Creating Artificial Prehistoric Animals?

[Techno-Druid]

So what do you guys think about the idea of creating artificially genetically engineered animals that look similar to iconic prehistoric animals such as smilodon (saber-tooth cat), selectively breeding an animal that closely resembles an extinct subspecies (Examples: European Cave Hyena, American Lion, Javan Tiger).

Currently, scientists are working on and have successfully worked on inserting mammoth genes (adaptive hemoglobin, thick fat, small ears, hair) into an Asian elephant genome. Technically they only have the create an embryo and fertilize a female Asian elephant (their closet relative as mammoths were still elephants). We still haven't figured out a plan to what will happen to these wooly elephants, hopefully they would be created in large numbers and reintroduced to experimental areas in Siberia and possibly the American continents and East Asia.

There's also a possibility of creating a false wooly rhinoceros, we've found wooly rhinoceros carcasses in permafrost. Although, even if we couldn't extract DNA from the wooly rhinoceros, we still have the mammoth genes which could be added to White Rhinoceros (the least endangered of the rhinoceros) and introduce them to areas in Siberia with mammoths.

Dinosaur-like creatures could be created by creating an artificial genome of avian and reptilian DNA. Dinosaurs are a lot different, because we necessarily wouldn't have a place to introduce them (unless we create an isolated island-like ecosystem for them) and we'd have to modify them to the point where they had to be "a dog-level of docile" towards humans. Unlike what you think, mammoths only went extinct around 3,000 to 4,000 years ago (we were building the pyramids when the last mammoths were kicking) and studies have made it clear that the Siberian Arctic Ecosystem still requires the ecological role of megafauna. Climate change also wouldn't affect them, because we've clearly seen periods (called inter-glacial periods), that are similar or even warmer than today's climate and all of those animals were doing very well, in fact, they only started to dying off when humans migrated to other continents.

Dinosaurs also range in terms of appearance, most therapod (two legged-carnivorous) had feathers, although most people prefer them to have more scaly and reptile like skin. So, which one do we do? Do we do both?

What about dragon-like creatures? Horses are distantly related to rhinoceros, it wouldn't be that implausible to insert the genes that produce the Keratin-rhino horns in a horse. I know a lot of this sounds outrageous, but most of this stuff is perfectly possible given how we're advancing and how many of this stuff is being started and almost finished with now.

So just close your eyes for a second. Imagine a strange futuristic scenario, where 'large' reptiles glide through the sky, hairy elephants and rhinos roam the plains of Siberia and Alaska. Where people could purchase unicorns and "dinosaurs".

[Kaleredar]

I think they made a documentary about that back in 1992....


At any rate... breeding back animals that look similar to extinct creatures would serve as little more than a gigantic money pit for what would amount to little more than side show attractions.

[Xeones]

Limit it to animals that might have been done in by humans like Mammoths.

I don't want to see something like Jurassic park. That level of genetic engineering opens flood gates for some disturbing stuff.

[Techno-Druid]

I think they made a documentary about that back in 1992....


At any rate... breeding back animals that look similar to extinct creatures would serve as little more than a gigantic money pit for what would amount to little more than side show attractions.

Yes, but these dinosaurs would have to be docile or at least have them smaller

[Kaleredar]

Limit it to animals that might have been done in by humans like Mammoths.

I don't want to see something like Jurassic park. That level of genetic engineering opens flood gates for some disturbing stuff.

What does recreating mammoths do?

First and foremost, Mammoths did not go extinct do to overhunting on the part of humans. Mammoths existed in an intensely different climate than exists now when things were much colder (and boy howdy, the climate is warming up yet again. It's not exactly "re-approaching the ice age climate")

There is no viable ecological niche for animals like saber tooth cats or mammoths, let alone dinosaur-approximate creatures, to occupy. As I said, these animals would be bred into existence after no shortage of money or time was spent to do so and then sit in zoos for tourists to gawk at.

[Belize]

Can you put a saddle on a raptor?

[Techno-Druid]

What does recreating mammoths do?

First and foremost, Mammoths did not go extinct do to overhunting on the part of humans. Mammoths existed in an intensely different climate than exists now when things were much colder (and boy howdy, the climate is warming up yet again. It's not exactly "re-approaching the ice age climate")

There is no viable ecological niche for animals like saber tooth cats or mammoths, let alone dinosaur-approximate creatures, to occupy. As I said, these animals would be bred into existence after no shortage of money or time was spent to do so and then sit in zoos for tourists to gawk at.

