Attempting De-Extinction

There's a group trying to save the functionally extinct northern white rhino using in vitro fertilization. But the ethics around using assisted reproductive technologies to save endangered animals are far from simple.

Hosted by: Jessi Knudsen Castañeda (she/her/they/them)

Should We Save Northern White Rhinos?
----------
----------
Huge thanks go to the following Patreon supporters for helping us keep SciShow free for everyone forever: Adam Brainard, Alex Hackman, Ash, Benjamin Carleski, Bryan Cloer, charles george, Chris Mackey, Chris Peters, Christoph Schwanke, Christopher R Boucher, DrakoEsper, Eric Jensen, Friso, Garrett Galloway, Harrison Mills, J. Copen, Jaap Westera, Jason A Saslow, Jeffrey Mckishen, Jeremy Mattern, Kenny Wilson, Kevin Bealer, Kevin Knupp, Lyndsay Brown, Matt Curls, Michelle Dove, Piya Shedden, Rizwan Kassim, Sam Lutfi
----------
Looking for SciShow elsewhere on the internet?

#SciShow #science #education #learning #complexly
----------
Sources

Image Sources

[darmocat]

Another problem too is; who is going to teach these northern white rhinos to BE northern white rhinos? It is a problem more pronounced in elephants; where having all the old males be poached leaves the younger generation of males without someone to teach them how to be an elephant. Maybe the problem isn't as pronounced in rhinos; but it is another angle to consider.

[allisonmarciszyn]

The hybrid calf: is it fertile? How much have these two species differentiated? I wonder if a better approach might be mixing the northern rhino samples into the extant southern herd to increase the genetic diversity of the whole group, rather than create another bottleneck situation.

[vidarmors]

Awesome to see her on here not just sci show kids!

[SilentMeteorite]

This is a fantastic summary of all the big relevant issues with severely endangered species. Not just from a genetics angle, but from actually adressing the systematic issues that caused the near-extinction in the first place, looking towards the sources of problems instead of just trying to fix problems after they've already happened. Thank you sci show!

[michaelobrien]

I wonder how long it took the rhino to get diagnosed with endometriosis. It often takes humans well over 10 years even while knowing they have it.

[chancetime]

Welcome back from Animal Wonders Montana Jessi. Don't remember Jessi over here on the main SciShow since before C-19.

[inganeer]

Really weird watching Jessi bring the serious energy rather than the kids show energy. Glad to see her role increasing though, great presenter!

[mariakasstan]

If preserving them includes preserving their range and protect them from poachers, it would be worth it but more efforts need to go to protecting all species that are still here.

[reiteration]

The last point seems kinda odd to me.

If we bring them back but don't do enough to address poaching, they *could* go extinct...

But if we don't bring them back then they *will* go extinct, even if we end poaching tomorrow.

[jenniferburns]

Ethical questions are very important when discussing these technological "fixes" to man made problems. From "should we use IVF to produce northern rhinos?" to "should we put all our climate efforts into carbon capture?" it feels like more energy and money go into after the fact fixes instead of addressing causes.

[jessicalindsey]

Hi Jessi! Great to see you back over here too.

[mollyj]

While not touched on here, another point is whether limited conservation funding should be spent on large charismatic species (eg, pandas, a rhino subspecies) when many other entire ecosystems or less charismatic, but highly important, species are at risk but get much less money. As an entomologist I'd be thrilled to have a fraction of a fraction of a percent of the funding put into saving these big mammals. I think all species are worth saving, but unless humankind miraculously agrees conservation is a high priority and gives us more funding, there are ethical considerations about which species or systems get the most money poured into their protection. More of that thought process needs to be the ecological ramifications of losing that species rather than how cute, cuddly, well-known it is, i.e., favoring mammals most of the time. We really need more funding if we want to give attention to all species, particularly the ones from highly unique evolutionary lineages or that play keystone roles in ecosystems. The last point she makes is a huge one - we need to address core problems of habitat loss & degradation, or those species won't last long once reintroduced. That's where more conservation funding needs to come in, to restore and protect the habitats, work with local communities to foster support and facilitate the community taking part in protecting their natural heritage, and get legislature passed to ban or reduce harmful practices that continue to contribute to habitat destruction. With such limited funding, putting it into a process that then fails because we didnt address the core threats is devastating. Ideally conservation is implemented primarily at the ecosystem level and only when needed at the species level; this preserves the natural processes, species interactions, and land they occur on, and protects the many many species we do not know enough about to protect, do not know are there, and do not have any public awareness or support. We try to get around limited funding by trying to use charismatic species as umbrellas for saving their whole habitats and thus all the species in them.

[alien]

We caused these problems, its time we do eveything we can to try and fix it. And we''ll learn a lot along the way

[MaryAnnNytowl]

Since we are the reason it's gotten to this point, from overhunting to poaching to habitat destruction, it seems we should be honor-bound to fix what we effed up. Then again, what about the other hundred species a year we drive to extinction? I feel we are also honor-bound to stop the disappearances of those species, TOO.

[Respectable_Username]

Among these "whether we should" questions is also about the rhino's impact on the wider ecosystem. More specifically, are they a keystone species or not? Because if they are and they're left to die out, it's not _just_ that rhino population that has been devastated.

[harvest]

I think if we are largely responsible for something dying off then we should try to bring them back. As for protecting them, keep them in zoos until it's safe to release them, that means among other things, paying people to keep them safe from poachers while educating people so they don't even want their horns.

[lady_draguliana]

Speaking more generally about Rhinos, there was a plan conserve them by actually farming (ranching) them for meat AND [horn]. the idea being that, much like the wide and cheap availability of bull horn, farmed rhinos could be strategically released into the wild once the price of [horn] tanks due to availability, essentially removing the motivation for poaching

[.namkhanh]

I really think that the urge to bring back extinct animals is just how human deal with the fact that we are the actual problem. And it's kinda absurd that we see them as an extinct specie, rather than dying inviduals.

[jakefrechette]

Thank you for illustrating the larger scope of this problem. Heartbreaking all around.

[nariutimes]

Love seeing Jessi here, showing her knowledge, as well as the excellent Sci Show team (research, writing, sound, etc!) I enjoy your work very much.