This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution
Access options
Subscribe to this journal
Receive 51 print issues and online access
$199.00 per year
only $3.90 per issue
Buy this article
- Purchase on SpringerLink
- Instant access to the full article PDF.
USD 39.95
Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Veríssimo, D., Cugnière, L. Revived species: how would they survive?. Nature 493, 608 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1038/493608a
Published:
Issue date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/493608a
Dan Distel
Veríssimo and Cugnière accurately point out the potential difficulties that might be faced by revived species when reintroduced into the wild, but this criticism takes a very narrow view of the proposal by Kumar. Kumar does not advocate for the re-engineering of the world?s ecosystems with reanimated species. He does not argue that reintroduction of revived species is a panacea that replaces the need for species conservation. Instead he points out that it may be possible to utilize the information contained in the genomes of endangered species in carefully considered and incisive ways to protect dwindling species and populations. Comparison of genomes and the proteins and biochemical pathways they encode have already produced important insights that will help to inform the protection and management of endangered species and ecosystems. If wisely applied, this knowledge will help reduce the impact of human activity on wild environments. A next step may be to return extinct or rare alleles to existing wild populations, bolstering their genetic diversity and enhancing their ability to survive environmental challenges. Such experiments might have substantial risks, but these may be comparable to the substantial risks of traditional agriculture, or to the risks of species introductions that are the inevitable consequence of trade, commerce and recreational travel. Revived species may have great research value, regardless of their ability or inability to survive in the wild. It is even be possible that the intentional release of revived species into the wild may, one day and with the appropriate precautions, be beneficial. The fear of the terrible consequences of ?playing God? is as old as history itself. It is no doubt a healthy fear. But we risk our planet?s future every day in ways that have no potential to improve our understanding of life on earth. Learning to preserve, protect, and make the most of the genomic wealth of our planet is likely a calculated risk worth taking. Whether one believes that reintroduction of extinct species is a wise or foolish goal, we should not be deterred from collecting and preserving the disappearing genomic diversity of our planet and using the information that it contains to the fullest extent possible for the benefit of mankind and the world in which we live.