Ancestor of Galapagos tortoises to be resurrected from extinction
LAZARUS TORTOISE: It could take 100 years of selective breeding, but an ancestor of some modern tortoises could be brought back from extinction. (Photo: Cynthia Perry/Flickr) 
EMAIL
Facebook
Stumble
Tweet
Digg
Link
link:
Comments(21)
Posted By shaffer - Wed, Jan 27 2010 at 10:22 AM ESTpeople, people, people...
really? socialist, nazi-esque, implying that over hunting is part of natural selection?
first - bill, just because this freaks you out doesn't mean you need to shout propaganda buzzwords to make it look evil. this has nothing to do with social constructs.
second - if WE being stupid humans, killed this species off with guns, it's not evolution or natural selection. maybe we should try this with dinosaurs and see how "natural" selection works with some of the people around.... More
Posted By Dead Seal - Wed, Jan 27 2010 at 2:34 AM ESTWe are creators Too.
It's not been long that we have had the ability to do this one small thing. To put it back. Take Take Take has been the modo for mankind. All I hear from these comments is a bunch of whining from people that are more infants than scholars when it comes to understanding the gift of life. We are all creators of life. Start acting like it. Support these efforts. Put it back. Then see what happens. See if Humans find something that could inspire us from our hearts and not your left brain freak.... More
Posted By Sam - Tue, Jan 26 2010 at 6:44 PM ESTMisleading?
Its hardly a ressurection, 4 generations ago is minscule in terms of evolution. Its interesting, but I dont understand how a new study of their genomes enables you to revert it back to a pure breed C. elephantopus, doesnt seem anymore scientific than dog breeding. And surely this pedigree breeding would have similar consequences, a more homogenous genome, in terms of alleles, increased chance of cancer, etc. Whats the purpose?
Posted By Jeff - Tue, Jan 26 2010 at 6:35 PM ESTHeadline
How is this a resurrection if parts of the living, inextinct animal's biology/genetics will be adopted?
Posted By bill - Tue, Jan 26 2010 at 11:58 AM ESTsocialists
sure sounds like breeding the master race of torti(sp?) , very naziesque. are they doing it because they can? or, rather, are we (modern man) just that much more caring and enlightened than man 300 years ago? why not let them be.. they carried on with their own means... same as the mammoth, why should we clone one of them? where will it stay? a museum or a zoo?
Posted By Nick - Tue, Jan 26 2010 at 1:45 PM ESTSocialists? Nazis?
By titling your post "socialists" and then calling selective breeding "naziesque", you're really betraying the fact that you have a deep misunderstanding of both concepts. Socialists and Nazis are distinct groups that were by no means friendly. With this kind of basic misunderstanding and childish name calling, why should anybody give any weight to the rest of what you say?
Furthermore, you go on to ask "why should we clone one of them?" The answer: there's no need! That's the point:.... More
Posted By Dodong Canyon - Tue, Jan 26 2010 at 2:23 AM ESTNext it's dinosaurs!
Is this Real Life Jurassic Park in the making?
Posted By Kevin - Mon, Jan 25 2010 at 8:50 PM ESTThe should do this with humans
What would stop this from working with with the oldest human fossil DNA we have, compaing it to some of the dna from tribal villages in remote areas of the world and see if it exists anywhere then pushing it forward with selective breeding.. could answer some things.. what can a tortoise tell you?
Posted By Anonymous - Mon, Jan 25 2010 at 9:14 PM ESTlol..
i can't tell if that comment was serious or not
Posted By Anonymous - Tue, Jan 26 2010 at 12:56 PM ESTWow
Dude thats amazing. Why dont they bring back a T-Rex or Teradactal or something??
Jes
Posted By Michael Stephenson - Mon, Jan 25 2010 at 8:46 PM ESTExplanation.
The T-Rex and Teradactyl lineages died leaving no descendents.
Therapods the group that T-Rex belonged to, does survive today in modern birds, but they are not direct descendent's of Tyrannosaurs, they are evolved from Therapods more closely related to Velociraptors.
This method is basically recreating a common ancestor by tacking genetic information from descendents of a common ancestor, eg if you merged together all the primates you might be able to create the original primate, a.... More
Posted By Nate Ruby - Tue, Jan 26 2010 at 6:21 AM ESTBreeding and Dinosaurs
As good of a biologist as you think you are, it is Pterodactyl. Jehsus, even spell check will tell you that.
You can't merge together all of the primates to get an original primate... that is not even close to being analogous and in fact borders on ridiculous pseudoscience.
The tortoise ordeal only works because it is recent, as recent it would seem as the seventeenth century that these animals went extinct. And this is why the two species can still breed with each other producing.... More
Posted By Michael Stephenson - Tue, Jan 26 2010 at 11:30 AM ESTre:breeding and dinosaurs
So I was wrong about the spelling, but nothing else I said was wrong, what I was talking about a theoretical possibility something not achievable by breeding but by taking the DNA from all the descendants of a common ancestor and building the original ancestor, not by cross breeding. I did not actually make any statement as to how the genetic engineering would take place or whether there actually was a species with enough descendants for it actually to be done, I just was stating that.... More
Posted By Lisa H - Thu, Jan 21 2010 at 10:41 PM ESTWhat a fabulous photo
That Cythia Perry lady should work for National Geo - what a great photo!
Posted By Chris - Wed, Jan 20 2010 at 2:51 PM ESTLove This
Evolution played a big part in extinction. Wouldnt the the creature created just eventually evolve into its current form 3 generations later and would not be the exact replica of its previous self/
Posted By Kris - Mon, Jan 25 2010 at 7:02 PM ESTEvolution did not play a big part in their extinction.
Sailors who hunted them to extinction did. If the sailors were selective about the ones they killed then we could call it artificial selection, but they weren't selective. They killed them all.
No, they would not revert, because they didn't revert, some survivors reportedly mated with closely related nearby island tortoises. The truth is throwing turtles overboard is unnecessary, there was probably some occasional small gene flow between the islands anyways.
IF they know the.... More
Posted By AS - Tue, Jan 26 2010 at 3:23 PM ESTSurvival is not part of evolution?
These animals went extinct due to overhunting by humans, but who's to say that our interference is not natural? We came to be by the same means, survival of the fittest. I strongly disagree with overhunting but it is a part of nature. The better adaptable organisms will survive as they are more fit, so I guess it is possible that they could revert to a successful form.
Posted By Sackett - Fri, Jan 29 2010 at 6:14 AM ESTContributing factors
I'm pretty sure it wasn't just over-hunting by humans. I seem to remember that the rats were introduced to the island from aboard their ships. The rats would eat the tortoises' eggs and young, who had no natural defense against these new predators. This, together with irresponsible hunting practices with no knowledge of their life spans, would be enough to bring the species to where it is today.
Posted By Nico Colombant - Wed, Jan 20 2010 at 2:06 PM ESTinterview query
Bryan I really enjoy your writing and insights. I am reporter with Voice of America, preparing a report on land grabs in Africa and was wondering if you would have time for a recorded phone interview about the topic. You can reach me at usnico at gmail. Thanks very much,
Nico Colombant
Huh?
It would be nice to save something rather than just kill wouldn't it?? So whats the problem?