The Implications of Cloning Extinct Animals The modern world is filled with diverse species of plants, animals, and ecosystems. Looking back hundreds or thousands of years, though, the types of environments, plants, and animals, vary from virtually the same to drastically different. Animals have either evolved or gone extinct as the environment changed, new species came and went, or humans impacted them. There is controversy whether extinct animals should be left extinct, or if people should intervene and bring them back. With modern technology, it would be possible to clone an extinct or endangered animal using genetic material from the cells of the animal, even after being dead for years. The real question is, should we? With an ever-changing
…show more content…
Regions of the world gradually change temperature, humans interfere, water levels change, and more. As these are occuring, new species are adapting to these changes, they have to to survive. Evolution may take place over thousands of years, and it takes a while for a species to recover from a drastic change in environment. With that said, placing an animal into a environment that they once called home would not be sufficient for them to survive. The ecosystem that they once were a part of has changed, and all the species that survived have changed with the environment. The new, cloned, animals would not have to adaptations needed to survive in the environment. They would likely be at a disadvantage and have trouble thriving, and die off again. Humans would have to put forth a great deal of work, money, and resources to keep the species alive, and it may be impossible for them to ever live on their own again. In the book, Jurassic Park, the cloned dinosaurs were kept in secure, controlled habitats because the habitat they were made for no longer existed. If humans cloned once extinct animals, they may only have the potential to live in a zoo, or a controlled environment, never able to become stable in the …show more content…
Older preserves of organisms also have limited usable genetic material, and the lack of diversity would present more problems with inbreeding, susceptibility to disease, and others. Sue Lindsey, an executive director of the Wild Canid Survival and Research Center, says "Even if you cloned several of these animals, I 'd be concerned about there being enough robust [genetic] material out there that [the population] would survive." (Mott, Maryann) Biodiversity is essential to a healthy, long living, thriving species, and when we have limited amount of diversity to start with, it would be very difficult to grow as a population. Cloning sounds like a good idea on the surface, but would have too many possible complications. Some scientists believe otherwise though. They claim that cloning extinct or endangered animals would undo the damage we’ve done to the species, or it would be a positive advancement for science, allowing us to study newer species. However, as stated before, the possible consequences would outweigh the benefits. Cloning would do damage to the environment and other species, and it could actually lead to more endangered animals. "It totally ignores the very practical realities of what conservation is about," conservation ecologist at Duke University, Stuart Pimm says. (Wu,
Regions of the world gradually change temperature, humans interfere, water levels change, and more. As these are occuring, new species are adapting to these changes, they have to to survive. Evolution may take place over thousands of years, and it takes a while for a species to recover from a drastic change in environment. With that said, placing an animal into a environment that they once called home would not be sufficient for them to survive. The ecosystem that they once were a part of has changed, and all the species that survived have changed with the environment. The new, cloned, animals would not have to adaptations needed to survive in the environment. They would likely be at a disadvantage and have trouble thriving, and die off again. Humans would have to put forth a great deal of work, money, and resources to keep the species alive, and it may be impossible for them to ever live on their own again. In the book, Jurassic Park, the cloned dinosaurs were kept in secure, controlled habitats because the habitat they were made for no longer existed. If humans cloned once extinct animals, they may only have the potential to live in a zoo, or a controlled environment, never able to become stable in the …show more content…
Older preserves of organisms also have limited usable genetic material, and the lack of diversity would present more problems with inbreeding, susceptibility to disease, and others. Sue Lindsey, an executive director of the Wild Canid Survival and Research Center, says "Even if you cloned several of these animals, I 'd be concerned about there being enough robust [genetic] material out there that [the population] would survive." (Mott, Maryann) Biodiversity is essential to a healthy, long living, thriving species, and when we have limited amount of diversity to start with, it would be very difficult to grow as a population. Cloning sounds like a good idea on the surface, but would have too many possible complications. Some scientists believe otherwise though. They claim that cloning extinct or endangered animals would undo the damage we’ve done to the species, or it would be a positive advancement for science, allowing us to study newer species. However, as stated before, the possible consequences would outweigh the benefits. Cloning would do damage to the environment and other species, and it could actually lead to more endangered animals. "It totally ignores the very practical realities of what conservation is about," conservation ecologist at Duke University, Stuart Pimm says. (Wu,