Startup announces ambitious plans to bring the dodo bird back from extinction

BY CONNOR RYAN NEWS EDITOR

Various forms of media portray the concept of cloning as a futuristic figment of humanity’s imagination. However, an ambitious startup company thinks that they can make this a reality, and they are starting with the dodo bird.

Colossal Biosciences is a genetic engineering company that has garnered massive investments after claiming their intentions to reconstruct and clone the DNA of the dodo bird, the woolly mammoth and the Tasmanian tiger. Scientists involved in the project are using DNA recovered from permafrost and attempting to use DNA from the Nicobar pigeon, the closest living relative of the dodo bird.

Though the company has substantial support, Dr. Patrick Schacht, professor of biochemistry, is highly skeptical of the project’s plausibility.

“Even in permafrost, [DNA] is going to slowly decay over time,” Schacht said. “You’re talking about stu that’s so heavily fragmented that you present a lot of issues currently. And one of the things that’s debatable as to whether it will be ever surmountable is the errors and being able to interpret between the errors.”

Schacht used a metaphor to explain the imprecise nature of the cloning process.

“I always think of the ‘Jurassic Park’ scene where they tried to explain how all this would work,” Schacht said. “They give a hypothetical model of taking DNA from a frog and fill in the missing gaps because it’s adaptable. And the di culty is it’s far more

COVID-19

Continued from Page 1

Politicians themselves have claimed the virus not only changed the political atmosphere but also ushered in a new era for government policies.

Porter referenced Gov. Gavin Newsom, who said he could “see this [pandemic] as an opportunity to reshape the way we do business and how we govern.”

“At this point, I do not think that we have witnessed the fundamental reshaping of complicated than that.

“Think of it as if you’re trying to put together a puzzle, and you don’t have all the pieces. Well, if you have the picture on the box, even if you don’t have all the pieces, you might be able to say, ‘I know this piece goes here, and I know that piece goes there because I’ve got the picture on the box.’ Well, if you take the picture on the box and run it through a filter that takes the photograph and makes it an impressionist painting, you can still kind of do that. You can get some information, but you’re not going to get 100% there.”

Schacht explained that in an animal with several billion nucleotides (units that form the basic structure of DNA), even a 0.001% error rate can be fatal, as that is equal to millions of missing or misplaced nucleotides.

Not only would these millions of nucleotides be in the wrong place, but without a living dodo bird as a reference, there is no way for the scientists to know which ones are creating problems.

Schacht said he believes that we are nowhere near this kind of technology and argues that many investors do not believe in it either.

“They didn’t get this out of an index fund — they got this out of a bunch of wealthy people who know there’s a 90% chance this fails miserably,” Schacht said, referring to Colossal Biosciences. “If it fails, they’ve got investments in 100 other places as well. So, they’re OK betting their money on it.”

Whether the process works, the moral ambiguity of the question is up for debate among the scientific community.

“A lot of people believe that this is wrong, and a few people governance as that quote seems to imply,” Porter said. “But there have been ways in which the pandemic has created conditions for implementing policy changes, especially as it relates to fiscal policy. believe it’s OK,” said Mirna Ramis, graduate biomedical major.

“The American Rescue Plan is a $1.9 trillion spending bill that was implemented in 2021 in response to the economic challenges created by COVID but included a wide range of spending provisions seemingly unrelated to the pandemic,” Porter continued.

Thus, as parties began implementing the changes they wanted, the necessity to centralize the issue lessened.

“I believe it is OK because you can use DNA from the entire species, which makes this much better than other methods. Also, DNA can be used to make new plants that can be used in a lot of di erent fields.”

Kobe Cortez, junior environmental science major, argued that though DNA alteration is nothing new, bringing back an extinct species is largely unethical.

“Human scientists have been altering DNA for decades to breed specific animals, so this is not an entirely new topic,” Cortez said.

“However, to bring an extinct species back to modern times? One would need to assume what it primarily fed on and its habitat to live healthily. Though, in all honesty, it would most likely be kept inside a lab. An artificially born creature forced to endure many experiments until it dies seems very unethical.”

Another issue is how these ancient animals can reacclimate to modern ecosystems.

While Schacht believes that a few dodo birds in zoos or enclosed habitats will likely have little e ect on the surrounding environment, there will probably be issues if they are released into the wild.

“Ecology has proven again and again that we don’t understand it,” Schacht said. “There’s this perennial issue of invasive species, and every time we try to do one thing, there are unintended consequences.”

However, Schacht does not attribute this environmental skepticism to the supposed

The number of cases and deaths was falling, and both politicians and civilians began to discuss the topic with less frequency unless they were more directly a ected by it.

Additionally, the economy has finally started to recover from the wide-raning e ects of a two-year lockdown.

“Some aspects of economic recovery have been stronger and faster than anticipated,” Porter said. “Gross domestic product and the labor market have had very robust recoveries that have exceeded expectations from the beginning of the pandemic. The primary impact we are currently experiencing practicing Catholic, argued that these people falsely ascribe a political agenda to Catholicism, when their ideologies are instead rooted in morality.

“I don’t think people understand the Catholic church itself never takes a side in American politics,” Mandzok said. “The church calls for us to be informed voters. You can see the teachings of the Catholic church in both sides of the political spectrum. There is no left or right, just what the magisterium teaches.”

De Gano provided another outlook, saying that politics and the church have always been linked. However, instead of labeling politics as explicitly dangerous, he made the case that church members have a right to voice their ideals in a political context.

“Can you argue that we’re playing politics?” said De Gano, contemplating the role of politics in the church.

“Well, we’re standing up for our faith, standing up for what we believe, and this is what democracy is about. So we’re really not any di erent than someone who’s speaking out on any other issue.”

Another issue arises if lawmakers attempt to twist the ideals of Christian denominations and appear to use them for political ends.

De Gano referenced an advertising campaign in the Midwest funded by Gov. Gavin Newsom that referenced Matthew 22:39 — in which Jesus says “You shall love your neighbor as yourself” — to extend California’s access to abortion to those from out of state. De Gano said he did not appreciate the connection of Jesus’s words to the campaign.

He stated that his principles are a product of faith in the Lord and his teachings. He argued that politics are not the cornerstone of religion, as there is often disagreement even among members of the church regarding these issues.

“We’re supposed to leave our politics at the doorstep at the church,” De Gano said. “Because when we come, we’re coming to glorify God, coming to gratitude to God for what God has for us. And our communion service — our mass — is about coming together to unify. Politics is not about unity.”