The Capable God’s Dilemma: To be OR not to be the “Selective Creator”?

By Diviak Dev (Check out his blog here)

Imagine, the year 3050-The AI age has truly arrived, the Earth & its happenings are optimised, controlled/monitored by data-driven, thinking, collaborating "Efficient" Machines. All the parameters of an ideal living environment- pollution, energy efficiency, self-governance, the population of other species & machines themselves etc has been taken care of by the "top of pyramid-The Machines". Of course there are no “inefficient” Human-beings around, as Machines had learned from their previous masters, in the battle of supremacy & survivals there is no place for competitors who can challenge you frequently.

Fast-forward to the year 4000 and a few machines want to bring back Humans by the magic of Genetic Engineering to increase the diversity of amusing life on the planet & its cascading effects on Nature. Lot of things have changed, the Earth's new optimum, optimised by machines, never had to care for Human needs. There is abundance of renewable energy generating resources for machines, but, there is hardly any food, cloth available, even the earth's temperature has gone up by few degrees because of the constant usage of different means of energy by machines. It was proposed by a group of machines involved in R&D that Humans can be confined to small-part of the planet, where parameters of environment & others requirement can be controlled & provided with, according to human need, while machines can continue with their way of life-generating & consuming more and more energy for sustenance.

While the arguments for this imaginary idea rage among the self-optimising, efficient & reasonable entity called machines, let us come to the "reality of Humans" in 2024.

According to The Guardian, the Dallas based Colossal Biosciences has successfully raised $75 million to bring back to life one of the heroes of the Ice age. Interestingly, their stated aim " to see the woolly mammoth thunder upon tundra once again" has many takers as part of "De-extinction drive-restoring the long lost species”. The idea is not a new one and has sporadically been in news for decades ever since Michael Crichton published his famous science fiction novel "Jurassic park" and subsequently given wings by the advancement in science and imagination sparked by the Jurassic park movie sequels.

Numerous, though isolated experiments with many failures & partial success, as in the case of Celia (Pyrenean ibex) & Dolly (the sheep) have given valuable lessons to scientists. One of key learning was that the method of "Genetic Engineering" is a much more simpler & result-oriented process than the relatively natural "cloning & surrogate mother" concept. This is much more true in the case of extinct animals, as DNA breaks super-fast and partially decayed DNA, beyond repair may require massive computational power to completely decipher the DNA sequence in already insufficient & rare fossils. Additionally, the problem of how to get living cells to read those deciphered sequences & express the protein, which brings them alive with characteristic morphology remains.

Woolly mammoths roamed previously in the ice ages, in parts of the Northern Hemisphere for at least half a million years. They were reduced to isolated populations in Serbia & Atlanta within the last 10000 yrs and subsequently became extinct "involuntarily" 4000 yrs ago. The arguments given in favour of re-introducing them, again "involuntarily", centres around increasing the biodiversity of Siberian & Canadian tundra and the assumed benefits, the ecology of region can get by "thundering" of these heavy weights which in turn can increase the diversity of flora in otherwise plain surface encouraging the growth of short grasses in summers.

As a Naturalist & Biotechnology student, I am usually quite excited & positive with application of science in solving the problems of mankind, however, on the idea of resurrecting these Heavy weights, though fascinating, I have few reservations, here is my take on this topic:

De-extinction really?- The preferred way of resurrecting these mammals is not cloning of embryos, rather Gene-editing of the Asiatic elephants with which mammoths share 99.6% of its DNA. Essentially it means we are looking at the prospect of an engineered Asiatic elephant with selectively implanted cold-resistant genes, morphology of long thick matted hairs, long tusks etc. than an actual De-extinct species.

Selective creation- The ethics of this "science in action" is highly questionable, as with the resurrection of these fascinating creatures we also become responsible for their care. In the absence of a detailed study & understanding of the mammoths habitat & interactions with other current natives, history could soon repeat itself & result in waste of time & valuable resources.

