A mammoth undertaking: harnessing insight from functional ecology to shape de‐extinction priority setting

Assessing contemporary Arctic habitat availability for a woolly mammoth proxy

Interest continues to grow in Arctic megafaunal ecological engineering, but, since the mass extinction of megafauna ~ 12-15 ka, key physiographic variables and available forage continue to change. Here we sought to assess the extent to which contemporary Arctic ecosystems are conducive to the rewilding of megaherbivores, using a woolly mammoth (M. primigenius) proxy as a model species. We first perform a literature review on woolly mammoth dietary habits. We then leverage Oak Ridge National Laboratories Distributive Active Archive Center Global Aboveground and Belowground Biomass Carbon Density Maps to generate aboveground biomass carbon density estimates in plant functional types consumed by the woolly mammoth at 300 m resolution on Alaska's North Slope. We supplement these analyses with a NASA Arctic Boreal Vulnerability Experiment dataset to downgrade overall biomass estimates to digestible levels. We further downgrade available forage by using a conversion factor representing the relationship between total biomass and net primary productivity (NPP) for arctic vegetation types. Integrating these estimates with the forage needs of woolly mammoths, we conservatively estimate Alaska's North Slope could support densities of 0.0-0.38 woolly mammoth km-2 (mean 0.13) across a variety of habitats. These results may inform innovative rewilding strategies.

Cloning for the Twenty-First Century and Its Place in Endangered Species Conservation

Cloning as it relates to the animal kingdom generally refers to the production of genetically identical individuals. Because cloning is increasingly the subject of renewed attention as a tool for rescuing endangered or extinct species, it seems timely to dissect the role of the numerous reproductive techniques encompassed by this term in animal species conservation. Although cloning is typically associated with somatic cell nuclear transfer, the recent advent of additional techniques that allow genome replication without genetic recombination demands that the use of induced pluripotent stem cells to generate gametes or embryos, as well as older methods such as embryo splitting, all be included in this discussion. Additionally, the phenomenon of natural cloning (e.g., a subset of fish, birds, invertebrates, and reptilian species that reproduce via parthenogenesis) must also be pointed out. Beyond the biology of these techniques are practical considerations and the ethics of using cloning and associated procedures in endangered or extinct species. All of these must be examined in concert to determine whether cloning has a place in species conservation. Therefore, we synthesize progress in cloning and associated techniques and dissect the practical and ethical aspects of these methods as they pertain to endangered species conservation.

In vitro and in vivo development of interspecies Asian elephant embryos reconstructed with pig enucleated oocytes

Interspecies somatic cell nuclear transfer (iSCNT) has an immense potential to rescue endangered animals and extinct species like mammoths. In this study, we successfully established an Asian elephant's fibroblast cell lines from ear tissues, performed iSCNT with porcine oocytes and evaluated the in vitro and in vivo development of reconstructed embryos. A total of 7780 elephant-pig iSCNT embryos were successfully reconstructed and showed in vitro development with cleavage rate, 4-cell, 8-cell and blastocyst rate of 73.01, 30.48, 5.64, and 4.73%, respectively. The total number of elephant-pig blastocyte cells and diameter of hatched blastocyte was 38.67 and 252.75 μm, respectively. Next, we designed species-specific markers targeting EDNRB, AGRP and TYR genes to verify the genome of reconstructed embryos with donor nucleus/species. The results indicated that 53.2, 60.8, and 60.8% of reconstructed embryos (n = 235) contained elephant genome at 1-cell, 2-cell and 4-cell stages, respectively. However, the percentages decreased to 32.3 and 32.7% at 8-cell and blastocyst stages, respectively. Furthermore, we also evaluated the in vivo development of elephant-pig iSCNT cloned embryos and transferred 2260 reconstructed embryos into two surrogate gilts that successfully became pregnant and a total of 11 (1 and 10) fetuses were surgically recovered after 17 and 19 days of gestation, respectively. The crown-rump length and width of elephant-pig cloned fetuses were smaller than the control group. Unfortunately, none of these fetuses contained elephant genomes, which suggested that elephant embryos failed to develop in vivo. In conclusion, we successfully obtained elephant-pig reconstructed embryos for the first time and these embryos are able to develop to blastocyst, but the in vivo developmental failure needs further investigated.

Harnessing the omics revolution to address the global biodiversity crisis

Human disturbances are altering global biodiversity in unprecedented ways. We identify three fundamental challenges underpinning our understanding of global biodiversity (namely discovery, loss, and preservation), and discuss how the omics revolution (e.g. genomics, transcriptomics, proteomics, metabolomics, and meta-omics) can help address these challenges. We also discuss how omics tools can illuminate the major drivers of biodiversity loss, including invasive species, pollution, urbanization, overexploitation, and climate change, with a special focus on highly diverse tropical environments. Although omics tools are transforming the traditional toolkit of biodiversity research, their application to addressing the current biodiversity crisis remains limited and may not suffice to offset current rates of biodiversity loss. Despite technical and logistical challenges, omics tools need to be fully integrated into global biodiversity research, and better strategies are needed to improve their translation into biodiversity policy and practice. It is also important to recognize that although the omics revolution can be considered the biologist's dream, socioeconomic disparity limits their application in biodiversity research.

