quote:

Originally posted by Aspen Hill Adventures:
Are they really dire wolves?

quote:

Originally posted by crbutler:
I’m all for returning the dire wolf if reasonable…

But these are not dire wolves; they may be close and the science involved is something we should be working on.

As to the rationale I would have to reintroducing an extinct species-

Why did they go extinct, and has the reason for that extinction gone away?

Can we accurately do it?

Does returning the species actually fill an ecological niche that is missing?

So if dire wolves were made extinct by humans, reintroduction in an area where they are gone might be rational. But if the reason the dire wolves died out was their large size was beneficial to survival in a ice age and their niche was predating on the megafauna on North America (mastodon, wooly rhino, giant ground sloth, etc.) there isn’t a niche for them and the dislocations caused by reintroducing them and protecting them will be as bad or worse than their extinction.

Compare the dire wolf to the tasmainian tiger… that was killed off by humans introduced mammals- that were more efficient in that niche. That and the prey species were outcompeted by old world species like rats and rabbits. Reintroduce the species and it’s going to die out again absent some significant human acts that will have other downstream effects.

I don’t know if reintroducing the mammoth (as cool as that would be) is feasible given the current state of the tundra and taiga.

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:

quote:

Originally posted by crbutler:
I’m all for returning the dire wolf if reasonable…

But these are not dire wolves; they may be close and the science involved is something we should be working on.

As to the rationale I would have to reintroducing an extinct species-

Why did they go extinct, and has the reason for that extinction gone away?

Can we accurately do it?

Does returning the species actually fill an ecological niche that is missing?

So if dire wolves were made extinct by humans, reintroduction in an area where they are gone might be rational. But if the reason the dire wolves died out was their large size was beneficial to survival in a ice age and their niche was predating on the megafauna on North America (mastodon, wooly rhino, giant ground sloth, etc.) there isn’t a niche for them and the dislocations caused by reintroducing them and protecting them will be as bad or worse than their extinction.

Compare the dire wolf to the tasmainian tiger… that was killed off by humans introduced mammals- that were more efficient in that niche. That and the prey species were outcompeted by old world species like rats and rabbits. Reintroduce the species and it’s going to die out again absent some significant human acts that will have other downstream effects.

I don’t know if reintroducing the mammoth (as cool as that would be) is feasible given the current state of the tundra and taiga.

Dire Wolves like the mammoth had their shot. They could not cut it in their niche in their time. None of this should be happening.

quote:

the prehistoric bison should be introduced to Canada

quote:

Originally posted by crbutler:
Really?

Why did they not cut it?

If you believe the greenies, it’s all a man made issue.

While not common, I’ve seen one wolf that I thought might go 150#. If so, the biggest “difference”- size- is not absolute.

Yes, these 3 hybrids are a science experiment… but if they don’t let them breed (they claim they will not) then it’s not even really an accurate report.

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:

quote:

Originally posted by crbutler:
I’m all for returning the dire wolf if reasonable…

But these are not dire wolves; they may be close and the science involved is something we should be working on.

As to the rationale I would have to reintroducing an extinct species-

Why did they go extinct, and has the reason for that extinction gone away?

Can we accurately do it?

Does returning the species actually fill an ecological niche that is missing?

So if dire wolves were made extinct by humans, reintroduction in an area where they are gone might be rational. But if the reason the dire wolves died out was their large size was beneficial to survival in a ice age and their niche was predating on the megafauna on North America (mastodon, wooly rhino, giant ground sloth, etc.) there isn’t a niche for them and the dislocations caused by reintroducing them and protecting them will be as bad or worse than their extinction.

Compare the dire wolf to the tasmainian tiger… that was killed off by humans introduced mammals- that were more efficient in that niche. That and the prey species were outcompeted by old world species like rats and rabbits. Reintroduce the species and it’s going to die out again absent some significant human acts that will have other downstream effects.

I don’t know if reintroducing the mammoth (as cool as that would be) is feasible given the current state of the tundra and taiga.

Dire Wolves like the mammoth had their shot. They could not cut it in their niche in their time. None of this should be happening.

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:

quote:

Originally posted by crbutler:
Really?

Why did they not cut it?

If you believe the greenies, it’s all a man made issue.

While not common, I’ve seen one wolf that I thought might go 150#. If so, the biggest “difference”- size- is not absolute.

Yes, these 3 hybrids are a science experiment… but if they don’t let them breed (they claim they will not) then it’s not even really an accurate report.

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:

quote:

Originally posted by crbutler:
I’m all for returning the dire wolf if reasonable…

But these are not dire wolves; they may be close and the science involved is something we should be working on.

