First Extinction of Large Mammal in Recent Decades.

[quote name='camoor']He has a kid too. I wonder what's the point when you think humanity is doomed and you don't give a fuck about spaceship earth.[/QUOTE]

Nice misdirection. How in the world could you conclude that I think humanity is doomed? You're projecting.

Humanity may only be doomed by people with half a brain, like you, who believe that things never change, or shouldn't change. It's not doomed by dying dolphins. Things that don't change, die. Things that don't realize change is inevitable, are already dead.

Selectively giving a fuck about species dying out on "spaceship earth" is a hypocritical excercise usually reserved for non-attractive college boys feigning sensitivity in order to score pussy. I'm guessing you've had some experience in this arena.

I care much more about my children than dying animal species, an order which I'm sure you have, obviously, reversed. God help your child when they learn you care more about the red cock woodpeckers' existence than theirs.
 
[quote name='bmulligan']How in the world could you conclude that I think humanity is doomed? You're projecting.
[/quote]This isn't my argument, but I'm awake at the moment so I'll step in for a second.

[quote name='bmulligan']someday the human race will be extinct[/quote]
He didn't project anything. He simply read your earlier post.
 
[quote name='SatchmoKhan']There are problems with using cloning to save a species. First of all you need a mother to carry the cloned embryo, and these dolphins are very rare even in captivity. Also, the genetic diversity of a species is very important for it's survival in the wild, so if we just try to clone some and use those to bring back the species there will be all sorts of birth defects and problems with their offspring. Cloning could be good enough to keep a few alive in zoos, but is probably unrealistic for preventing their extinction in the wild.

Here is the link to the CNN story:
http://www.cnn.com/2006/TECH/science/12/13/china.dolphin.ap/index.html[/QUOTE]

Neither is an especially dire obstacle. On the gestation host issue the two main options are to enlist a species that is a close relative to fill the role. This has been done already with projects to rebuild diminished populations of certain species.

Further away but not outside the realm of possibility within this century is artificial gestation environments. As genomics and proteomics improves, so does our ability to design such vessels.

Genetic variance is also easily dealt with so long as you don;t mind having a fair percentage of unviable embryos. Once you define the range of variance within the target species' genome, the varinces within the range can be induced to produce a group of animals with sufficient variance to form a viable base population. It doesn't take all that many. Just a few hundred for humans and even that group can be within a narrow band of the range we recognize for our species. This was the common state of human groups up until very recently, say 10 to 20 thousand years.

It may sound like science fiction but all of these things are being developed now and some, like trans-species surrogacy, are already in use. Much of what is common today was solely in the realm of SF novels when I was a child and the pace is hastening.

So get lots of genetic samples of everything. It will eventually be of use.
 
[quote name='guinaevere']Yes, the body is able to fight off most viral illnesses. But that has little to nothing to do with my earlier statement.[/QUOTE]It doesn't? Seems like it directly contradicts it to me.
 
I bet there will be a zoo in the near future filled with once extinct animals. They were planning on building a Jurassic Park like safari in Siberia for animals that lived around the ice age (Wooly Mammoths, Sabertooth, etc), but I am not sure what happened to that. There was some interest to build on in Japan in 2005, but that died down a bit recently. If it does get built in Japan, maybe CheapyD can take pics for us?
 
[quote name='wiki']The super-family of river dolphins...[/quote]
Now who will save the world since the super-family of river dolphins have become extinct.
 
I want some freshwater dolphins for the Great Lakes. How come we never get any of the cool mammals? We would take better care of them than the damn commies, that's for sure!
 
[quote name='SpottedNigel']I'll miss them. They were delicious[/QUOTE]As filthy as the river they swam around in was, who would want to eat them?
 
[quote name='epobirs']Neither is an especially dire obstacle. On the gestation host issue the two main options are to enlist a species that is a close relative to fill the role. This has been done already with projects to rebuild diminished populations of certain species.

Further away but not outside the realm of possibility within this century is artificial gestation environments. As genomics and proteomics improves, so does our ability to design such vessels.

Genetic variance is also easily dealt with so long as you don;t mind having a fair percentage of unviable embryos. Once you define the range of variance within the target species' genome, the varinces within the range can be induced to produce a group of animals with sufficient variance to form a viable base population. It doesn't take all that many. Just a few hundred for humans and even that group can be within a narrow band of the range we recognize for our species. This was the common state of human groups up until very recently, say 10 to 20 thousand years.

It may sound like science fiction but all of these things are being developed now and some, like trans-species surrogacy, are already in use. Much of what is common today was solely in the realm of SF novels when I was a child and the pace is hastening.

So get lots of genetic samples of everything. It will eventually be of use.[/QUOTE]

There is always potential to save the species, but in this case there are more obstacles than most. I don't think saving them is impossible, just unlikely.

The Chinese river dolphin is generally considered to belong to its own family (Lipotidae), and thus its closest living relatives may not be similar enough to act as surrogates. But there is the possibility of artificial gestation, as you said.

And on the issue of genetic diversity, it is generally thought that a minimum population of 25-50 individuals are necessary to minimize the effects of inbreeding. Even with significantly larger numbers the population can be weakened due to the persistence of harmful traits, an example of this can be seen in the problems cheetahs are having due to inbreeding.

And the hope of saving them all depends on the effort and funding being provided to bring them back.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top