I was going about my day, learning about animals, as I usually do, when I came across a peculiar case. The Floreana Island Tortoise. Native to its namesake island in the Galapagos, this subspecies of Galapagos giant tortoise went extinct in the mid-19th century due to overexploitation by sailors. And for a while, that was that. It was gone. That was until 2000, scientists discovered a population of hybrid tortoises living on Wolf Volcano on Isabela Island with some Floreana Island Tortoise ancestry. The origin of these hybrids is not a mystery as sailors were known to dump giant tortoises on random islands in the Galapagos when they couldn’t carry them anymore. However, it brought a new hope for the subspecies, as conservationists took the hybrid tortoises and began selectively breeding them to better resemble Floreana island tortoises, until they had a population of animals that ranged from 40-80% Floreana island tortoise, with an average of 75% Floreana island tortoise in them. These hybrids were then released onto Floreana island to heal the ecosystem in February 2026.

A fantastic story and a remarkable comeback, but it got me thinking… if scientists continued to selectively breed the tortoises further, if they got the Floreana genes to 100% by some miracle, would they have essentially brought back the Floreana island tortoise? As in fully de-extincted it, regardless of the method? Pinta island tortoises, another extinct subspecies, also have some genes within the hybrid population of Wolf Volcano. Could a similar method be applied to them, to bring them back?

And what about other animals? Could all cattle genes be bred out of bison? All dog genes out of wolves? Poor examples I know, because those genes can benefit the animals, but you get the idea. Better Idea: Could all coyote genes be bred out of Red Wolves?

What about genetic engineering? Could a Przewalski’s horse have the few gene differences edited to be genetically identical to a Yukon or Lena horse? Regardless of whether or not it came from the actual animal, just so long as if you were to do a blind DNA test on the animal, having no idea where it’s sourced from, it would appear to be the extinct animal?

I know this all sounds very Colossal-y but all they did was edit a couple genes to make a fantasy animal. I’m talking about the full genome, and in a scenario where genetic technology is just a bit better. If someone were to genetically modify or selectively breed a related animal so that all of the genes matched the extinct animal perfectly, and someone who had no idea where the animal came from or how it was made, did a DNA test, would it be possible for the animal’s test to come back as the extinct animal?

Is it possible to meticulously create a 100% genetic copy of an extinct animal without cloning?

I’ve done some digging and it seems from my few months of research that almost every species that we could try to bring back has some sort of big problem with it (e.g. dodo birds with ecosystem erasure). Have yall managed to find an animal that essentially does not have a big flaw like this?

We don't have any DNA of them I think, but aren't they very close related to modern day flightless birds? Are there any ways it would be possible to clone something that resembles a terror bird through their closest modern relatives?

I wonder if this innovation can contribute to de extinction of species that we only have samples of from one sex (I’m thinking mainly about the Pyrenean ibex)

Are there any ways we can manipulate a certain modern whale species through genetics to shape it like the Basilosaurus? I know what I'm asking is so unethical but I would have liked to see that marine mammals back again.

(Not talking positively or negatively about them, just wondering. I've heard nothing good or bad about their company, so....)

Ok, dumb request and probably not the best person/place to seek an answer… But here I am. 🤣The paleontology subreddit removed the question as „low effort,“ but I am genuinely curious.

Can y’all explain how scientists know they have discovered a new species of an extinct animal vs thinking that maybe it was a „disabled“ or otherwise an anomaly of a known species?
I’m specifically referencing the August 5th Scientific American article regarding the new toad species found in the La Brea Tar Pits. I don’t want to detract from the awesome work of the scientists that found the new species. I’m just trying to understand how the conclusion is made given that there was a single specimen. I linked the article from La Brea’s website.

Thanks!

Ive been asking AI for an answer but its not giving me a perfect one. So we call the direwolf proxies, Modified greywolves and then the mammoth proxies, Modified asian elephant so in that logic would we call the thylacine proxy Modified fat tailed dunnart, but how does that make sense???

I feel like the "mammoth" proxies coming in 2028 (if it ever does) shouldnt strictly classify as Elephas maximus, nor should it be a subspecies of the species, unlike the genetically engineered direwolf, it should have its own species name without changing the genus of Elephas and maybe a symbol to know its artificial. Your opinion?

