Dire wolf de-extinction claims challenged by researchers in new study
Researchers argue that recent projects featuring edited grey wolves do not constitute true de-extinction of the extinct lineage.
Recent claims surrounding the return of extinct animals are facing pushback from researchers who argue that modifying living species does not equal true resurrection. In a paper published in Biology Letters, marine biologist Andrew Davinack and biochemist Charlotte Daniels from Wheaton College Massachusetts examine the scientific limits of modern genetic efforts.
Much of the focus centers on work done by biotech company Colossal Biosciences involving the dire wolf. Rather than reversing extinction, the process involved making genetic edits to grey wolf cells to produce animals with larger bodies, bigger teeth, and paler coats. The authors argue this is not a de-extinction, introducing the term lineage-genome conflation to describe the mislabeling.
"Recent advances in ancient DNA sequencing, comparative genomics and genome editing have renewed interest in de-extinction, often framed as the technological reversal of species loss," write the researchers in their published paper. "Here, we argue that de-extinction cannot recover extinct species because extinction represents the termination of an evolutionary lineage, not merely the disappearance of genetic information."
Evolutionary history and habitats
The argument emphasizes that a species involves more than just isolated DNA sequences. Genes and physical traits are shaped by long, continuous evolutionary histories, and any gaps in that timeline break the biological connection. Furthermore, modern environments differ drastically from those inhabited by dire wolves more than 10,000 years ago.
"Species are historically continuous population-level lineages shaped by gene flow, mutation, drift, selection, demographic history and ecological interaction," write the authors. While acknowledging that preserved cells or embryos offer a more direct route to biological continuity—such as efforts with the Pyrenean ibex in 2003—the researchers stress the need for precise terminology when evaluating technological milestones.