As to the rationale I would have to reintroducing an extinct species-

Why did they go extinct, and has the reason for that extinction gone away?

Can we accurately do it?

Does returning the species actually fill an ecological niche that is missing?

So if dire wolves were made extinct by humans, reintroduction in an area where they are gone might be rational. But if the reason the dire wolves died out was their large size was beneficial to survival in a ice age and their niche was predating on the megafauna on North America (mastodon, wooly rhino, giant ground sloth, etc.) there isn’t a niche for them and the dislocations caused by reintroducing them and protecting them will be as bad or worse than their extinction.

Compare the dire wolf to the tasmainian tiger… that was killed off by humans introduced mammals- that were more efficient in that niche. That and the prey species were outcompeted by old world species like rats and rabbits. Reintroduce the species and it’s going to die out again absent some significant human acts that will have other downstream effects.

I don’t know if reintroducing the mammoth (as cool as that would be) is feasible given the current state of the tundra and taiga.

Dire Wolves like the mammoth had their shot. They could not cut it in their niche in their time. None of this should be happening.

Really, man was no different from any other creature in competition. Wolves made it. Dire did not. It was not deforestation or the building of a hydro electric dams. They had their chance and could not adapt to changes in both environment and creature conflict. Some did. They are not extinct because humans introduced a species into their environment. Humans did not artificially end the Dire. The Wooly is not adapted to modern climate.

Agains, wolves evolved along side Dire. Wolves won.

quote:

Originally posted by RolandtheHeadless:
The movement to introduce these extinct species is called rewinding.

I once wrote a science fiction novelette (published here: https://www.amazon.com/Years-B...%2Caps%2C311&sr=8-15 ) about an effort to reintroduce the extinct giant beaver.

quote:

Originally posted by medved:
they re-introduced bisons, moose, wolf, sheep and many other species even with success so why not

quote:

Originally posted by RolandtheHeadless:
Sorry, I don't follow you there. Who is Lizzo?

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:

quote:

Originally posted by medved:
they re-introduced bisons, moose, wolf, sheep and many other species even with success so why not

Those species are not extinct and were the result of modern sport hunting. I will add the idea of repating non extinct animals to traditional ranges in high concentrations, but limited range is dubious so a sound management plan. That applies to herbivores.


The Dire Wolf was not made extinct through building a hydro electric dam or unregulated market hunting w the species surviving. They had their shot and failed. I would not permit the use of dna sequencing in this manner. Likewise, no one is arguing the habit exists to support Wooly Mammoths. Thus, no.

Dire Wolfs probably could not breed with canids according to the conclusions of a 2021 scientific paper. Wolves arrived from Asia. Colossal claims the Dire Wolf and wolves share 99.5 percent of the same DNA. However, assuming that is true, Colossal has not released the entire genome they say they have completely sequenced. Assuming the 99.5 percent number is accurate, the grey wolf genome is 2.4 billion base pairs. That leaves room for millions of base pairs to be different. Thus, these creatures are truly Jurassic Park mutants. Sorry, I do not appreciate this use of science.


Similar morphologically to the extant grey wolf, dire wolves were a highly divergent lineage that split from living canids around 5.7 million years ago. In contrast to numerous examples of hybridization across Canidae2,3, there is no evidence for gene flow between dire wolves and either North American grey wolves or coyotes. This suggests that dire wolves evolved in isolation from the Pleistocene ancestors of these species. Our results also support an early New World origin of dire wolves, while the ancestors of grey wolves, coyotes and dholes evolved in Eurasia and colonized North America only relatively recently.

Fire Wolves did not become extent due to “non-natural” endeavors of humans. Fire Wolves lost to wolves. There is no place for them. They and their kind should remain as concluded. They should not be hybridized back into a life of captivity. Such hybrids could not be self sustaining and would be genetic science fair projects artificially placed to combat with species that long out competed them. Let’s assume this hybrid, mutants could now breed w grey wolves. It would be poker conservation and science to place a new mega predator into a limited environment to breed and compete w the species that is supposed to by evolution/adaption here.

Further reading tells me that 5 of the genetic changes in grey wolves genetics that were selected to give them grey wolf white coats. Stayed better, those five edits were grey wolf genes to make the grey wolf gene for white coats express. Thus, only 15 edits were The Dire Wolf DNA. Again, it appears Colossal position is that the dna vastly overlaps. Thus, these edits have returned the species by morphology according to Colossal.

