Friday, 17 February 2017
"Let's Create A 'Mammophant' -We've Nothing Better To Do With Our Time!"
Natural History Museum, London/SPL
This article in The Guardian online was interesting. Interesting in how misleading it is. I would really LOVE to see a mammoth but I'm not going to. A few simple notes.
Your milk. How and why do you keep getting milk? Because of cows. There are a lot of cows but why? Because dairy farmers only want "breeders and milkers" -male cows are killed straight away.
Like your eggs? Lots of chickens -why? Because chicks are sexed after being born and if it ain't a hen its killed. Not very nicely.
So what has this to do with reviving or "de-extincting" (which is not even a real word fer cripes sake) mammoths? Simple. If you try to create certain traits in cats, dogs or any animal what you do is breed the ones with the traits you want. The offspring without those traits are killed (sorry "euthenised"). The ones with some of the traits are kept alive to breed until the exact traits show.
Ahh, those Russian bred foxes. "Selectively bred" over the years. Which means, of course, that any pup NOT looking like what the breeders wanted were killed. The survivors kept in cramp cages and bred and bred -and don't think the breeding foxes survived after they could no longer breed. It can all be shown and read about in very sanitized ways: http://www.bbc.com/earth/story/20160912-a-soviet-scientist-created-the-only-tame-foxes-in-the-world
So where am I going with this? Say they manage to do what they want? However, it's "not quite right"? That 'success' would be euthenised, dissected and lessons learnt. Then they succeed and get what they want. But what about the successes that are not quite what they wanted? Practice in wildlife parks and zoos is to kill these off as "excess stock" but might these unsuccessful successes be sellable to zoos as attractions to make money until the "real thing" is available?
You see, most will be interested in the visitors such an animal can draw in and the money that makes. Who wants to see half a non-mammoth when another zoo has the real thing? And then, once bred where will these animals go?
As shown in the article, there are questions as to how regular elephants would treat a “mammophant” because elephants are social how will a “mammophant” live? You would need to have a male and female for a breeding pair and then you are in the endless cycle of breeding to establish a herd and there would be the question of "excess stock" because you may have too many males or even females unable to breed. Sell them off so they can live a lonely life in a park or zoo?
There is also the fact that this would not be a real mammonth. Mammoths varied in size, according to the remains found, from 4 m (13.1 ft) at the shoulder and weights of up to 8 tonnes (8.8 short tons) and more, though others could be the sized of a modern Asioan elephant at 2.5 m to 3 m high at the shoulder, and rarely exceeding 5 tonnes.
We are talking about a domesticated freak show species. Imagine they were bred to a degree that allowed them to be introduced into the wild. They won't last long because, illegal or not, some rich dentist will want to shoot one -and if they developed huge tusks....
News items tend to not mention the big problems -or, to them, the "little ones". They go by press releases. Space fillers.
Perhaps we should be putting all the money into breeding and saving the rhino and elephants that are already flying toward endangered species level and extinction?
Wolves and other predators, and non predators, have been saved from the brink of extinction yet, right now, Humans are legally killing them in high numbers and not just making established groups extinct but pushing the species to the limit -and ignorance, money and business is the main factor in "why?" And the same applies to whales, dolphins and other sea species.
To create a new species without a well thought out and explained/monitored long term plan while other species are being killed off is, morally wrong.
Now, onto the sanitized fluff.
Size comparison of mammoth species. M. primigenius (3.4 m), M. exilis (1.8 m), M. columbi, M. trogontherii, and M. meridionalis (4 m).
Now, onto the sanitized fluff.
The woolly mammoth vanished from the Earth 4,000 years ago, but now scientists say they are on the brink of resurrecting the ancient beast in a revised form, through an ambitious feat of genetic engineering.
Speaking ahead of the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) annual meeting in Boston this week, the scientist leading the “de-extinction” effort said the Harvard team is just two years away from creating a hybrid embryo, in which mammoth traits would be programmed into an Asian elephant.
“Our aim is to produce a hybrid elephant-mammoth embryo,” said Prof George Church. “Actually, it would be more like an elephant with a number of mammoth traits. We’re not there yet, but it could happen in a couple of years.”
The creature, sometimes referred to as a “mammophant”, would be partly elephant, but with features such as small ears, subcutaneous fat, long shaggy hair and cold-adapted blood. The mammoth genes for these traits are spliced into the elephant DNA using the powerful gene-editing tool, Crispr.
Until now, the team have stopped at the cell stage, but are now moving towards creating embryos – although, they said that it would be many years before any serious attempt at producing a living creature.
“We’re working on ways to evaluate the impact of all these edits and basically trying to establish embryogenesis in the lab,” said Church.
Since starting the project in 2015 the researchers have increased the number of “edits” where mammoth DNA has been spliced into the elephant genome from 15 to 45.
“We already know about ones to do with small ears, subcutaneous fat, hair and blood, but there are others that seem to be positively selected,” he said.
Church said that these modifications could help preserve the Asian elephant, which is endangered, in an altered form. However, others have raised ethical concerns about the project.
Matthew Cobb, professor of zoology at the University of Manchester, said: “The proposed ‘de-extinction’ of mammoths raises a massive ethical issue – the mammoth was not simply a set of genes, it was a social animal, as is the modern Asian elephant. What will happen when the elephant-mammoth hybrid is born? How will it be greeted by elephants?”
Church also outlined plans to grow the hybrid animal within an artificial womb rather than recruit a female elephant as a surrogate mother - a plan which some believe will not be achievable within the next decade.
“We hope to do the entire procedure ex-vivo (outside a living body),” he said. “It would be unreasonable to put female reproduction at risk in an endangered species.”
He added that his lab is already capable of growing a mouse embryo in an artificial womb for 10 days - halfway through its gestation period.
“We’re testing the growth of mice ex-vivo. There are experiments in the literature from the 1980s but there hasn’t been much interest for a while,” he said. “Today we’ve got a whole new set of technology and we’re taking a fresh look at it.”
“Church’s team is proposing to rear the embryo in an ‘artificial womb’ which seems ambitious to say the least – the resultant animal would have been deprived of all the pre-birth interactions with its mother,” said Cobb.
The woolly mammoth roamed across Europe, Asia, Africa and North America during the last Ice Age and vanished about 4,000 years ago, probably due to a combination of climate change and hunting by humans.
Their closest living relative is the Asian, not the African, elephant.
“De-extincting” the mammoth has become a realistic prospect because of revolutionary gene editing techniques that allow the precise selection and insertion of DNA from specimens frozen over millennia in Siberian ice.
Church helped develop the most widely used technique, known as Crispr/Cas9, that has transformed genetic engineering since it was first demonstrated in 2012. Derived from a defence system bacteria use to fend off viruses, it allows the “cut and paste” manipulation of strands of DNA with a precision not seen before.
Gene editing and its ethical implications is one of the key topics under discussion at the Boston conference.
Church, a guest speaker at the meeting, said the mammoth project had two goals: securing an alternative future for the endangered Asian elephant and helping to combat global warming. Woolly mammoths could help prevent tundra permafrost from melting and releasing huge amounts of greenhouse gas into the atmosphere.
“They keep the tundra from thawing by punching through snow and allowing cold air to come in,” said Church. “In the summer they knock down trees and help the grass grow.”
The scientists intend to engineer elephant skin cells to produce the embryo, or multiple embryos, using cloning techniques. Nuclei from the reprogrammed cells would be placed into elephant egg cells whose own genetic material has been removed. The eggs would then be artificially stimulated to develop into embryos.
Church predicts that age-reversal will become a reality within 10 years as a result of the new developments in genetic engineering.