Startup Raises $200 Million To 'De-Extinct' the Woolly Mammoth, Thylacine and Dodo (venturebeat.com) 63
An anonymous reader quotes a report from VentureBeat: Colossal BioSciences has raised $200 million in a new round of funding to bring back extinct species like the woolly mammoth. Dallas- and Boston-based Colossal is making strides in the scientific breakthroughs toward "de-extinction," or bringing back extinct species like the woolly mammoth, thylacine and the dodo. [...] Since launching in September 2021, Colossal has raised $435 million in total funding. This latest round of capital places the company at a $10.2 billion valuation. Colossal will leverage this latest infusion of capital to continue to advance its genetic engineering technologies while pioneering new revolutionary software, wetware and hardware solutions, which have applications beyond de-extinction including species preservation and human healthcare.
"Our recent successes in creating the technologies necessary for our end-to-end de-extinction toolkit have been met with enthusiasm by the investor community. TWG Global and our other partners have been bullish in their desire to help us scale as quickly and efficiently as possible," said CEO Colossal Ben Lamm, in a statement. "This funding will grow our team, support new technology development, expand our de-extinction species list, while continuing to allow us to carry forth our mission to make extinction a thing of the past." Here's a summary of the startup's progress on its efforts to bring back the woolly mammoth, thylacine and the dodo:
Woolly Mammoth De-extinction Progress
- Generated chromosome-scale reference genomes for elephants and the first de novo assembled mammoth genome
- Acquired and aligned 60+ ancient mammoth genomes and 30+ genomes of extant elephant species, improving mammoth-specific variant accuracy
- Derived pluripotent stem cells for Asian elephants, advancing reproductive technologies essential for de-extinction
Thylacine De-extinction Progress
- Created a 99.9% complete ancient genome for the thylacine using long-read and RNA sequencing
- Assembled telomere-to-telomere genomes of dasyurid species to understand evolutionary relationships and support conservation of marsupials
- Progress in genomics and reproductive technologies positions Colossal ahead of schedule on critical de-extinction steps
Dodo De-extinction Progress
- Completed high-coverage genomes for the dodo, its relatives, and the critically endangered manumea
- Developed tools for avian genome engineering, including techniques for craniofacial gene-editing and primordial germ cell cultivation
- Significant advances in avian-specific genetic techniques are driving progress toward dodo restoration and bird conservation
"Our recent successes in creating the technologies necessary for our end-to-end de-extinction toolkit have been met with enthusiasm by the investor community. TWG Global and our other partners have been bullish in their desire to help us scale as quickly and efficiently as possible," said CEO Colossal Ben Lamm, in a statement. "This funding will grow our team, support new technology development, expand our de-extinction species list, while continuing to allow us to carry forth our mission to make extinction a thing of the past." Here's a summary of the startup's progress on its efforts to bring back the woolly mammoth, thylacine and the dodo:
Woolly Mammoth De-extinction Progress
- Generated chromosome-scale reference genomes for elephants and the first de novo assembled mammoth genome
- Acquired and aligned 60+ ancient mammoth genomes and 30+ genomes of extant elephant species, improving mammoth-specific variant accuracy
- Derived pluripotent stem cells for Asian elephants, advancing reproductive technologies essential for de-extinction
Thylacine De-extinction Progress
- Created a 99.9% complete ancient genome for the thylacine using long-read and RNA sequencing
- Assembled telomere-to-telomere genomes of dasyurid species to understand evolutionary relationships and support conservation of marsupials
- Progress in genomics and reproductive technologies positions Colossal ahead of schedule on critical de-extinction steps
Dodo De-extinction Progress
- Completed high-coverage genomes for the dodo, its relatives, and the critically endangered manumea
- Developed tools for avian genome engineering, including techniques for craniofacial gene-editing and primordial germ cell cultivation
- Significant advances in avian-specific genetic techniques are driving progress toward dodo restoration and bird conservation
Doesn't feel right somehow (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
I think I saw a documentary in the late 90s, "so preoccupied with how they could, they didn't think they should" or somesuch.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]
Luckily, the first generation will at most get this instead:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]
Re: (Score:1)
It's ok, we will just make sure to they can't produce lysine, so they will be forever dependent on us for it. Should they escape and go rampaging through a populated city, eventually they will die from lysine deprivation, and everything will be fine.
Raphus cucullatus (Score:5, Insightful)
It's ok, we will just make sure to they can't produce lysine, so they will be forever dependent on us for it. Should they escape and go rampaging through a populated city, eventually they will die from lysine deprivation, and everything will be fine.
They're not 36 foot tall, intelligence-enhanced Dodos.
They were hunted to extinction because they were unafraid of humans. And we introduced other species that ate all their chicks and eggs. Including: Sailors brought animals to the island, including: Monkeys, Dogs, Rats, and Pigs. So never mind the exogenic amino acids. If there's trouble, we can just do some more generic engineering. A MonkeyDog or RatPig ought to take are of things.
Re: (Score:2)
I used to work in computational biology and bioinformatics, but my fingers were programmed decades before that for "generic" rather than "genetic".
