Scientists believe it may be possible to clone a woolly mammoth within five years after finding well-preserved bone marrow in a thigh bone recovered from permafrost soil in Siberia.
Teams from Russia's Sakha Republic's mammoth museum and Japan's Kinki University will launch fully-fledged joint research next year aiming to recreate the giant mammal, Japan's Kyodo News reported from Yakutsk, Russia.
By replacing the nuclei of egg cells from an elephant with those taken from the mammoth's marrow cells, embryos with mammoth DNA can be produced, Kyodo said, citing the researchers.
- Enjoy this article? Help vote it up the 'Vine.
- Public Discussion (82)
Hmmm. Sounds very promising and very interesting as well. However, Somatic Cell Nuclear Transfer(what this is talking about as well as how Dolly was cloned) often leads to less than healthy animals which should be interesting to see if this actually happens...(The DNA cannot be degraded much...)
- 4 votes
A less healthy "wholly mammoth"? Than an extinct one? Hmmm.... boggles the mind.
- 4 votes
Jurassic Park in the making. Sounds exciting, but the day will come when dinosaurs will roam and rule the planet once again, and we will be their appetizers, desserts and main course meals.
- 5 votes
RaisedByWolves: I think wolves like to hunt many animals, does this include the CAT family? LOL.
I'm all for saber-toothed cats next!
- 4 votes
LOL, I love my kitties! YUM YUM YUM I was mostly thinking that few people will feel the wrath of the Jurassic Park mentality with the cloning of a woolly mammoth; but, the saber-tooth cat is able to destroy the lab and this idiocy with it!
- 6 votes
I'm all for saber-toothed cats next!
Well, there is that possibility as they both lived during the same time period. I am guessing of all of the STT bones they have pulled out of the La Brea Tar Pits, there must be some DNA left.
Unfortunately, STT didn't live in the northern climes the Wooly Mammoths did, so we won't find any frozen DNA.
- 2 votes
No woolly mammoths at The Brea Pits, but mammoth and STTs were both there. I wonder if that dip in a petroleum pool saved the DNA? And I'm serious about that question because my life sciences classes were so basic and so long ago...
- 1 vote
I can tell you they're a mess to clean up after and they eat a ton of hay.
- 10 votes
Oh yes indeed. Did you ever see the elephant habitat at the San Diego Zoo? My wife just stood there fascinated as the pile of dung behind one of them grew and grew. Finally, she turned to me when it was about four feet high and said, "Isn't it ever going to stop?"
Ought to be a very interesting result.
- 7 votes
-but can't they turn all that Mammoth dung into cleaner, useful energy.
- 4 votes
Anyone see the article I put up at THE INVISIBLE ROADSIDE GARDEN, on the bio-fueled truck? This would provide a LOT of bio-fuel.... http://gtodd52.newsvine.com/_news/2011/11/13/8784684-green-transportation
- 3 votes
A few years ago, we tried to clone a wooly bully. Something went terribly wrong and we ended up with a bird with the word.
- 6 votes
Is that where Big Bird came from backroads? I've always wondered.
- 4 votes
A few years ago, we tried to clone a wooly bully. Something went terribly wrong and we ended up with a bird with the word.
Interesting,
I hadn't heard about the bird.
apparently Matty told Hatty, but nobody told me.
- 1 vote
Why do I think they'll end up cloning bacteria that would have surely moved in during decomposition?
- 5 votes
They're taking the first steps towards a real Jurassic Park! Awesome!
(cue epic theme song)
- 3 votes
Right, the mammoth will just LOVE global warming.......
- 3 votes
LOL NAKED "Not so Wooly" mammoth!!! Ummm, wouldn't that be an elephant?!
- 6 votes
Right, the mammoth will just LOVE global warming.......
but the barber shops will love all the business...
lol
- 5 votes
Meanwhile - the United Sheep and Wool Producers lobby begins to speak out against this scientific endeavor.
The question is: Why? What purpose would a woolly mammoth serve today? Will they be farmed for their meat or fur?
- 3 votes
Well, since horsemeat is now on the table... Actually, early man hunted those Mammoths, with spears, and they were food. However, I doubt we would use ALL of the animal, and would waste much...
- 4 votes
Yum. Mammoth and beans. Should work just like the beef and beans eaten so much in the old west (for a demonstration of how well that worked, see the campfire scene in Blazing Saddles).
- 9 votes
The question is: Why? What purpose would a woolly mammoth serve today? Will they be farmed for their meat or fur?
The real purpose in doing this is to actually try and find out how they behaved and survived. Other than that, these people that are now playing god will one day regret creating a beast such as this that will cost a fortune to accommodate and to feed. So raise then, kill them, and then feed them to the human savages if the wooly Mammoth refuses to behave.
One Mammoth burger and a large order of saber tooth tiger fires on the side, and one large coconut drink.
- 5 votes
Woolly Mammoth Fart Levels Kinki University and Areas of Higashi-Osaka District: Film at 11.
- 4 votes
But, in order to discover how woolly mammoths behaved and survived, wouldn't they need to be in their original environment?
