Philosophy & Technology

, Volume 30, Issue 4, pp 395–411 | Cite as

De-extinction as Artificial Species Selection

  • Derek D. Turner
Research Article


This paper offers a paleobiological perspective on the debate concerning the possible use of biotechnology to bring back extinct species. One lesson from paleobiology is that extinction selectivity matters in addition to extinction rates and extinction magnitude. Combining some of Darwin’s insights about artificial selection with the theory of species selection that paleobiologists developed in the 1970s and 1980s provides a useful context for thinking about de-extinction. Using recent work on the prioritization of candidate species for de-extinction as a test case, the paper argues that de-extinction would be a form of artificial species selection in which humans influence which species persist vs. go extinct. This points to a serious gap in our ethical theory: Much work has been done to clarify the value(s) of biological diversity, but we also need theoretical guidance for decisions that amount to species sorting, and that will shape the macroevolutionary future.


Artificial selection Conservation paleobiology De-extinction Extinction selectivity Macroevolution Resurrection biology Species selection 



An earlier version of this paper was presented at the ISHPSSB meeting in Montreal, Canada, in July 2015. I am very grateful to colleagues at that meeting (especially Leonard Finkelman, Markku Oksanen, and Helena Siipi) for their ideas and critical feedback. The paper has also benefitted from helpful comments from Russell Powell, as well as two anonymous referees for this journal.