Maybe with the AI craze I could fix it by doing some genetic programming...
PREVIEW buttons are for chumps anyway.
Re: Raphus cucullatus (Score:2)
Or a Hyena-Swine from the island of Dr Moreau for the best results.
Re: (Score:3)
They won't 'de-extinct' anything. There will be insufficient genetic diversity to produce a breeding population. There will be no wild adults to raise the young as their species would have done while it still lived.
What they might get is some interesting lab animals to study, maybe a zoo exhibit or two.
Re:Doesn't feel right somehow (Score:5, Insightful)
The genetic diversity would be an issue. Zoo exhibit would be the target for the foreseeable future. Still, it isn't that bad.
Okay, the three animals listed are the Dodo, Thylacine, and Woolly mammoth.
Had to search to find out what the Thylacine was like.
In the Dodo's case, it should be relatively easy - I figure that it'd be like a chicken, have most of what's necessary in instinct. Worst case, you do the raptor thing where they raise it using puppets.
Woolly mammoth - everything I've read says that they're mostly similar to elephants. So, assuming that we use an elephant as a surrogate mother, she can train the baby on zoo-related living at least.
Thylacine - Raise by hand in zoos, if you actually get enough to want to release them into the wild, accept a multi-generational training effort.
I'll note that I'd place de-extincting a species at closer to $2B or more, not $200M for 3. The latter is barely enough for preparatory efforts like collecting up as much genome information as you can get.
Re: (Score:2)
You lack imagination my friend. The way chicken farms are run these days the dodo sounds like it would work out perfectly. No wild adults or significant genetic diversity required. Though I imagine we can come up with some techniques for creating genetic diversity.
Re: (Score:2)
There will be no wild adults to raise the young as their species would have done while it still lived.
If you hatch a bird and it doesn't have any parents, you feed it through a dropper, possibly dressed up as a mother bird if you're getting elaborate. (But people do this all the time with budgies, and they don't make any pretense of a parent.) AFAIK the birds turn out just fine. Even if you release them into their natural habitat. I don't know if this works well for predator birds, but I think the dodo is more like a budgie or a chicken.
I agree that it is questionable whether you're going to wind up with a
Re: (Score:2)
They won't 'de-extinct' anything. There will be insufficient genetic diversity to produce a breeding population. There will be no wild adults to raise the young as their species would have done while it still lived.
What they might get is some interesting lab animals to study, maybe a zoo exhibit or two.
Hmm. Sounds oddly familiar. Didn’t we humans write a Jurassic-era Park story literally warning humanity about the dangers of assuming to exactly this level of ignorance?
And we sit around feverishly developing AI, while assuming it simply cannot morph into Skynet..
Re: (Score:3)
I get an uneasy feeling about this. It's like something out of Mary Shelley's Frankenstein, on a genomic level.
If God wanted us to deliberately genetically engineer, he would have given us Agriculture and animal husbandry.
Re: Doesn't feel right somehow (Score:2)
The old Cro Magnon man from 20k years ago had neither.
Re: (Score:2)
But but that's a conspiracy right? Because the Earth didn't exist 20k years ago?
Re: (Score:2)
I think he's saying Cro-Magnon grew wheat and fucked goats.
Re-Extinction Always an Option (Score:2)
Who approves this stuff? (Score:4, Insightful)
I can't believe the amount of money & the number of projects almost guaranteed to fail that attract big money.
Re: (Score:2)
People look up to Elona, who made a killing just by peddling "cult classics" cliches and smart "investment" in election purchases.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, most *tech* projects fail; if you "probably will fail" rules out funding then very little gets funding. It's not necessarily technical reasons; sometimes the money dries up and it's not your fault. Sometimes you end up making a product that for unforeseen reasons people don't buy it.
Although I dunno on that last point. it kind of "stands to reason" that people would find resurrected mammoth tasty...
Re: (Score:1)
From what I know about Church, he's basically the Tom Cruise of biotech startups. I wouldn't bet against this team.
Re: (Score:2)
The wealth imbalance in America is so extreme that regular people have no readily available mental pictures that are appropriate for gauging bank balances with so many zeros.
It's li
Re: (Score:2)
I can't believe the amount of money & the number of projects almost guaranteed to fail that attract big money.
Maybe we should start saying “I cannot believe how many people need jobs”, since failed projects guarantee at least that for the foreseeable future. Some don’t look beyond the foreseeable, and therefore find value in failed ventures.
Theres also the issue of taxes. Rich people prefer funding write-offs more than they do paying taxes. Even if the venture is pointless, it’s more entertaining than paying taxes.
Re: (Score:2)
Huh? How is it guaranteed to fail? It's not implausible. I'm sort of in this field, while they will definitely need a breakthrough or two (specifically they will need to figure out in-vitro gametogenesis -- which we can do in mice, but can't get to work in primates and elephants -- though that from lack of trying hard. Nothing they are proposing is in the realm of impossible -- just difficult. Challenging, but not impossible. They'll need to hire the right people though. It's very easy to F it up, I'll give
Re: (Score:2)
This is a waste of money (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
"Just because something is theoretically possible is not a reason to do it."
