If cloning frogs and Dolly the sheep is any indication, I predict that endangered animals could be cloned within the next five years.
Would the pros to doing so out-weigh the cons, though? The pros I can think of are: more animals (obviously); less threat of that animal dying out; people would feel like they are making a positive impact on the world.
On the other hand, the cons would be: limited gene pools would not be increased by cloning so animals might still die out; where does one put larger populations of animals, particularly potentially dangerous ones like tigers, given that their habitat is more or less gone; cost; the potential attitude that we won’t have to worry about harming existing animal populations since we can duplicate them if we force them to the brink of extinction…
What other sorts of positives and negatives could arise if the science becomes a reality?
I want to see them clone a wooly mammoth.
I’m not a biologist or anything, but I’d fear that if a species becomes dependent on cloning to replenish and maintain its numbers, it will basically become so genetically homogenous that it will loose its vitality as an evolving species.
For instance if all Giant Pandas, due to cloning eventually become nearly genetically identical, a disease could easily wipe out the whole population.
This is based on a limited knowledge of genetics, but its the obvious drawback to me. Maybe someone smarter will care to explain why I am wrong…
Cute and cuddly pet Siberian Tigers for all and Bald Eagle wings at your local chinese restaurant.
The future is now, my friend!
On the OP, the biggest con is that cloning doesn’t do anything to increase genetic variability. Unless the species is utterly on the brink, it’s a pointless endeavour. Cloning is sexy science, but banking genes for artificial insemination has shown greater promise than cloning. It’s also much cheaper, more practical, and more reliable. Zoos swap genes all the time.
Just curious, where are you reading that cloning is viable method of forestalling extinction? Sounds like bad information to me.
No hybrid vigor.
If it weren’t for trafficing in black rhinos, elephants, tigers, giraffe, etc. (all of it quite legal in many African countries), many of these species would be on the brink of collapse. Populations are managed. Profits made from sport hunting.
Cloning might be sexy but it is a long way from being perfected. They don’t much mention the monstrosities they create.
Ostensibly, cloning would be good for security, a back up, but with the same genetic limitations as the orginal.
cloning wouldn’t be the best answer for all of the reasons mentioned above, but also these ones mentioned in my genetics and ethics courses…
as living cells age their DNA becomes less stable and spontaneously mutates, enough of these mutations in enough cells can lead eg. to cancer. cloning requires the DNA of an OLDER cell to be inserted into a modified ovum and the resulting embryo to be implanted. it took 30 such implantaions before ONE viable product (Dolly) was created. this was in sheep, which are relatively “easy” to breed. what about “harder” animals like tigers, rhinos etc?
so i)
your clone starts off with OLD, mutated DNA…not the best start in life you would think? Dolly already shows signs of premature aging.
and ii)
you have to create a LOT of embryos and make a LOT of animals pregnant to get a viable result…expensive and inefficient compared to Artificial Insemination.
so until technology is a bit more developed, no it’s not the best idea.
It raises very scary ethical questions though. The week before last there was a very good article in The New Yorker. Written by a doctor, it was about about the history of cancer research in this country. He said that much of the present research is focussing on oncogenes, genes which produce cancer. The article is fascinating and worth tracking down. There are over 100 different types of cancer and each manifests itself in each individual somewhat differently. Some victims respond to a specific treatment while others don’t. Hundreds of thousands of compounds have been scrutinized for use in the “war against cancer”. Public perception is that this disease is simple but pernicious. As if there was a single key to a cure that can be found. It is the very essence of the second law of thermodynamics. Cellular turpitude will claim us all.
But I wouldn’t underestimate the cunning of humankind, nor overestimate their wisdom. Philip K. Dick’s Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep (film adaptation, Bladerunner) is not so farfetched.
“Where’s the skinjob? I want those dishes done now”.
Consider the deep wound of slavery in this country. It would be Pollyanna to think in an atavistic “modernist” way that we have somehow grown out of genocidal tendencies or other human nastiness. Witness the growing concentration of wealth in fewer hands and the misery this causes.