, domesticated fully), and very large tracts of land that have not been disturbed. And off shore island sanctuaries to start with. But bringing back the haast's eagle? Nah fam, leave the Known Man Killer apex predator alone.

Disclaimer: my reply to this ask is a lot more opinion than hard science. So don't take it as The Truth™, because there isn't one.

To me, Aotearoa/NZ is actually a great example for my exact points from earlier. It has one of the most fascinating ecosystems; with incredible levels of endemism, very few native land mammals, and some amazingly unique birdlife. For those unfamiliar, see below!

Image source: theafterworkphotographer.com

But-

94% of reptile species, 82% of bird species, 80% of bat species, 76% of freshwater fish species, 22% of marine mammal species and 46% of Aotearoa's vascular plant species are facing extinction.

I cannot see any reason to dedicate time and money to resurrecting (one of nine) moa species that have been gone from the ecosystem for 500+ years. Not when so many extant species need desperate assistance, unless we want them to end up on an extinction list with the Moa, Haast's eagle, and huia.

This is how I feel about the Thylacine too.

I personally doubt there would be enough demand for Moa meat to make farming a viable reason to clone them. People barely eat emu in Australia, and they are right there as a perfectly viable ratite for captive-breeding and farming. Both Au and NZ export huge amounts of meat compared to the amount we consume. So unless they can find a huge international market for ratite meat, it's not really a worthwhile risk to most farmers.

Bird cloning/ genetic modification is also much harder to than in mammals. While mammal embryos can be implanted into a surrogate, it's much harder to implant a bird embryo into an egg and still have it hatch.

Extinction in Aotearoa is personal to me- -because my family are all Kiwis, even if I don't live there. I visit often and always lament how few native birds I actually see when I do.

---

It's worth noting the Northern White Rhinoceros isn't extinct quite yet; there are two individuals remaining, Fatu and Najin. However, as they are both infertile females, the species is functionally extinct.

Unfortunately, saving the Northern white rhino with cloning/GMO relatives or even cross species surrogacy will likely suffer nearly all the issues of true de extinction.

A company called BioRescue has 30 frozen Northern White Rhino embryos. Which looks great on paper! But every one was created using Fatu's eggs. Meaning all the potential rhinos would be full or half siblings. As I said in my Wrangel Island mammoth ask, sometimes species do strangely well as an entire population with extreme inbreeding depression. But most don't.

Side note, and this is purely my own speculation (and Polarwooly's), I wonder if the Wrangel Mammoths survived with inbreeding depression because elephants (and relatives) have extreme DNA repair 'machinery'. They also have extremely low cancer rates, so it could easily be linked!

I really don't want to sound like one of those "Useless animal! Let it go extinct!" people, because I don't think we shouldn't try. I just genuinely don't know how much anyone can do for them at this point. It all feels a bit 'too little, too late.'

And again, the Southern White Rhinoceros isn't extinct, functionally or actually. But they are threatened with the same things that drove their Northern cousins to the edge. That said, the Southern subspecies nearly went extinct in the late 1800s, being reduced to less than 50 individuals. Their numbers rebounded spectacularly when effort was put into habitat preservation and protection from poachers, but their numbers have been dropping again in recent years.

It just makes me wonder if the time and money being put into resurrection wouldn't be better spent fixing the underlying problems...

Also, can you please give a source for the "domestic deer"? I mean this genuinely, not as a dig! I couldn't find anything when I looked except that 'deer are farmed in NZ' (which I knew because I've seen deer farms there before lolol). But it takes more than "bred in captivity for x generations" to qualify as fully domestic!

Repeating my disclaimer: You, dear reader, are absolutely welcome to disagree with my opinions, and think having moa back would just be cool AF. Because logistics aside, it absolutely would be cool af!

