Raising the dead: ‘De-extinction’ science could lead to rescue of threatened wildlife

SEDDON

If you think bringing extinct species, such as the moa, back to life is simply science fiction fantasy, think again.

Some scientists such as University of Otago zoologist Philip Seddon, say such questions are moving from the realm of science fiction into science fact.

Seddon has co-authored an article on de-extinction in the ecological journal, Trends in Ecology and Evolution.

The article has already sparked considerable international attention, including a recent lengthy article on ”de-extinction” in the New York Times, which refers to his research.

He says technological advances have raised the controversial prospect of resurrecting extinct species.

Some people are horrified at talk of ”de-extinction’, partly because they fear that if extinct species can be brought back to life, this will distract resources and attention from the more urgent task of saving endangered species from the imminent risk of extinction.

But there could be a positive side to some carefully-considered ”de-extinctions”, he says.

The possibility of bringing back a species must raise questions about whether there is suitable habitat and could even be a major incentive for habitat restorations. And good habitat for mammoths, or moa or huia, will also be good habitat for a multitude of other native species.

Overseas researchers recently cloned an extinct type of European mountain goat from tissue, using an egg cell of a domestic goat, which also acted as a surrogate mother. However, the kid died within a few minutes of birth.

Seddon argues de-extinction ought to be more than a technical exercise.

If you want to resurrect a species, ”the idea is not to create something that’s a curiosity in a zoo”.

It should be for some ecological gain- putting a species back into a suitable habitat to do the kind of things it used to do.

The major challenge is how to apply the range of translocation tools available to maximise conservation benefit while minimising the risk of unintended consequences.

Teams of South Korean and Russian scientists are already working to reconstruct the DNA of Siberian mammoths, to possibly try to bring them back from extinction. And New Zealand has developed internationally recognised skills in reintroducing threatened animals, such as protected birds on offshore islands.

Seddon says the New Zealand public will need to think ”very carefully” about what it wants.

Bringing back the huia, a small wattle bird which was last confirmed seen in 1907, and a small species of moa are among the possibilities.

They could live in protected areas in national parks if New Zealanders wanted them to make a comeback, he says.

Ultimately, the public should decide if de-extinction is a positive move, or if scarce conservation funding can be better spent saving what we still have.

Read the full, original story: Lost species: Raising the dead

{{ reviewsTotal }}{{ options.labels.singularReviewCountLabel }}
{{ reviewsTotal }}{{ options.labels.pluralReviewCountLabel }}
{{ options.labels.newReviewButton }}
{{ userData.canReview.message }}

Related Articles

Infographic: Global regulatory and health research agencies on whether glyphosate causes cancer

Infographic: Global regulatory and health research agencies on whether glyphosate causes cancer

Does glyphosate—the world's most heavily-used herbicide—pose serious harm to humans? Is it carcinogenic? Those issues are of both legal and ...

Most Popular

Screenshot 2025-07-30 at 10.48
Can gene editing eliminate Down syndrome? Scientists have done it in lab-grown cells
ChatGPT-Image-Mar-10-2026-01_39_01-PM
Viewpoint—“Miracle molecule” debunked: Why acemannan supplements don’t work
Screenshot 2026-05-26 at 10.15
Viewpoint: Double standard—Why does the wellness industry get a free pass while Big Healthcare is treated as morally suspect?
Screenshot-2026-06-04-at-12.05.08-PM
Cases of brain inflammation surge as U.S. measles pandemic approaches 2000
ChatGPT-Image-May-26-2026-07_51_21-AM-2
Viewpoint: There are more than 1,000 chemicals in a cup of coffee—including many substances that can cause cancer. Why isn’t it banned?
Screenshot-2026-05-28-at-1.36.28-PM
Viewpoint: Can mRNA research survive the Trump administration?

Sorry. No data so far.

glp menu logo outlined

Get news on human & agricultural genetics and biotechnology delivered to your inbox.