Scientists plan to clone Woolly Mammoth

[Holdfast]

What do they intend to do with whatever they create?

Farm for wooly mammoth burgers?

Is it bad that this was my first thought? I wonder how mammoth tastes.

I'd try it.

I can't see there being much harm to cloning a mammoth or two. If nothing else, it would be interesting to see them. Trouble is, as far as I understand the technology (not an expert in that field), it requires the use of a surrogate cell to host the new DNA. That means you're dependent the mitochondrial DNA and other bits & pieces of cytoplasmic machinery. So you won't really be getting a mammoth, but a mammoth-somethingelse partial hybrid.

Which might affect the taste...

 

[RJDiogenes]

^^ It mentions that in the article.

I believe it is possible to taste mammoth meat. I think I've read that some frozen mammoths in Siberia have been edible when thawed.

As far as the cloning goes, there is no ethical issue. They're not likely to be introducing a breeding population into the wild.

 

[RoJoHen]

Farm for wooly mammoth burgers?

Is it bad that this was my first thought? I wonder how mammoth tastes.

I'd try it.

I can't see there being much harm to cloning a mammoth or two. If nothing else, it would be interesting to see them. Trouble is, as far as I understand the technology (not an expert in that field), it requires the use of a surrogate cell to host the new DNA. That means you're dependent the mitochondrial DNA and other bits & pieces of cytoplasmic machinery. So you won't really be getting a mammoth, but a mammoth-somethingelse partial hybrid.

Which might affect the taste...

Indeed. Without an honest-to-God mammoth mother to start with, you'd never be able to clone a legit mammoth.

Frankly, I think if you're going to attempt to clone extinct animals, you should do so in an attempt to repopulate the species. Cloning a mammoth and then just allowing it to die seems a bit of a waste to me. Even if successful, would a cloned mammoth be capable of reproducing?

 

[Holdfast]

^^ It mentions that in the article.

I really should read the links sometimes, rather than just commenting, shouldn't I? Sorry for the redundant verbiage!

Cloning a mammoth and then just allowing it to die seems a bit of a waste to me. Even if successful, would a cloned mammoth be capable of reproducing?

I think there's something to be said for just pushing back the frontiers of what's been done. You never know what you might learn, and the research would probably pay for itself in terms of attracting funding. As for the sterility issue, I don't think there would be any specific reason why a cloned animal would be sterile. Some hybrids are, of course (eg mules), but AFAIK that's because of their nuclear DNA (the hybridised sex chromosomes lead to problems with gametogenesis I think, but it's been ages since I did any genetics) rather than mitochondrial DNA.

 

[ares93]

Even if successful, would a cloned mammoth be capable of reproducing?

Well, no. Because there is no pappoth.

I'm really sorry. I know thats lame, but i just couldnt resist.

Seriously though, it wouldnt be able to reproduce unless they clone both a male and female mammoth.

 

[RoJoHen]

Seriously though, it wouldnt be able to reproduce unless they clone both a male and female mammoth.

Obviously. What I mean is, would it be possible to clone a mammoth that is even fertile? Don't hybrid animals tend to be barren?

 

[SeerSGB]

Farm for wooly mammoth burgers?

Is it bad that this was my first thought? I wonder how mammoth tastes.

I'd try it.

I can't see there being much harm to cloning a mammoth or two. If nothing else, it would be interesting to see them. Trouble is, as far as I understand the technology (not an expert in that field), it requires the use of a surrogate cell to host the new DNA. That means you're dependent the mitochondrial DNA and other bits & pieces of cytoplasmic machinery. So you won't really be getting a mammoth, but a mammoth-somethingelse partial hybrid.

Which might affect the taste...

Mammoth-Vulcan? What? It's a Trek board.

 

[Robert Maxwell]

As far as the cloning goes, there is no ethical issue. They're not likely to be introducing a breeding population into the wild.

I don't think that's a fair characterization. What about the ethical issues involved with bringing back an extinct species to exist only for scientific research? And if mammoths have anywhere near the intelligence of modern elephants, what we're really talking about is creating sentient beings specifically to keep them in captivity and study them. Is that really ethical? Is there a way to do it ethically?

 

[Bob The Skutter]

The question is can we clone a mammoth then breed a teacup-mammoth to keep as a pet?

 

[iguana_tonante]

Just because something can be done, doesn't mean it should be done.
What is the purpose of the exercise?
What do they intend to do with whatever they create?

You'd make a terrible scientist.

Well I think if it goes ahead there should be oversight by an ethics committee.

There goes my pet project of plunging Earth in a new Ice Age and then conquering it with my unstoppable army of mutant mammoths.

Frankly, I think if you're going to attempt to clone extinct animals, you should do so in an attempt to repopulate the species. Cloning a mammoth and then just allowing it to die seems a bit of a waste to me.

Actually, there is a full market for that: extinction at will! Do you always wanted to kill the last mammoth? Now you can... again and again! The ultimate thrill. Rich people would go nuts over it!