[mammoth-clangen]

(Hi, i need to rant to someone who knows more than me on the topic of the de-extinction of mammoths. Apologies to your inbox and you for the wall.)

in my opinion, for mammoths, it's also vital to remember how unfortunately inbred their last living population was. If humans hadn't killed them, they'd have all died of inbreeding. They were stuck on an island, the only extant population left, and honestly, probably on their way to if not already suffering from low food supplies, assuming they had few or no natural predators there. Plus, I'm pretty certain we have at least one specimen from there, and to my knowledge, we can't exactly test how inbred it is without other direct relatives... while yes, a few cases of inbreeding would be relatively harmless to a population, rampant inbreeding is bad for a reason.

I don't think any species should be revived - even if there was somehow a good reason to - unless we can clearly and consistently prevent unhealthy amounts of incest from occurring down the line. Something which, as you pointed out, likely can't be done with "dire wolves" or mammoths.

These scientists are playing with fire, and all they're going to do is make everything worse. The very definition of "so determined to see if you could, you forgot to stop to see if you should."

You make a very good point about the mammoths towards the end, they were indeed, very inbred. The cervical rib thing is interesting to me in particular because I have cervical ribs too, lolol

That being said...

The last surviving refuge population, the Wrangel Island Mammoths, were actually were doing surprisingly well before humans showed up! This is surprising, especially given what we know about animals such as Cheetah, with very reduced genetic diversity.

But it seems the Wrangel Island population, small as it was, had found a sort of 'genetic and environmental equilibrium' that lasted 200+ generations. They were living long-term as a whole population with inbreeding depression until their extinction ~4000 years ago, at the hands of humans. Major deleterious gene mutations were apparently "purged" rather than accumulating, though why, I'm not certain.

Really strange and interesting stuff!

However, the severe inbreeding in the last mammoths is still important in discussions of de extinction.

It shows what happens when, as we both mentioned, a species' numbers drop below the minimum survivable population. "Severely reduced heterozygosity" is the scientific term for "both copies of everyone's genes are the same." It leaves them vulnerable to disease, and much less able to adapt to changes as a population.

Refugia of extinct species like Wrangel Island are fascinating, but unless they can repopulate outside their refuge, they typically don't last. It's only a matter of time before something novel to the environment, such as predators or disease, wipes the rest of them out.

Quick clarification about inbred mammoth genomes in cloning

It's important to remember that the ice sheets have come and gone across the Northern Hemisphere for hundreds of thousands of years. Mammoths lived and died among them for much of that time. Thus, any intact genomes we find would likely be from different times in their range; not all from at the time of their extinction!

Here's a couple of examples of mammoth DNA sequenced from:

52,000 year old Woolly Mammoth skin.

Three Siberian mammoth specimens dating to the Early and Middle Pleistocene subepochs, two of which are more than one million years old!

So what I'm saying is, we actually could sequence a fair number of non-inbred mammoths. And we should! Learning about their genetics is fascinating, and tells the story of their lives throughout their existence as a species!

Does this mean we should clone/GMO mammoths using those sequenced genomes?

It's still a Hard No from me, for the other reasons mentioned here.

Additionally, whatever was happening on Wrangel Island, I doubt we would be able to replicate it well enough to stop inbreeding depression in resurrected mammoths.

Like the bucardo, I think any de extinct mammoths would unfortunately be crawling towards a second extinction.

---

Sorry to mildly rebuttal you there; I just think it's important not to spread misinformation, regardless if it supports your viewpoint c:

And thanks for giving me a chance to ramble about those funny island proboscideans!

In a world where endangered species are constantly at risk of genetic drift and inbreeding depression, the Wrangel Island mammoths are a bizarre case that I don't expect most people to know about XD

Image taken from the Wrangel Island paper.

[mammoth-clangen]

have you heard of any updates with new finds from the homotherium cub? i heard they were working on a follow-up paper to the first one and im curious to know if thats been published yet

I haven't heard anything, but that's hardly surprising. The Badyarikha mummy was discovered in 2020 and wasn't published until November 2024, that's 4 years!

Science doesn't tend to move fast. Even species with rapidly evolving knowledge and controversy *cough Spinosaurus cough* will often be years between publications!

Obligatory figure from the paper because Toe Beans!

I am hoping we get a genomic analysis paper, that would be interesting to learn about uvu