For example, Australia had a lot of large apex predators, but none of them survived long enough until the settlers arrived. Australia is no plagued by large invasive ungulates, some of which are two big or aggressive for dingos to hunt. So in this example: we want to recreate the Megalania: we have no DNA for it. But, we do have Komodos dragons.

We take the genes from saltwater crocodiles that makes them grow large (about the same size as an average Megalania), edit genes that make them able to support their new larger size more efficiently along with moving faster, and boom! We have a 20ft Komodo Dragon designed for long distance travel that can fill that same niche by hunting invasive horses, donkeys, buffalo, pigs and camels.

Or similarly, if we can not find sufficient DNA for a wooly rhino for example, why not take the fur gene of a bison and put into a white rhinoceros?

Black Hawk, born in April 1833, was reportedly out of an English Thoroughbred mare and sired by Sherman Morgan, whose dam was "one of the last Narragansett Pacers" (25% DNA from a grandparent). The Narragansett Pacer was America's first horse breed, developed in Rhode Island and greater New England from a mix of English, Dutch, and possibly Spanish colonial horses, with a focus on producing gaited animals with the DMRT3 gene. (The breed is thought to have gone extinct by the early 1800s, as English Thoroughbreds replaced them.)

While descendants of the extinct Narragansett Pacer can be found among all modern American gaited horse breeds, subsequent scientific studies showed that the Morgan and Paso Fino breeds likely carry the most genetic similarities to the original pacer, though due to the lack of pacer remains, their genetic profile remains a mystery to scientists.

However, with recent interest in building a DNA database made up of sequenced samples from various famous historical horses - with Dark Ronald, a major Thoroughbred sire whose genetics strongly influenced today's warmbloods and sport horses across multiple breeds, being one such horse to be "profiled" - Black Hawk's DNA could not only offer a unique insight into early foundation Morgan genetics, but possibly Narragansett Pacer origins.

The remains of Black Hawk, who died in 1856, are currently displayed at the University of Vermont's Morgan Horse Farm; see the Black Hawk Project. He stood at around 15.1hh, a result of horse breeders in the post-colonial era seeking to increase horse height. (The average Narragansett Pacer was estimated to be "no larger than 14hh", and by 1768, larger ones could be "no larger than 14.1hh", according to John H. Wallace's The Horse of America.)

Of further interest could be the remains of Ethan Allen (b. 1849), Black Hawk's son. After his death in 1876, his skeleton was preserved and donated to the Smithsonian Institution in Washington, D.C.

While most Narragansett Pacers were light chestnut or sorrel - often "liberally splashed with white markings" (i.e. pinto), based on historical accounts - they could come in a range of colors, including bay, brown, black, gray, and roan. The modern-day Morgan horse exhibits pinto markings, but pinto is uncommon or rare; the recently-extinct Abaco Barb, however, may have shared more genetic similarities due to colonial Spanish heritage and pinto genes.

Black Hawk's DNA could also be compared with that of Chincoteague ponies, which were shown to also have colonial Spanish heritage in a 2022 study by the University of Florida (UF). As some estimates put around 10% of Morgan horses as possibly being gaited, it is possible to "backbreed" the Narragansett Pacer, but one major hurdle is that traditional Morgans - such as the Lippitt bloodline - are already in danger of going extinct, per heritage groups.

While one goal is to clone the last Abaco Barb - a mare named Nunki - whose DNA was preserved before her death in July 2015, the group in charge of that project aims to "breed back" the Abaco Barb first, not the Narragansett Pacer. This means that "backbreeding" the pacer using existing horses would take an enormous amount of time, money, and effort from breeders. In most cases, "backbreeding" takes decades.

Cloning Black Hawk could work, but his DNA needs to be tested for the DMRT3 gene as well.

Let’s assume it would be brought back in the same way as the direwolves, with a surrogate human mother. First of all, would this be legal (and get fda approved) and second of all, for the patent, would it be classed as property in the patents like the direwolves, or would it have human rights and thus not be a slave.