- 4 votes
Read Jean Auel's books on THE EARTH CHILDREN SERIES., etc. She did heavy research before writing the series.
- 4 votes
I love those books! My point, however, is that scientists wouldn't be getting a completely accurate idea of mammoth behavior in our world- because it is so different from the time of the mammoths.
- 2 votes
Excellent and valid point Dani. Curiosity is a wonderful thing but sometimes it can be carried to extremes. LOL The real question is "of what value would any of their findings have for our present day society and flora and fauna?" As you point out when taken out of context it probably would not be relevant.
- 2 votes
I wonder just how many times man, in his ignorance, fooled around with Mother Nature only to have his actions come back and bought him in the butt?
- 6 votes
FINutmegger my guess would be 'almost every time.' LOL In the universe everything requires balance. When ever we tinker with something we invariably create some kind of an imbalance. That ultimately has adverse effects that may not show up for many years. Humans are very short sighted.
For example our concept of using dams for irrigation and flood control seemed to be very logical and beneficial. However no one considered the long term effects such as salinization of the soil from too much irrigation and loss of fish population because of messing up the migratory habits of the fish when spawning. I am not saying that we should never try to improve things but I do suggest that some thought be put into our efforts with a very strong consideration of the natural balance of all things involved.
In the game of poker sometimes you have to just take the risk because you have become 'pot committed.' Similarly once we have committed to a particular evolutionary direction in our society we must then follow through with it or it has all been a waste of time and money. In this case the die was cast for this creature long ago and I can see no long term benefits of resurrecting it as a living species again.
- 4 votes
I am not saying that we should never try to improve things but I do suggest that some thought be put into our efforts with a very strong consideration of the natural balance of all things involved.
Spot on! Whenever I think about our unnatural impositions upon nature I invariably think of the Peruvian Incas and their hundreds of years old irrigation system, and aqueducts, somehow designed and built as a complement to nature and still in effective use today.
- 3 votes
We are so short-sighted most of the time, FIN. First Nations have a philosophy of adopting some program or law only after considering how it affects 7 generations!
- 3 votes
I wonder just how many times man, in his ignorance, fooled around with Mother Nature only to have his actions come back and bought him in the butt?
Counting or not counting Twilight Zone episodes?
- 1 vote
Well, since horsemeat is now on the table...
Horse meat has ALWAYS been on the table, it's just that in the U.S. horses are cute pets and you don't eat pets. Europe, different story!
- 3 votes
Hey, I will pay to go to the Zoo that has a Woolly Mammoth. But they better have lots of solar panels at that zoo, the Mammoth is going to need a very big refrigerated cage.
- 5 votes
And will promptly file for candidacy for President of the United States.
- 4 votes
I'm not saying they shouldn't but do these people ever stop to consider that species go extinct because nature chooses for them to? obviously not including the species that have gone extinct because of mans selfish destruction.
- 3 votes
yes but you know what i meant. I meant not due to sport hunting as opposed to hunting for food etc
- 1 vote
There is some evidence that humans may have been responsible to mammoth's extinction in the first place; maybe we can UNdo some of the damage we've done...
- 5 votes
I meant not due to sport hunting as opposed to hunting for food etc
It may interest you to know that sport hunting has never caused the extinction of any species.
- 1 vote
Ummm......what about the Thylacine?
(Tasmanian Tiger)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thylacine
- 3 votes
Not sport hunting Abby. They were, like the Wolf, considered a pest and a danger to cattle. The difference is that mostly the Wolves were poisoned off rather than shot.
- 1 vote
But it was MAN that killed them off, in their own habitat.
Humans have a lot to answer for.
:(
- 3 votes
Abby, the question was strictly confined to sport hunting, which is heavily regulated to ensure that extinctions don't happen. Whether we should kill off competitors for our food supply or those species that are otherwise dangerous to humans is an entirely different question, which may have a completely different answer.
- 2 votes
Modern hunting is very responsible... when there is responsible oversight at least. Hunters are some of the staunchest conservationists.
But in days past, things have indeed been overhunted to extinction/near extinction. The buffalo is an obvious one. Dodo birds as well. It's when you combine our arrogance, with a disrespect for the land - that you get things like this.
Real hunters have nothing but respect for the land that supports them, it's the posers and trophy hunters who are the problem.
- 1 vote
But in days past, things have indeed been overhunted to extinction/near extinction. The buffalo is an obvious one. Dodo birds as well.
But Shuklack, those too were not sport hunting. That was commercial hunting for meat and hides. Sport hunters were among those who put a stop to it.
Great article, it will be interesting to see if they actually do it.
- 2 votes
I can sort of understand the curiosity factor and wanting to study one of these creatures in a live scenario but I can see no earthly reason to resurect a breeding population of these animals. After all they thrived from about the middle to the end of the last ice age as I understand it so our climate today would most likely be unhospitable to them. Also they consume massive amounts of vegetation as do modern elephants and other large herbivores and they are already facing some serious habitat problems in their native environs so this creature would have a real difficult time competing for food sources unless they were fed by their keepers.
- 3 votes
Your exactly right and at the same time, exactly wrong. The same curiosity study could be said of the evasive, distructive, and over consuming being, mankind!