No but some day we might have need to do it and our chances of succeeding are much higher if we've done it before. That's a reason to do it.
"This is a waste of money that would be better spent preserving existing species."
Why preserve existing species?
"There is no natural habitat for the three species anymore, so all they would ever be is zoo displays."
They could also have use as agricultural animals. Sign me up for kentucky fried d
Re:This is a waste of money (Score:4, Insightful)
No but some day we might have need to do it and our chances of succeeding are much higher if we've done it before.
For example, suppose aliens show up trying to communicate with humpback whales and they've gone extinct...
Re: (Score:2)
I think the bigger issue will be finding a functional Klingon Bird of Prey. And transparent aluminum.
Re: (Score:2)
True, but it shouldn't be too hard to find the LDS.
Re: This is a waste of money (Score:2)
Re: This is a waste of money (Score:2)
Fred Flintstone Finally Found!
No natural habitat? Not true. (Score:2)
The habitats they inhabited still exist - unless you think Tasmania has undergone radical enviromental change since the 1930s in the case of the thylacine. Even the mammoth could probably still survive in northern siberia.
Yummm (Score:3)
I cannot wait to eat each one of these on a bun or in a casserole -- the possibilities for culinary advancement are endless! Well worth the $200 million+
Re: (Score:1)
Fur burgers at the drive through!
Environmental impact of a herd of mammoths? (Score:1)
If people are complaining about the environmental impact of cows, then these mammoths will be 20x worse.
Re: (Score:1)
It's positive actually, something about promoting grass vs trees in tundra regions.
Population Size Matters (Score:2)
Sweeeet (Score:2)
Natural order (Score:1)
By all means, let's try to mess with natural order. Introduce/reintroduce species where they don't belong (Mongoose, Eucalyptus trees, bees/wasps, shellfish... we can go on).
Nothing can possibly go wrong.
Re: (Score:2)
"where they don't belong"
What does that actually mean? Its almost as if you believe there is an absolute correct that we can compare against.
we have lots of raptor dna as well (Score:2)
we have lots of raptor dna as well
Trump's grand project (Score:2)
Jerkassic Park
NATURE took care of this (Score:1)
So where you believe in Darwinism or a God, either way something caused these creatures to cease their existence on this planet.
Bringing them back suggest as one other post has sadi "Mary Shelley's Frankenstien" but Frankenstein was the doctor's name and Franenstein's Monster is what he/she meant... OR bringing a creature doomed to die back to life.
Today's environment is not the same. Creatures of the wild don't all "adapt" to Zoos. I'm oversimplifying but that's what you do when you respond to a BeauHD
Re: (Score:2)
Thylacine - Wiped out by humans because they were perceived as a threat to livestock.
Dodo - Wiped out by human introduced livestock and companion animals.
Mammoths - Hunted heavily by human, not helped by climate changes.
If our ongoing impact on this biosphere is anything to go by, nature isn't taking care of shit all.
Tasts like... (Score:2)
Genetic diversity and walking around acting like a dodo in some habitat is not the goal here. What will pay for this is the exotic experience of eating a once-endangered species. Because apparently dodo was delicious!
Say, this is making me thirsty.
Do you have a cokie-mokey?
Meanwhile ... (Score:2)
thousands of species are going extinct, lost forever every year, because we destroy and pollute habitats and simply ruin this planet, the only one we will ever have (despite remarks from idiots like Musk).
200 Million for amusement while the tragedy goes on.
Another hyperloop? (Score:2)
Why? (Score:2)
Okay but why (Score:2)
Are they going to allow bioengineered species to be released into the wild? I doubt it. Are we going to be eating buttermilk dodo burgers? I doubt it.
So are they going to sell bioengineered animals to zoos and themeparks? Possibly but I could see a massive ethics firestorm and are these things going to be genetically diverse enough to breed or will they simply drop dead from some genetic "killswitch" and require the zoo order another batch from this company?
Or maybe the company doesn't give a damn about the
Today is Thursday, right? (Score:1)
I guess Thursday Next might like a word with you, about those Dodos.
One Question (Score:2)
I mean, really. Why?
Re: (Score:2)
Knowledge.
It's a fascinating field and we're learning a lot.
Re: (Score:1)
Apparently they believe there will be a huge market for the carbon offset credits associated with sponsoring these critters,
Also artificial placentas, which... Yuck, but we'll have to wait and see.
Ethical? (Score:2)
I mean either you let them roam free which immediately would make them endangered species...
Or you breed them for the zoo.
Seems narcissistic to me.
What about bacteria and other stuff not in DNA? (Score:1)
Babies don’t develop in a sterile bubble relying only on their own DNA. While in the womb, it’s possible they already come into contact with some microbes from the mother, though the extent of this is still under research. During birth and through breastfeeding, they definitely acquire a variety of bacteria and other microorganisms that help establish their gut flora and overall microbiome. These microbes each have their own genetic makeup, separate from the baby’s DNA, and play a key role
This is GM research (Score:2)