On the rocky island of Eldey, Iceland, the gannets are making more of a fuss than they usually do. They’ve been polite enough to their new—or, rather, old—neighbors. The large, thick-beaked black and white birds have been waddling across the rocks for a few months now. Even the oldest among the gannets cannot remember the last time these unfamiliar fellows had walked the Earth. The sea has risen some since they had last dwelled on the island; the crisp air is a little warmer. But through some marvel of technology and the careful coordination of a few dedicated groups, the Great Auks have returned. No longer a miserable metaphor for human cruelty and greed, this new generation has no knowledge of the terrible fates their predecessors suffered. The gannets converse only among themselves, saying little of the last Great Auks and the attacks that took their lives. But as a ship approaches the island, the same fear strikes them all. The gannets fly upwards, calling out, having no intent to linger, unwilling to see for themselves if history will repeat itself.
It’s not hard to imagine a future where extinct species walk the earth again. It might be a little more difficult, however, to have the best outlook in mind.
De-extinction seems like a no-brainer. The IUCN lists 926 species as extinct. According to the United Nations, humans are directly responsible for the extinction of 680 species of vertebrates. In 2023, the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service announced the removal of 21 species from the Endangered Species Act, declaring them extinct. The ability to bring back some of these species—to have the opportunity to have a second go-around is tempting. Maybe this time around, we can properly protect species before they go extinct again. Others may be drawn to the allure of reliving the past—usually, the distant past: Pleistocene Park, a reserve in Siberia, aims to replicate the habitat of wooly mammoths, offering a space for them to live if de-extinction efforts prove successful. Elsewhere, Texas-based biotech company Colossal Biosciences intends to not only resurrect the likely-extinct ivory-billed woodpecker, but also a variety of other species, such as the well-known and dearly departed wooly mammoth, dodo, and Tasmanian tiger. Revive & Restore, a conservation organization also located in the United States, has already provided a rough plan (complete with the anticipated budget) for developing technologies and methods that can bring back the Great Auk. Many of these species have gone extinct over the last two centuries: the last Tasmanian tiger died in a zoo in 1936 (although it is rumored that others survived in the wild until the 1980s), the last of the Great Auks were killed in 1844, and although the ivory-billed woodpecker has not yet been declared extinct, the last official sighting of the bird was in 1944. Even the dodo went extinct in the late 17th century, and still serves as one of the most well-known extinct species. De-extinction provides the opportunity to bring these species back, so they can continue to help their ecosystems thrive.
How Does It Work?
There are many approaches to de-extinction. Generally, de-extinction projects aim to “recreate” or “resurrect” an extinct species. In many cases, this can involve back-breeding, where individuals of a related species are selectively bred to produce offspring with the traits of the extinct species. One notable example of a de-extinction project that utilizes back-breeding is the Quagga Project in South Africa, which has attempted to revive the extinct plains zebra subspecies through selective breeding. Rain, born in 2022, has some of the brown coat coloration and fading stripes of the long-gone quaggas, but the project’s effectiveness is yet to be determined. On the other hand, many other projects involve genetic modification. Revive & Restore’s Great Auk de-extinction plan proposes the use of gene-editing to recreate the features of the extinct bird, then ensuring these traits can be passed on through manipulation of primordial germ cells (embryonic cells that develop into gametes), transmission to domestic chickens (which can reproduce quickly and live under human care), and the eventual release of the re-created Great Auks into the wild. Colossal Biosciences seems to take a somewhat similar approach, using genetic engineering to not only recreate extinct species but to also give these new individuals traits that make them resistant to the impacts of climate change. The field is still developing, and more research is needed for these companies and organizations to accomplish their goals.
But Why?
There is no singular reason to pursue de-extinction. Some groups note their hope to right the wrongs of the past. The Quagga Project’s main website page states in bolded and italicized text that “the project is aimed at rectifying a tragic mistake made over a hundred years ago through greed and short sightedness”. Most of the aforementioned extinct species (and subspecies) were driven to extinction by humans. The Great Auk met its end to the violence of fishermen after years of overhunting. Similarly, the dodo went extinct from hunting, conflicts with invasive species, and habitat loss less than a century after being encountered by the Dutch in 1600. Quaggas were overhunted in the 19th century, leading to their extinction. The Tasmanian tiger and ivory-billed woodpecker both suffered from overhunting and habitat loss before their last sightings. De-extinction provides the opportunity to “bring back” species that—had they not been impacted by humans—would likely continue to thrive today.
De-extinction can also help provide more biodiversity to an area, restoring a void that has been missing. As an apex predator, the Tasmanian tiger played an essential role in Tasmania’s ecosystems. Dodos aided in spreading seeds across Mauritius, encouraging the growth of native plants. Bringing these extinct species back will allow for the restoration of some ecosystem functions.
For some groups, developing the technology for de-extinction can lead to other successes. Colossal Bioscience notes the potential for commercialization of de-extinction and other genetic services. Furthermore, their de-extinction efforts have helped to address issues plaguing extant species today: the company is dedicating time and resources to researching how gene editing (CRISPR) can be used to prevent the spread of elephant endotheliotropic herpesvirus (which has a 66% fatality rate in Asian elephants).
There are various “why”s, but you might also wonder:
Should We Do It?
While de-extinction can seemingly provide many benefits, there are also many doubts about bringing extinct species back to life. Some methods may not be as effective as they seem: while the Quagga Project is confident that it has effectively resurrected the quagga, some are skeptical that these new quaggas could be considered quaggas at all. Further genetic testing will provide more information about the project’s success in the future.
Some may also be conflicted about the cost of de-extinction projects. The aforementioned Revive & Restore Great Auk de-extinction plan is predicted to cost over half a million dollars ($675,000), and this plan does not actually involve the recreation of the Great Auk. While the Revive & Restore plan aims to develop the technologies necessary to recreate and re-introduce the extinct bird, the actual experimentation results in domestic chickens serving as surrogates for genetically modified button quails that are fluorescent. While this is an interesting potential result, the actual recreation of the Great Auk could be far more costly, as it would likely involve more genetic modification.
There are also ethical concerns regarding de-extinction. Is it ethical to bring a species back when it has no home to return to? Even if ivory-bills are modified to be more resistant to increasing temperatures, they may still struggle to survive in the southern regions of America where they once thrived. Deforestation is still an issue in the United States, and nearly ⅓ of the forestland in the Southeastern region has been converted to agricultural land. What suffering may be incurred through genetic modification, hybridization, and selective breeding, and what will happen to these animals, like the fluorescent quails, who are just “one step” in the process?
In order for de-extinction to be successful, it is essential for organizations, researchers, and companies to be responsible. The inherent excitement of doing the impossible is motivational, but could also lead to tunnel vision. If we want to pursue de-extinction, we must create a world that these species can return to. We cannot consider de-extinction to be a “quick fix” for overhunting, deforestation, and climate change, and we must address the issues that drove these species to extinction in the first place.
In the future, the ivory-billed woodpecker may stretch its great wings before swooping over the heads of unsuspecting birdwatchers; the dodo may dare to drop a few seeds in just the right place; the Tasmanian tiger may hunt its prey without threat; and even Great Auks may walk without fear, heralded by the rapid calls of gannets.