How genomics can help biodiversity conservation

The availability of public genomic resources can greatly assist biodiversity assessment, conservation, and restoration efforts by providing evidence for scientifically informed management decisions. Here we survey the main approaches and applications in biodiversity and conservation genomics, considering practical factors, such as cost, time, prerequisite skills, and current shortcomings of applications. Most approaches perform best in combination with reference genomes from the target species or closely related species. We review case studies to illustrate how reference genomes can facilitate biodiversity research and conservation across the tree of life. We conclude that the time is ripe to view reference genomes as fundamental resources and to integrate their use as a best practice in conservation genomics.

A global ecological signal of extinction risk in terrestrial vertebrates

To determine the distribution and causes of extinction threat across functional groups of terrestrial vertebrates, we assembled an ecological trait data set for 18,016 species of terrestrial vertebrates and utilized phylogenetic comparative methods to test which categories of habitat association, mode of locomotion, and feeding mode best predicted extinction risk. We also examined the individual categories of the International Union for Conservation of Nature Red List extinction drivers (e.g., agriculture and logging) threatening each species and determined the greatest threats for each of the four terrestrial vertebrate groups. We then quantified the sum of extinction drivers threatening each species to provide a multistressor perspective on threat. Cave dwelling amphibians (p < 0.01), arboreal quadrupedal mammals (all of which are primates) (p < 0.01), aerial and scavenging birds (p < 0.01), and pedal (i.e., walking) squamates (p < 0.01) were all disproportionately threatened with extinction in comparison with the other assessed ecological traits. Across all threatened vertebrate species in the study, the most common risk factors were agriculture, threatening 4491 species, followed by logging, threatening 3187 species, and then invasive species and disease, threatening 2053 species. Species at higher risk of extinction were simultaneously at risk from a greater number of threat types. If left unabated, the disproportionate loss of species with certain functional traits and increasing anthropogenic pressures are likely to disrupt ecosystem functions globally. A shift in focus from species- to trait-centric conservation practices will allow for protection of at-risk functional diversity from regional to global scales.

Building genomes to understand biology

Genetic manipulation is one of the central strategies that biologists use to investigate the molecular underpinnings of life and its diversity. Thus, advances in genetic manipulation usually lead to a deeper understanding of biological systems. During the last decade, the construction of chromosomes, known as synthetic genomics, has emerged as a novel approach to genetic manipulation. By facilitating complex modifications to chromosome content and structure, synthetic genomics opens new opportunities for studying biology through genetic manipulation. Here, we discuss different classes of genetic manipulation that are enabled by synthetic genomics, as well as biological problems they each can help solve.

Creating proxies of extinct species: the bioethics of de-extinction

In April 2013 the National Geographic magazine carried the cover title 'Reviving extinct species, we can, but should we?' suggesting that the technical challenges had been met, but some ethical concerns remained unresolved. Seven years later it is clear that this is not the case. Here we consider the technical scope, the uncertainties, and some of the bioethical issues raised by the future prospect of de-extinction. Biodiversity and welfare will not always align, and when a clash is unavoidable, a trade-off will be necessary, seeking the greatest overall value. De-extinction challenges our current conservation mind-set that seeks to preserve the species and population diversity that currently exists. But if we want to sustain and enhance a biodiverse natural world we might have to be forward looking and embrace the notion of bio-novelty by focussing more on ecosystem stability and resilience, rather than backward looking and seeking to try and recreate lost worlds.

Spaceship Earth Revisited: The Co-Benefits of Overcoming Biological Extinction of Experience at the Level of Person, Place and Planet

Extensive research underscores that we interpret the world through metaphors; moreover, common metaphors are a useful means to enhance the pursuit of personal and collective goals. In the context of planetary health—defined as the interdependent vitality of all natural and anthropogenic ecosystems (social, political and otherwise)—one enduring metaphor can be found in the concept of “Spaceship Earth”. Although not without criticism, the term “Spaceship Earth” has been useful to highlight both resource limitations and the beauty and fragility of delicate ecosystems that sustain life. Rene Dubos, who helped popularize the term, underscored the need for an exposome perspective, one that examines the total accumulated environmental exposures (both detrimental and beneficial) that predict the biological responses of the “total organism to the total environment” over time. In other words, how large-scale environmental changes affect us all personally, albeit in individualized ways. This commentary focuses the ways in which microbes, as an essential part of all ecosystems, provide a vital link between personal and planetary systems, and mediate the biopsychosocial aspects of our individualized experience—and thus health—over our life course journey. A more fine-grained understanding of these dynamics and our power to change them, personally and collectively, lies at the core of restoring “ecosystems balance” for person, place and planet. In particular, restoring human connectedness to the natural world, sense of community and shared purpose must occur in tandem with technological solutions, and will enhance individual empowerment for personal well-being, as well as our collective potential to overcome our grand challenges. Such knowledge can help shape the use of metaphor and re-imagine solutions and novel ways for restoration or rewilding of ecosystems, and the values, behaviors and attitudes to light the path toward exiting the Anthropocene.

