31–40 of 60 posts
I wonder, have they asked the people of Tasmania if they want it back? It's Jurassic Park writ small.
It’s amazing what an incredibly prescient work of science fiction Jurassic Park (the novel) really was. Before CRISPR, before Dolly, before the Human Genome, Crichton called it.
One can’t help but wonder how much the movie influenced the work
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Cursed_Earth_(Judge_Dredd_...
We're actively hiring frontend and backend engineers (React, Golang, GCP/multicloud). Drop a line: darren @ colossal.com
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's not plausible that such a large animal can have a self-sustaining population in the wild, and not be properly detected by the scientific community for 100 years.
Twelve animals thought to be extinct, some for hundreds, one for millions of years, before being rediscovered: https://www.treehugger.com/lazarus-species-extinct-animals-f...
Is this likely to be the first de-extinct animal which we can bring back does anyone know?
The Pyrenean ibex was de-extincted for 7 minutes: https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/article/news-buca... There are a number of other candidates, though. I would guess either the thylacine, the woolly mammoth, or the passenger pigeon would be first to sustain an actual population, but I don't really follow the projects: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De-extinction#Current_candidat...
Source: I work there.
“We can now take the giant leaps..." says Professor Pask of the Thylacine Integrated Genetic Restoration Research (TIGRR) Lab. Which is a lot more accurate than the article headline, which says that they _have already_ taken a 'giant leap'. I expect such exaggeration and overstatement from mainstream news sources; I suppose I should not be surprised to see it coming from a university website.
“We can now take the giant leaps..." says Professor Pask of the Thylacine Integrated Genetic Restoration Research (TIGRR) Lab. Which is a lot more accurate than the article headline, which says that they _have already_ taken a 'giant leap'. I expect such exaggeration and overstatement from mainstream news sources; I suppose I should not be surprised to see it coming from a university website.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Twelve animals thought to be extinct, some for hundreds, one for millions of years, before being rediscovered: https://www.treehugger.com/lazarus-species-extinct-animals-f...
Except that in general the "rediscovery" isn't something dramatic -- it's just a systematist in a lab looking at an animal known by many and realizing that it is the same species as fossilized/preserved specimens thought to be extinct rather than a common related species. That's quite different from finding a thylacine, an animal that couldn't be confused with anything else.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why?
My guess: if non-genetic heritable elements -- epigenetics (such as modifications to DNA) -- are necessary for proper development, then the DNA sequence alone will not be enough to develop thylacines. (There are caveats, notably that some modifications can be inferred). However, the scientists will also be experimenting with gestation and creating embryos from modified cells, so whether epigenetics specifically is a…