Background and Context Cloning is the act of producing a copy of a living organism that is physically and genetically identical to the organism that it originates from. There are many ways to clone organisms. In the question of extinct animals, those ways are somatic cell nuclear transfer, SCANT for short, or mapping out the genome of an extinct animal and implanting it into a closely related surrogate mother. In the case of the woolly mammoth, the cell would have to be implanted into an Asian elephant (Hutchinson).
Another idea proposed by scientists would be to alter an existing elephant’s genome so that it followed the genome of a woolly mammoth (Hutchinson). Recently, cloning has seen a significant number of advances. The Asian ox is an endangered species. Fortunately, 2001 saw the birth of Noah, a successfully born Asian ox. Unfortunately, he died a few days later (Hutchinson). Other kinds of cloning have also been advancing. In 2008, the efficiency of agricultural cloning caused the FDA to approve consumption of cloned animals.
For clients who miss their pets, reproductive cloning allows clients to “resurrect” their livestock or pets for a large sum of money (Hutchinson). Although there have been no lawsuits against extinct animal cloning, many groups oppose it because they don’t want unethical practices taken to clone animals. In 1952, Robert Briggs and his team of scientists created the first successful animal clone. They removed the nucleus from a frog egg and replaced it with DNA from a different frogs cells.
In 1996, the first adult mammal, Dolly the sheep, was cloned by Ian Willet (Hutchinson). Instead of taking DNA from an embryonic cell, Willet took the genetic information from an adult male sheep and injected it into a fertilized female egg through SCANT (Hutchinson). 2. Side 1: Extinct Animals Should not be Brought Back The opponents of extinct animal cloning have two main reasons for their opinion: 1 . Animal cloning is unethical, with a low success rate 2.
It would take way too much time to bring back a full extinct animal Of course, there are many other reasons for why resurrecting extinct animals is bad, including the fact that we should be focusing more on today’s endangered species and that we onto know how to reintroduce them into our natural habitats. However, these two are the reasons that will be focused on in this section. First of all, a successfully cloned animal comes from a long process of trial and error. Most of these trials have “low success rates. ” Even if an animal is born, it is prone to many health problems, including respiratory failure and heart defects (Hutchinson).
When Dolly, the first cloned mammal, was created, 29 out of 229 embryos were considered suitable for cloning. Out of those cloning attempts, only Dolly, 1/29, was successfully born. Or a success rate of 3. 4% (Morris). Secondly, fully bringing back extinct animals will take too much time while we could be pursuing other scientific endeavors. Most scientists agree that bringing back a fully cloned 100% mammoth is optimistically over 20-30 years away. This is because in cloning, the mammoth’s genetic material must be inserted into an Asian elephant’s egg, and then implanted into the elephant itself (Hutchinson).
All the DNA that scientists are getting for mammoth cloning comes from frozen mammoth parts found in Siberia. Not only must their complex genome be completely reproduced from scratch, the constant thawing and freezing of the mammoth parts could easily have damaged the cells being used in the genome project. Someone Gregory, one of the scientists working on the project, notes that mapping their genome is a “complex process that can take many years,” and that it would take a whole year Just to determine whether a newly discovered frozen mammoth’s cells were alive or not (The Associated Press).
Even then, Toothier Yakima of the RISEN Center for Developmental Biology in Kobo, Japan says that woolly mammoth carcasses “would likely have frozen and thawed several times,” causing damage to the cells (Knows). Furthermore, many animals become extinct because humans have destroyed or altered their natural habitats. To have these animals brought back for the purpose of reputation would mean spending many resources to rebuild their habitat in the natural world. I know that my house is probably built upon knocked down forests and trees.
The deer that used to inhabit those forests are running out of places to stay and have resorted to living among humans, eating their gardens and plants to survive. There are many other species like this deer and no one has been able to come up with a solution for them. If we can’t fix problems with animals still in existence, how would we be able to make a whole new habitat for resurrected animals? (Morris). 3. Side 2 Draft: Extinct Animals Should be Brought Back The people who support bringing back extinct animals have two main reasons for their side: 1 .
Scientists are very close to being able to bring back an extinct animal. Science should not be impeded. 2. It could lead to environmental benefits There are other reasons for extinct animal cloning. Scientists argue that humans as a species have a moral obligation since humans were the ones who hunted extinct animals out of existence. Other scientists think it would Just be really cool to see animals only seen in movies in real life. However, the two main reasons above are going to be the main focus of this section. Extinct cloning is a learning process. It should be done for the sake of knowledge itself.
Scientists are very close to achieving this goal. They have already obtained “80% of the woolly mammoth genome” from “high quality DNA preserved” within frozen mammoths (Gingerbread). Extinct cloning is a knowledge fountain Just waiting to be discovered. Even if scientists couldn’t finish he mammoth genome, they have already replicated and synthesized several working viruses. Although viruses are much simpler than eukaryotic cells, this “theoretically suggests that even without an intact mammoth cell, one could” assemble the mammoth genome, or any genome, to be exact (Greenwood).
Bringing back extinct species, or De-extinction also raises the question, where will the animals go once they’ve been born? To answer this, Serge Gizmo, a Russian scientist, has created “Pleistocene Park” which, to be completed, needs: “1) a woolly rhino, and 2) a woolly mammoth” (Gingerbread). With scientists so close to De-extinction, it would be a waste of time and money to stop now. Even if cloning ends up failing, there’s no harm in learning any new information about the subject. De-extinction could potentially have environmental benefits.
Whenever an animal dies, whatever food chain that that animal belonged to loses diversity. The addition of extinct animals into that “could achieve the opposite effect. ” For example, the mammoth’s grazing habits “might encourage the growth of a variety of grasses,” which would help prevent the Arctic room melting. Some scientists have also talked about bringing back the passenger pigeon, which could potentially compete for acorns with rodents and deer, thereby decreasing Lame disease (Rich).
Many scientists hope that the success of such a project would “increase public awareness of the threats of mass extinction” (Rich). With so many species dying off every year, a real life ancient animal could really open the eyes of many people to the loss in diversity in this world. I always thought cloning was something taken from science fiction books. It was the basis for Jurassic Park and many other media outlets. However, now it seems like it’s not that far away. 4. Conclusion: The Larger Issue Ultimately, this debate is about whether or not history should be resurrected.