You didn't read my post at all did you? Mammoths survived as recently as a few thousand years ago, where the climate wasn't very different. Mammoths also ranged across the globe from Africa to America (Africa was actually warmer in the ice age or Pleistocene). They also survived countless inter-glacial periods, where the polar icecaps had decreased rapidly or even completely melted.

They also have a very prominent ecological role. They trampled over bushes and trees that made room for grass to grow and their dung fertilized grasses. It's a common fact everybody who's familiar with mammoths knows...

[Gamevizier]

They went extinct for a reason. Im fine with them creating artificial animals in limited numbers for zoos and shows, and perhaps reintroduce some recently erradicated animals that went extinct due to human poaching and destruction of habitat.

Other than that, no.

[Jinxz]

T-rex mini pet!!!!

[dextersmith]

It's a bad idea.....

[Techno-Druid]

It's a bad idea.....

No, it really isn't of you go off logic and not Frankenstein fears...

[Celista]

The created animals are going to be nowhere near authentic. If you want to see wooly tusked beasts roaming Alaska you can just go to the musk ox farm in Palmer.

http://www.muskoxfarm.org/

[apepi]

No thanks. They died for a reason, they did not survive in their time, why do you think they will survive now? Just let them be died. Even if they do good, and thrive, they are just going to replace another animal, what are you going to do then? Try to save that one? There is only so much space.

Instead of being so focused on the past, be focused on the present. Enjoy the animals that we have today, because those are the 'strongest' animals that we have.

[Techno-Druid]

No thanks. They died for a reason, they did not survive in their time, why do you think they will survive now? Just let them be died. Even if they do good, and thrive, they are just going to replace another animal, what are you going to do then? Try to save that one? There is only so much space.

Instead of being so focused on the past, be focused on the present. Enjoy the animals that we have today, because those are the 'strongest' animals that we have.

Wait, what exactly are mammoths going to replace in a Siberian ecosystem...

[apepi]

Wait, what exactly are mammoths going to replace in a Siberian ecosystem...

Bears, Elk, Birds and small mammals.

[Celista]

Wait, what exactly are mammoths going to replace in a Siberian ecosystem...

I don't know about Siberia, but the ecosystem in Alaska would not be able to support wooly mammoths, I don't think. Maybe a small herd...but legit wooly mammoths lived a long time, until like age 60 or so. And animals that size would require a lot of plant matter for subsistence.

The introduction/extinction of any animal is disruptive to the local ecosystem.

[Deleted]

So just close your eyes for a second. Imagine a strange futuristic scenario, where 'large' reptiles glide through the sky, hairy elephants and rhinos roam the plains of Siberia and Alaska. Where people could purchase unicorns and "dinosaurs".

Lets forget about issues for a moment. I want a bioluminescent aloe vera that often produces trichomes very rich in cannabinoids on its surface and regenerates cut leaves in weeks.

Or a small-sized pair of whales.

[Rassium]

There's no point. It would be one thing to study the genomes of the actual animals, but just going through the costly process of genetic engineering to create lookalikes? Why? What would the benefit be?

[Deleted]

Read up on DNA and you´ll soon see where the limits are. I highly recommend the book Molecular Biology (Clark/Pazdernik)

[Techno-Druid]

Bears, Elk, Birds and small mammals.

Why would the animals that mammoths coexisted with for thousands of years replace the mammoth's ecological role. Mammoths had a vital role in the ecology of Russia and Siberia (you can still see the affects). They trampled shrubs and weeds to allow grass to grow and their warm feces help fertilize the grass and allow it to grow faster.

Now that the megafauna have become extinct in Siberia, much of the land has turned to tundra, which is releasing carbon (the Arctic carries two times more carbon than is in the Atmosphere currently). The grass is very slow to grow without large animals like bison or horses grazing on it and allowing it to reach direct sunlight.

We don't actually need mammoths or rhinos per say. However, many of the large mammals like wild horses, musk ox, bison, saiga antelope, wolves, bears and even tigers can and are already being reintroduced slowly into the former Mammoth Steppe ecosystem.