The Extinction and De-Extinction of Species
In this paper, we discuss the following four alternative ways of understanding the outcomes of resurrection biology (also known as de-extinction). Implications of each of the ways are discussed with respect to concepts of species and extinction. (1) Replication: animals created by resurrection biology do not belong to the original species but are copies of it. The view is compatible with finality of extinction as well as with certain biological and ecological species concepts. (2) Re-creation: animals created are members of the original species but, despite their existence, the species remains extinct. The view is incompatible with all species concepts presented. (3) Non-extinction: animals produced belong to the original species which actually never went extinct. The view may be consistent with phenetic and phylogenetic species concepts as well as with finality of extinction. (4) According to literal resurrection, resurrection biology is successful in reversing extinction through the creation of new members of species that once went extinct. This view presupposes non-finality of extinction and it is compatible with phenetic species concepts. It is notable that no species or extinction concept is consistent with all possible views of resurrection biology nor is any view of resurrection biology consistent with all species or extinction concepts. Thus, one’s views regarding species and extinction determine which views one can adopt regarding resurrection biology and vice versa.
KeywordsResurrection biology De-extinction Concept of species Concept of extinction
We thank two anonymous referees for their useful comments on the earlier version of the paper.
- Archer, M. (2013). Second chance for Tasmanian tigers and fantastic frogs. http://longnow.org/revive/tedxdeextinction. Accessed 29 November 2015.
- Bhullar, B. A. S., Morris, Z. S., Sefton, E. M., Tok, A., Tokita, M., Namkoong, B., Camacho, J., Burnham, D. A., & Abzhanov, A. (2015). A molecular mechanism for the origin of a key evolutionary innovation, the bird beak and palate, revealed by an integrative approach to major transitions in vertebrate history. Evolution, 69(7), 1665–1667.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Boyd, R. (1999). Homeostasis, species, and higher taxa.Google Scholar
- De Queiroz, K. (1998). The general lineage concept of species, species criteria, and the process of speciation. In R. Wilson (Ed.), Species: new interdisciplinary essays (pp. 49–90). Cambridge: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
- Dobzhansky, T. (1937). Genetics and the Origin of Species (No. 11). Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
- Ereshefsky, M. (2010). Species. URL = http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2010/entries/species. Accessed 29 November 2015.
- Folch, J., Cocero, M. J., Chesné, P., Alabart, J. L., Domínguez, V., Cognié, Y., Roche, A., Fernandez-Arias, A., Marti, J. I., Sanchez, P., Echegoyen, E., Beckers, J. F., Sanchez Bonastre, A., & Vignon, X. (2009). First birth of an animal from an extinct subspecies (Capra pyrenaica pyrenaica) by cloning. Theriogenology, 71(6), 1026–1034.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Garvey, B. (2007). Philosophy of biology. Stocksfield: Acumen Publishing.Google Scholar
- Greer, A. (2009). Cloning the thylacine. Quadrant, 53(7–8), 28–39.Google Scholar
- Hiendleder, S., Zakhartchenko, V., & Wolf, E. (2004). Mitochondria and the success of somatic cell nuclear transfer cloning: from nuclear–mitochondrial interactions to mitochondrial complementation and mitochondrial DNA recombination. Reproduction, Fertility and Development, 17(2), 69–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Horner, J. R., & Gorman, J. (2009). How to build a dinosaur: extinction doesn't have to be forever. Penguin.Google Scholar
- Hull, D. L. (1965). The effect of essentialism on taxonomy: two thousand years of stasis. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 15, 2–32 16: 1-18.Google Scholar
- Mayden, R. L. (1997). A hierarchy of species concepts: the denouement in the saga of the species problem. Claridge, M. F., Dawah, H. A., & Wilson, M. R. (eds). Species: the units of biodiversity (pp. 381–423). London: Chapman & Hall Ltd.Google Scholar
- O’Connor, M. R. (2015). Resurrection science. New York: St. Martin’s Press.Google Scholar
- Paterson, H. G. H. (1985). The recognition concept of species. In E.S. Vrba (ed.), Species and Speciation. Pretoria: Transvaal Museum Monograph no. 4.Google Scholar
- Piña-Aguilar, R. E., Lopez-Saucedo, J., Sheffield, R., Ruiz-Galaz, L. I., de Barroso-Padilla, J. J., & Gutiérrez-Gutiérrez, A. (2009). Revival of extinct species using nuclear transfer: hope for the mammoth, true for the Pyrenean ibex, but is it time for “conservation cloning”? Cloning and Stem Cells, 11(3), 341–346.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Poulakakis, N., Glaberman, S., Russello, M., Beheregaray, L. B., Ciofi, C., Powell, J. R., & Caccone, A. (2008). Historical DNA analysis reveals living descendants of an extinct species of Galápagos tortoise. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 105(40), 15464–15469.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Raup, D. M. (1991). Extinction: bad genes or bad luck? London: W.W. Norton.Google Scholar
- Raup, D. M., & Stanley, S. M. (1971). Principles of paleontology. San Francisco: W.H. Freeman and Company.Google Scholar
- Salsberg, C. A. (2000). Resurrecting the woolly mammoth: science, law, ethics, politics, and religion. Stanford Technology Law Review, 1, 1–30.Google Scholar
- Siipi, H. (2014). Authenticity of animals. In M. Oksanen & H. Siipi (Eds.), The ethics of animal re-creation and modification: reviving, rewilding, restoring (pp. 22–39). Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
- Simpson, G. G. (1961). Principles of animal taxonomy. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
- Stamos, D. N. (2003). The species problem. Lanhand: Lexington Books.Google Scholar
- Stone, R. (2003). Mammoth: the resurrection of an ice age giant. Fourth Estate.Google Scholar
- Wägele, J.-W. (2014). The necessity of biodiversity research: we are responsible for the quality of life of coming generations. In D. Lanzerath & M. Friele (Eds.), Concepts and values in biodiversity. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
- Wilkins, J. S. (2009). Species: a history of the idea. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
- Wilmut, I., Schnieke, A. E., McWhir, J., Kind, A. J., & Campbell, K. H. S. (1999). Viable offspring derived from fetal and adult mammalian cells. Clones and clones: facts and fantasies about human cloning, 21.Google Scholar
- Zimmer, C. (2013). Bringing them back to life. National Geographic, 223(4), 28–41.Google Scholar