- 2 votes
The same curiosity study could be said of the evasive, distructive, and over consuming being, mankind!
Ivorybill,
That same study is being done regarding humans and it's pretty far advanced. It's called Behavioral Psychology.
- 1 vote
Extinction is like ignorance: It does'nt last forever, but a humans life span does'nt either. To view what once was we used to just go to books, yet now we are at an age where our cognitive abilities advance to more common sense than our social structures addictions to consume the rest of Earth do. Bringing back or saving any species from temporary extinction is an improvement over our obvious dereliction to our once ignorant thoughts as to what domnion over should mean in regards to all other life on Earth. Seven billion of us, with seven billion dreams of prosperity, but science shows the reality to our preservation is in relation to the bio-diversity richness of all Earth. Go to a small town library and try and research an advanced subject and you will find the place somewhat lacking of complete knowledge. That is the situation we have exploited this wonderful Earth to. The Great Library is getting hometown small and all knowledge we have derived thus for was given from the main branch library we are still demolishing and replacing with a man made facsimile of what we will surely miss one day.
I don't think that reserrecting extinct animals is really the way forward when we have so many animals currently starring extinction in the face, why can't we direct our scientific efforts towards preserving what is currently living on our planet?
- 3 votes
This is purely for the bragging rights that they did it (who ever they happen to be this time). Sorry scientific intellectual types but this is DUMB!
- 4 votes
It is my personal belief that everything in life and in nature happens for a reason. I won't delve further into that because it would cause this thread to descend into one of those circular arguments/discussions about theology. So I will simply leave it at that. Given my beliefs then it makes sense that past extinctions were meant to happen and that even those creatures on the edge of extinction today are perhaps meant to go. It is just their time and the evolution of our environment has made their continued existence less possible.
Now I understand and appreciate our well meaning considerations when it comes to trying to save this species or that from extinction but at the same time I question whether such considerations are worth the time and effort since, in most cases, the given species will most likely disappear anyway despite our most heroic efforts. Please understand that I am not talking about the willful destruction of a normally successful species capable of flourishing on its own such as the whale population. Once we regulated their hunting that species has managed quite nicely on its own and has come back to the point of being removed from the endangered list and put on the protected list. This recovery required nothing more from us than to simply stop killing them in huge numbers. Kind of reminds one of the American bison and its brush with extinction in the 19th century.
So any effort to resurrect the wooly mammoth would, in my humble opinion, be nothing more than a curiosity for curiosity's sake and would have no real meaning as it regards trying to restore this species to a self sustainable level. In any case these scientists will do what they think that they must and the fall out will simply land where it will. Who would have imagined that Frankenstein would someday really exist? LOL Lets just hope that they don't create a monster. :=))
- 2 votes
shepherd0886:, Well said and on the mark too IMO! There is a reason for all actions and activities on the earth and man in his ignorance simply fails to either understand, or see, that some of his actions, to satisfy his "curiosity", are dangerous to us, as a species, in the animal kingdom, beyond measure. Your analogy to Frankenstein is truly on the money.
- 3 votes
Well...that same theory could apply to our abilities to bring something back, that before was not cognitively possible, yet through time came possible. One day , I suspect we will be able to create life from scratch. From the dusts of Earth, and if that comes to light, then it could be said by some: it was meant to be.
- 2 votes
So... how much longer until we start digging up loved ones and resurrecting them? You know we would. It would be a half-assed reincarnation, right?
- 1 vote
That's a good question...........just "What" are the limits that were genectically induced by evolution, and or were limited by a devine sorce???........Time will answer, that, and many more questions we ponder now.
- 1 vote
hmmm. i feel like poaching is about to get a lot more interesting unfortunately :(
Unleash your imagination here and consider 75,000,000 of these animals roaming freely and living in concert with the Indians of the times who knew exactly what they were doing in maintaining that balance between man and nature. Then along came those who knew about genocide since they were already practicing it on the native people and figure just how much empathy they must have felt for an animal. They were guilty of killing for no more that the skins and leaving the carcasses to rot. This carnage continued until there were less than a thousand (800) left. Check just the numbers 75,000,000 down to 800. Now isn't that special.
Before white settlers began to push into the vast west in any great numbers, an estimated 75 million buffalo freely roamed upon the Great Plains. American Indians hunted them for food and other necessities, and a harmonious ebb and flow between man and beast prevailed.
“Let them kill, skin, and sell until the buffalo is exterminated, as it is the only way to bring lasting peace and allow civilization to advance."
- General Philip Sheridan
Yhea...and people make Buffalo Bill into some sort of hero....when in reality, he was a butcher. We call our way of life, civilization, yet to all others in Nature, our 7 billion, we must surely appear as if we are a desease.
- 2 votes
Oh, yeah. Oooh, ahhh, that's how it always starts. Then later there's running and screaming.
- 2 votes
my grandpa used to say:
"I bet them mammoths was good eatin'"
I'll let you know when I get to heaven, grandpa.
- 1 vote
You're in Easy Mode. If you prefer, you can use XHTML Mode instead. |



