Artistic impressions of the moa, one of the largest extinct birds
Christopher Cree/Colossal Biosciences
Colossal Biosciences has unveiled its ambitious project to “bring back” the New Zealand MOA, one of the most remarkable extinct birds in history, although critics claim the objectives may be scientifically unfeasible.
The MOA was the only fully known flightless bird, with no close relatives like emus. Nine species once inhabited New Zealand, including the turkey-sized bush moa (Anomalopteryx didiformis). The two largest varieties, the South Island Giant MOA (Dinornis robustus) and the North Island Giant MOA (Dinornis novaezealandiae), both stood at an imposing 3.6 meters tall and weighed around 230 kilograms.
By the mid-15th century, all MOA species were believed extinct, following the arrival of the Polynesian people, now known as Māori, in New Zealand around 1300.
Colossal has partnered with the Ngāi Tahu Research Centre, an indigenous institution affiliated with the University of Canterbury in New Zealand, along with filmmakers such as Peter Jackson and the Canterbury Museum. These collaborations are vital as Colossal aims to extract DNA and reconstruct the genomes of all nine species of MOA.
Similar to Colossal’s other “de-extinction” initiatives, this project involves modifying the DNA of currently existing species. Andrew Pask, a scientific advisor at the University of Melbourne, notes that the MOA’s closest living relative is the South American Tinamou, although it is considerably smaller.
This suggests the project may need to utilize the Australian EMU (Dromaius novaehollandiae) instead. As Pask explains, “Emus have large embryos and eggs, which are crucial for recreating the MOA.”
Previously, Colossal announced its so-called “de-extinction” of the thylacine. This endeavor has faced skepticism from external experts who argue that the animal is essentially a modified gray wolf. Pask insists that the MOA project involves greater genetic manipulation.
“With the MOA, we are making a concerted effort to accurately reassemble the species,” he states. “When this animal walks the Earth again, we will have no doubt it is a true MOA. It will be an engineered version of the original.”
The specific habitat for these reintroduced animals is still unclear. Mike Stevens from the Ngāi Tahu Research Centre emphasizes that both his organization and the local Māori community must fully grasp the “feasibility and ethical implications” of Colossal’s efforts. “Only after this discussion can we consider how and where the ‘giant MOA’ will fit into our world,” he mentions, raising numerous profound ethical and practical questions that need careful consideration before proceeding. Technology must prove its worth.
Conversely, Philip Seddon from the University of Otago believes that whatever Colossal creates won’t truly be a MOA and may exhibit distinctly different traits. He highlights that while Tinamous are the closest relative of the MOA, their evolutionary paths diverged over 60 million years ago.
“Ultimately, Colossal’s approach utilizes genetic engineering to produce GMOs that resemble an extinct species without genuinely solving contemporary global issues,” he asserts.
Pask vigorously challenges this viewpoint, arguing that insights gained from this de-extinction endeavor are crucial for the preservation of current endangered species.
Jamie Wood from the University of Adelaide believes this project may yield “valuable new perspectives on MOA biology and evolution.” However, he cautions that if Colossal employs similar methodologies to those used in the dire wolf project, they could struggle to persuade the public that the resultant creature can be regarded as a true MOA.
“While they may possess certain MOA-like characteristics, they are unlikely to behave as the originals did or occupy the same ecological roles.”
Topics:
Source: www.newscientist.com