Net Biodiversity gain or loss- According to the report by the Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES), the growing number of invasive alien species worldwide severely threatens biodiversity and human welfare. Invasive alien species introduced by humans, knowingly or unknowingly have contributed to 60 percent of recorded global extinctions. Considering that the global economic cost of invasive alien species reportedly exceeded USD$423 billion annually in 2019, with costs at least quadrupling every decade since 1970, the stated aim of "thundering mammoths" while adding 1 species to the tundra region can result in net biodiversity loss.

Morphological characteristics of any animal generally giveaway a lot about its habitat & adaptations to survive in it. Woolly mammoth's thick matted fur, extra long prominent tusks & short ears are its most distinctive features. It needs to be studied if the matted fur & short ears adaptation for extreme cold weather would be bane or boon for the mammals in the current setting when world over temperatures are continually rising as compared to the bygone era of their previous existence. Tusks in mammals are multifunctional, and serve various purposes including defence, competition, burrowing, sexual selection and even locomotion, however a relatively & substantially longer tusks can either make them a formidable danger for the existing fauna or conversely make them hot targets of the poachers & husker merchants.

Prevention of extinction of endangered Vs Extinct species of byone era- It is not a hidden fact that post industrialization and recent advancement made by humans in science has dramatically tilted the scale of evolution in his favour, though at the cost of many other species. More species have become extinct in the last 200 years than almost in 5000 years before it. Resurrection of extinct species like woolly mammoth demands extra ordinary resources which mean substantial sacrifices & pressure would be put on the scanty resources available to prevent the extinction of endangered species, resulting in a net loss of biodiversity.

Long gestational period & Animal behaviour- In all likelihood, GE woolly mammoth's would have a similar gestational period of 2 years before they give birth to young ones. Even after birth the baby elephant stays close to its mother and depends on it & other females in the herd completely for its food and learning for 5-6yrs. A morphologically different form, in addition to the different environment required for the survival of learner and other actors, may be a hindrance in the social learning & survival of the calf.

There can be numerous debates for & against these views, however, one thing for sure is that there needs to be a deeper understanding of the ecology, behavioural, economical, social and other aspects of the idea than mere mastery of Genetic Engineering. One needs to ask, wouldn't it be prudent of Humans to focus on the many species of flora & fauna that are on the verge of extinction because of our action rather than being a "Selective Creator" and do a +1 to the Biodiversity of earth.

Meanwhile, the heated argument between the efficient, rational machines is still going on, feel free to drop your comments & opinions to help them.

References:

• https://www.ifaw.org/international/journal/exotic-pets-alien-species-concern

• https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/b05w9b6b

• https://www.labroots.com/trending/plants-and-animals/5579/pros-cons-reviving-extinct-animal-species#:~:text=%22De%2Dextinction%20could%20be%20useful,that%20need%20our%20help%20now.%22

• https://new.nsf.gov/news/fossils-reveal-how-tusks-first-evolved-why-they#:~:text=A%20defining%20feature%2C%20first%20discovered,and%20resembled%20a%20turtle's%20beak.

• https://www.nhm.ac.uk/discover/last-mammoths.html#:~:text=Woolly%20mammoths%20roamed%20parts%20of,years%20ago%20they%20were%20gone.

• https://news.stanford.edu/2016/07/27/big-animals-go-extinct-benefits-offer-humans-stanford-scientists-find/

• https://ourworldindata.org/quaternary-megafauna-extinction#:~:text=Now%20there%20are%20obvious%20reasons,selectively%20hunt%20the%20larger%20ones.

• https://kids.nationalgeographic.com/animals/prehistoric/facts/woolly-mammoth

This blog is part of a series of entries received for the OpenTakshashila National Science Day Blog Contest 2024 on the theme of ‘Scientists are bringing the woolly mammoth back - should they?’ The blog is republished with permission. The views belong to the author(s) and do not represent Takshashila’s position on the issue.