  1. Arnold, A. J., & Fristrup, K. (1982). The theory of evolution by natural selection: a hierarchical expansion. Paleobiology, 8, 113–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Barnosky, A. D., et al. (2011). Has the earth’s sixth mass extinction already arrived? Nature, 471, 51–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Brand, S. (2015). Rethinking extinction. Aeon. Available at Retrieved 1 August 2015.
  4. Ceballos, G., Ehrlich, P.R., Barnosky, A.D., Garcia, A., Pringle, R.M., & T.M. Palmer (2015). Accelerated modern human-induced species losses: entering the sixth mass extinction. Science Advances 1(5). Available online at Retrieved 2 August 2015.
  5. Cohen, S. (2014). The ethics of de-extinction. Nanoethics, 8, 165–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Delord, J. (2007). The nature of extinction. Studies in History and Philosophy of Biology and Biomedical Sciences, 38, 656–667.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Delord, J. (2014). Can we really recreate a species by cloning it? In M. Oksanen & H. Siipi (Eds.), The ethics of animal re-creation and modification: reviving, rewilding, restoring (pp. 22–39). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Dietl, G. P., & Flessa, K. W. (2011). Conservation paleobiology: putting the dead to work. Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 26(1), 30–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Gallagher, A. J., Hammerschlag, N., Cooke, S. J., Costa, D. P., & Irschik, D. J. (2015). Evolutionary theory as a tool for predicting extinction risk. Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 30(2), 61–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Gould, S. J. (1989). Wonderful life: the burgess shale and the nature of history. New York: W. W. Norton.Google Scholar
  11. Gould, S. J. (1993). The wheel of fortune and the wedges of progress. In S. J. Gould (Ed.), Eight little piggies: reflections in natural history (pp. 300–312). New York: W. W. Norton.Google Scholar
  12. Gould, S. J. (2002). The Structure of Evolutionary Theory. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  13. Gould, S. J., & Lloyd, E. (1999). Individuality and adaptation across levels of selection: how shall we name and generalize the unit of Darwinism? Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 96, 11904–11909.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Grantham, T. (1995). Hierarchical approaches to macroevolution: recent work on species selection and the ‘effect hypothesis’. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, 26, 301–326.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Grantham, T. (2002). Species selection. In M. Pagel (Ed.), Encyclopedia of evolution (pp. 1086–1087). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  16. Grantham, T. (2007). Is macroevolution more than successive rounds of microevolution? Paleontology, 50(1), 75–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Grayson, D. K., & Meltzer, D. J. (2003). A requiem for North American overkill. Journal of Archaeological Science, 30, 585–593.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Harries, P. J., & Knorr, P. O. (2009). What does the ‘Lilliput effect’ mean? Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology, 284, 4–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Hilpinen, R. (1992). On artifacts and works of art. Theoria, 58(1), 58–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Jablonski, D. (1987). Heritability at the species level: analysis of geographic ranges of cretaceous mollusks. Science, 238, 360–363.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Jablonski, D. (2008). Species selection: theory and data. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics, 39, 501–524.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Jones, K. E. (2014). From dinosaurs to dodos: who could and should we de-extinct? Frontiers in Biogeography, 6(1), 20–24.Google Scholar
  23. Jørgensen, D. (2013). Reintroduction and de-extinction. Bioscience, 63(9), 719–720.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Kolbert, E. (2014). The sixth extinction: an unnatural history. New York: Henry Holt and Company.Google Scholar
  25. Lloyd, E., & Gould, S. J. (1993). Species selection on variability. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 90, 595–599.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. MacLaurin, J., & Sterelny, K. (2008). What is biodiversity? Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Martin, P. (2005). Twilight of the mammoths: Ice Age extinctions and the rewilding of America. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  28. Nicholls, H. (2008). Let’s make a mammoth. Nature, 456, 310–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Norton, B. (1987). Why preserve natural variety? Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  30. Okasha, S. (2006). Evolution and the levels of selection. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Oksanen, M. (2014). Biodiversity and the value of human involvement. In M. Oksanen & H. Siipi (Eds.), The ethics of animal re-creation and modification: reviving, rewilding, restoring (pp. 150–169). New York: Palgrave MacMillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Oksanen, M., & Siipi, H. (Eds.). (2014). The ethics of animal recreation and modification: reviving, rewilding, restoring. New York: Palgrave MacMillan.Google Scholar
  33. Raup, D. M., Gould, S. J., Schopf, T. J. M., & Simberloff, D. (1973). Stochastic models of phylogeny and the evolution of diversity. Journal of Geology, 81, 525–542.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Rick, T. C., & Lockwood, R. (2012). Integrating paleobiology, archaeology, and history to inform biological conservation. Conservation Biology, 27(1), 45–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Sandler, R. (2014). The ethics of reviving long extinct species. Conservation Biology, 28(2), 354–360.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Sarkar, S. (2005). Biodiversity and environmental philosophy: an introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Shapiro, B. (2015). How to clone a mammoth: the science of de-extinction. Princeton: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Seddon, P. J., Griffiths, C. J., Soorae, P. S., & Armstrong, D. P. (2014a). Reversing defaunation: restoring species in a changing world. Science, 345(6195), 406–412.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Seddon, P. J., Moehrenschlager, A., & Ewen, J. (2014b). Reintroducing resurrected species: selecting deextinction candidates. Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 29(3), 140–147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Sepkoski, D. (2012). Rereading the fossil record. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Sherkow, J. S., & Greely, H. T. (2013). What if extinction is not forever? Science, 340, 32–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Siipi, H. (2014). The authenticity of animals. In M. Oksanen & H. Siipi (Eds.), The ethics of animal re-creation and modification: reviving, rewilding, restoring (pp. 77–96). New York: Palgrave MacMillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Smith, D. (2013). South African game reserve poisons rhino’s horns to prevent poaching. The Guardian (4 April 2013), available online at Retrieved 17 August 2015.
  44. Stanley, S. (1975). A theory of evolution above the species level. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 72(2), 6467–6650.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Sterrett, S. (2002). Darwin’s analogy between artificial and natural selection: how does it go? Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences, 33, 151–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Turner, D. (2010). Gould’s replay revisited. Biology and Philosophy, 26, 65–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Turner, D. (2011). Paleontology: a philosophical introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Turner, D. (2014). The restorationist argument for extinction reversal. In M. Oksanen & H. Siipi (Eds.), The ethics of animal re-creation and modification: reviving, rewilding, restoring (pp. 40–59). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Turner, D. (2016). “Conservation paleobiology,” extinct: the philosophy of palaeontology blog, 21 March 2016, available online at
  50. Vrba, E. (1983). Macroevolutionary trends: new perspectives on the roles of adaptation and incidental effect. Science, 221, 387–389.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Vrba, E. (1984). What is species selection? Systematic Zoology, 33, 318–328.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Vrba, E., & Gould, S. J. (1989). The hierarchical expansion of sorting and selection: sorting and selection cannot be equated. Paleobiology, 12, 217–228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Wilson, E. O. (2003). The future of life. New York: Vintage Books.Google Scholar
  54. Wolverton, S. (2010). The North American Pleistocene overkill hypotheses and the rewilding debate. Diversity and Distributions, 16, 874–876.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Connecticut CollegeNew LondonUSA

Personalised recommendations