De-Extinction

De-extinction projects for species such as the woolly mammoth and passenger pigeon have greatly stimulated public and scientific interest, producing a large body of literature and much debate. To date, there has been little consistency in descriptions of de-extinction technologies and purposes. In 2016, a special committee of the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) published a set of guidelines for de-extinction practice, establishing the first detailed description of de-extinction; yet incoherencies in published literature persist. There are even several problems with the IUCN definition. Here I present a comprehensive definition of de-extinction practice and rationale that expounds and reconciles the biological and ecological inconsistencies in the IUCN definition. This new definition brings together the practices of reintroduction and ecological replacement with de-extinction efforts that employ breeding strategies to recover unique extinct phenotypes into a single “de-extinction” discipline. An accurate understanding of de-extinction and biotechnology segregates the restoration of certain species into a new classification of endangerment, removing them from the purview of de-extinction and into the arena of species’ recovery. I term these species as “evolutionarily torpid species”; a term to apply to species falsely considered extinct, which in fact persist in the form of cryopreserved tissues and cultured cells. For the first time in published literature, all currently active de-extinction breeding programs are reviewed and their progress presented. Lastly, I review and scrutinize various topics pertaining to de-extinction in light of the growing body of peer-reviewed literature published since de-extinction breeding programs gained public attention in 2013.

The overkill model and its impact on environmental research

Research on human-environment interactions that informs ecological practices and guides conservation and restoration has become increasingly interdisciplinary over the last few decades. Fueled in part by the debate over defining a start date for the Anthropocene, historical disciplines like archeology, paleontology, geology, and history are playing an important role in understanding long-term anthropogenic impacts on the planet. Pleistocene overkill, the notion that humans overhunted megafauna near the end of the Pleistocene in the Americas, Australia, and beyond, is used as prime example of the impact that humans can have on the planet. However, the importance of the overkill model for explaining human-environment interactions and anthropogenic impacts appears to differ across disciplines. There is still considerable debate, particularly within archeology, about the extent to which people may have been the cause of these extinctions. To evaluate how different disciplines interpret and use the overkill model, we conducted a citation analysis of selected works of the main proponent of the overkill model, Paul Martin. We examined the ideas and arguments for which Martin's overkill publications were cited and how they differed between archeologists and ecologists. Archeologists cite overkill as one in a combination of causal mechanisms for the extinctions. In contrast, ecologists are more likely to accept that humans caused the extinctions. Aspects of the overkill argument are also treated as established ecological processes. For some ecologists, overkill provides an analog for modern-day human impacts and supports the argument that humans have "always" been somewhat selfish overconsumers. The Pleistocene rewilding and de-extinction movements are built upon these perspectives. The use of overkill in ecological publications suggests that despite increasing interdisciplinarity, communication with disciplines outside of ecology is not always reciprocal or even.

De-scenting Extinction: The Promise of De-extinction May Hasten Continuing Extinctions

Among the most egregious and discouraging problems of conservation is the rapidly escalating human-caused species extinction rate. "De-extinction" refers to the application of certain cutting-edge techniques for the supposed recovery of lost species and gives the impression that scientists, enlightened and empowered by the miracles of technology, are coming to the rescue. "De-extinction" is the latest example of a long play of language that has given conservation efforts a tragically false sense of accomplishment and has worsened the conservation crisis. De-extinction is the tip of an intellectual iceberg that sits atop of a host of profoundly questionable value systems, expectations, attitudes, and priorities that elude and bewitch critical reflection. It gives the impression that extinction is reversible and, thus, diminishes the gravity of the human annihilation of species. Here, we examine how the language of de-extinction influences attitudes, shapes thoughts and imagination, and creates ethical blindness. The language developing around "de-extinction" reveals what is in fact a profound intellectual crisis at the foundation of conservation. The underlying challenge is to find the language that will articulate and inspire the radical and indispensable change needed to come to grips with the value of nature.

Reclaiming Hope in Extinction Storytelling

Critics often take conservationists to task for delivering a constant barrage of bad news without offering a compelling vision of the future. Could recent advances in synthetic biology-an optimistic, forward-looking field with a can-do attitude-let conservationists develop a new vision and generate some better news? Synthetic biology and related gene-editing applications could be used to address threats to species. Genetic interventions might also be used in plants to better protect biodiversity in U.S. rangelands and forests. One possibility has stood out in its ability to capture media attention and the public imagination-recreating extinct species. And perhaps a de-extinction story could counter the seemingly relentless negativity in biodiversity talk. De-extinction proponent Stewart Brand writes that resurrecting species could shift the "conservation story … from negative to positive, from constant whining and guilt-tripping to high fives and new excitement." So, why do many people in conservation oppose the de-extinction narrative? This essay is an inquiry into whether there are intrinsic social reactions to these types of conservation solutions that might offset their potential benefits. If genetic tools are to be applied to address conservation issues in a realistic and responsible way, their broader social-cultural implications deserve far more attention than they have so far received.