Quagga brought back to life...kinda

Adam Khor

http://edition.cnn.com/2016/01/25/africa/quagga-project-zebra-conservation-extinct-south-africa/

What do you think?

Manach

I had a glance also at the Wiki page. While such programs are to be on one hand praise for making the conservation attempt. But that the DNA patterns are not pure Quagga and that perhaps the funds could have been directed to more viable endangered species very much make it, to quote Adam Khor, a kinda.

Linnaeus

Now I may be wrong, but I'd say that all extinct creatures are definitely as dead as dodos. They just can't be brought back to life, not in their original "unadulterated" form at any rate. Attempting to insert DNA from deceased individuals into related living animals can, at best, produce hybrids. No matter how many infusions of original DNA might be introduced over the generations, the genetic structure and characteristics of the host animal will always remain; even when they exist in a mainly dormant state, these host genes may eventually re-assert themselves, resulting in regressive physiology. So the descendants of the resurrected "quaggas" may finally revert to zebra types.

Adam Khor

Agreed, although in this case it seems there was no foreign DNA inserted (unless I missed that).

I do think the funding would've been better used trying to preserve other more endangered species, like Manach said.

Linnaeus

The article is not very explicit, but it does mention DNA, and I suspect that some infusion must have been used in order to achieve the desired effect so swiftly.

How far back in the prehistoric timeline are quaggas and zebras known? Which is really the older species? Could it be possible that they represent two "cousin" species, and have a common ancestor? (Sorry for these questions, but I am not entirely convinced that one must necessarily have sprung from the other.)

Adam Khor

Linnaeus wrote: »

The article is not very explicit, but it does mention DNA, and I suspect that some infusion must have been used in order to achieve the desired effect so swiftly.

How far back in the prehistoric timeline are quaggas and zebras known? Which is really the older species? Could it be possible that they represent two "cousin" species, and have a common ancestor? (Sorry for these questions, but I am not entirely convinced that one must necessarily have sprung from the other.)

There was no cross breeding involved. The desired genetics were artificially selected. The quagga-like appearance was contained within the zebra's genes all the time.
All recent genentic studies indicate the quagga was more a variety of this particular zebra species rather than a separate species of its own.