...I'm not helping the cause of science, am I?

 

[Robert Maxwell]

You'd make a terrible scientist.

Well I think if it goes ahead there should be oversight by an ethics committee.

There goes my pet project of plunging Earth in a new Ice Age and then conquering it with my unstoppable army of mutant mammoths.

Frankly, I think if you're going to attempt to clone extinct animals, you should do so in an attempt to repopulate the species. Cloning a mammoth and then just allowing it to die seems a bit of a waste to me.

Actually, there is a full market for that: extinction at will! Do you always wanted to kill the last mammoth? Now you can... again and again! The ultimate thrill. Rich people would go nuts over it!

...I'm not helping the cause of science, am I?

Everyone knows that man is the most dangerous game. Sign me up for hunting people. Just make sure they're bad people, so I won't feel guilty for shooting them. And then I'll send the corpses to this guy:

[yt]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LJP1DphOWPs[/yt]

 

[iguana_tonante]

Everybody knows that Sudoku is the most dangerous game.

 

[Alidar Jarok]

The thylacine's prey is common, under no threat, and often has to be culled. Add to this the fact that the reintroduced thylacine is likely to feed on rabbits than reintroducing them would most like be beneficial to wildlife.

The main problem would be determining how they would affect its two natural competitors - the quoll and the Tasmanian devil. It probably isn't in too much competition with the devil because the devil is a scavenger while the thylacine never was. The cat is probably more of a threat to quolls (as a competitor) than the thylacine would be.

The main problem with any reintroduction would be the Devil Facial Tumor Disease which has decimated the devil population. The devil is facing a serious threat and no-one knows the origin of the disease. So far it hasn't been found in any other species and, as it is only spread by devils biting each other when fighting it is unlikely to jump species. However the devl declining numbers mean that it would be wong to use any female devil as a surrogate mother for a thylacine. Devil mothers need to be used to boost their own species.

I almost wonder if the tasmanian tiger would do better on the mainland. There's a large infestation of animals like rabbits, it's main competition would be dingos, and it wouldn't interfere with tasmanian devils. I do wonder what it might do to animals like koalas, though.

 

[Hound of UIster]

Putting aside the ethical problem for a moment, I saw a TV show a couple years ago that covered this exact thing. The thing is, even if they managed to get viable cells, the resulting animal would be a hybrid of a mammoth and an elephant. It would take several generations to produce a mostly-pure mammoth.

They aren't talking about a hybrid, but a clone, which would be born 100% mammoth. The elephant would only provide the womb for the clone to incubate in, not any genetic material.

Um, no. From the article linked in the OP:

While most of the genetic coding of the embryo would come from the mammoth, some would come from the elephant ovum.
"We really don't know what the contribution of that cytoplasmic material is, or how it would interact with 'alien' DNA," he said.
It would however mean that, even if successful, the clone would be a hybrid rather than a pure mammoth.

The article writer seems to be confused. The genetic material in the nucleus is 100% mammoth, what the prof seems to be saying is that the cellular machinery in the ovum is still modern day elephant and they don't know how the two are going to interact. It's a hybrid in the sense that the cell and mitochrondria is from an elephant, but the dna is from a mammoth.

 

[doubleohfive]

Sounds like the elephant in the room then would be which is which? Also, has anyone asked the Sam Neill question yet?

Just because we can do a thing, does it mean we should?

 

[sojourner]

^Depends on the thing in question.

 

[Robert Maxwell]

You could just as well ask the opposite question: Just because we haven't, does it mean we shouldn't?

 

[scotpens]

I almost wonder if the tasmanian tiger would do better on the mainland. There's a large infestation of animals like rabbits, it's main competition would be dingos, and it wouldn't interfere with tasmanian devils. I do wonder what it might do to animals like koalas, though.

Fuck the koalas. I hate those lazy little critters. All they do is sleep, eat eucalyptus leaves, and say “Look at me, I’m so goddamn cute!”

 

[RoJoHen]

I almost wonder if the tasmanian tiger would do better on the mainland. There's a large infestation of animals like rabbits, it's main competition would be dingos, and it wouldn't interfere with tasmanian devils. I do wonder what it might do to animals like koalas, though.

Fuck the koalas. I hate those lazy little critters. All they do is sleep, eat eucalyptus leaves, and say “Look at me, I’m so goddamn cute!”

Sounds like a pretty great existence if you ask me.

 

[Itisnotlogical]

I'm all for cloning them for study and research, but I would really rather that they not introduce them into the wild at all. Mammoths have been extinct for a long-ass time and the various living beings of the world have adjusted to not having them around. Who knows what crazy, zany animal adventures would occur if they began reproducing in the wild (if they clone both genders in enough quantities for a viable population)?

(Probably very horrible things. I really have no clue but it sounds like releasing them is Something We Really Shouldn't Do, if only for safety's sake).