Beth Shapiro who is the science head to all this has stated, “Species concept are human classifications, and everybody can disagree, and everyone can be right…You can use the phylogenetic species concept to determine what you are going to call a species, which is what you are implying…we are using the morphological spices concept, and saying if they look like this animal, then they are this animal.”

Thus, Jurassic Park science fair hybrids.

Now, I’ll be up front. I am old fashion and use the old when two can breed and produce viable offspring, then they are the same species. I am not hard in the fans splitters camp. However, I bet these pups can breed with grey wolfs producing viable off spring. Where as, Dire Wolfs could not.


No doubt these are morphologically Dire wolf by appearance. However, an advisor employed by Colossal, a Professor Love Dylan, has stated these are 99.9 percent Grey Wolves. Colossal surges at this taking the position both have 99.5 percent dna overlay. Again, Dire Woves diverged from wolves and are not dire wolves were a highly divergent lineage that split from living canids around 5.7 million years ago. In contrast to numerous examples of hybridization across Canidae2,3, there is no evidence for gene flow between dire wolves and either North American grey wolves or coyotes. This suggests that dire wolves evolved in isolation from the Pleistocene ancestors of these species. Dire Wolves then lost the battle to wolves when they crossed from Asia. This is not returning grey wolves to a range they were market hunted from.

I said these things when they crossed a lion with a tiger to create a non-viable science fair mutant.

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:

quote:

Originally posted by medved:
they re-introduced bisons, moose, wolf, sheep and many other species even with success so why not

Those species are not extinct and were the result of modern sport hunting. I will add the idea of repating non extinct animals to traditional ranges in high concentrations, but limited range is dubious so a sound management plan. That applies to herbivores.


The Dire Wolf was not made extinct through building a hydro electric dam or unregulated market hunting w the species surviving. They had their shot and failed. I would not permit the use of dna sequencing in this manner. Likewise, no one is arguing the habit exists to support Wooly Mammoths. Thus, no.

Dire Wolfs probably could not breed with canids according to the conclusions of a 2021 scientific paper. Wolves arrived from Asia. Colossal claims the Dire Wolf and wolves share 99.5 percent of the same DNA. However, assuming that is true, Colossal has not released the entire genome they say they have completely sequenced. Assuming the 99.5 percent number is accurate, the grey wolf genome is 2.4 billion base pairs. That leaves room for millions of base pairs to be different. Thus, these creatures are truly Jurassic Park mutants. Sorry, I do not appreciate this use of science.


Similar morphologically to the extant grey wolf, dire wolves were a highly divergent lineage that split from living canids around 5.7 million years ago. In contrast to numerous examples of hybridization across Canidae2,3, there is no evidence for gene flow between dire wolves and either North American grey wolves or coyotes. This suggests that dire wolves evolved in isolation from the Pleistocene ancestors of these species. Our results also support an early New World origin of dire wolves, while the ancestors of grey wolves, coyotes and dholes evolved in Eurasia and colonized North America only relatively recently.

Fire Wolves did not become extent due to “non-natural” endeavors of humans. Fire Wolves lost to wolves. There is no place for them. They and their kind should remain as concluded. They should not be hybridized back into a life of captivity. Such hybrids could not be self sustaining and would be genetic science fair projects artificially placed to combat with species that long out competed them. Let’s assume this hybrid, mutants could now breed w grey wolves. It would be poker conservation and science to place a new mega predator into a limited environment to breed and compete w the species that is supposed to by evolution/adaption here.

Further reading tells me that 5 of the genetic changes in grey wolves genetics that were selected to give them grey wolf white coats. Stayed better, those five edits were grey wolf genes to make the grey wolf gene for white coats express. Thus, only 15 edits were The Dire Wolf DNA. Again, it appears Colossal position is that the dna vastly overlaps. Thus, these edits have returned the species by morphology according to Colossal.

Beth Shapiro who is the science head to all this has stated, “Species concept are human classifications, and everybody can disagree, and everyone can be right…You can use the phylogenetic species concept to determine what you are going to call a species, which is what you are implying…we are using the morphological spices concept, and saying if they look like this animal, then they are this animal.”

Thus, Jurassic Park science fair hybrids.

Now, I’ll be up front. I am old fashion and use the old when two can breed and produce viable offspring, then they are the same species. I am not hard in the fans splitters camp. However, I bet these pups can breed with grey wolfs producing viable off spring. Where as, Dire Wolfs could not.


No doubt these are morphologically Dire wolf by appearance. However, an advisor employed by Colossal, a Professor Love Dylan, has stated these are 99.9 percent Grey Wolves. Colossal surges at this taking the position both have 99.5 percent dna overlay. Again, Dire Woves diverged from wolves and are not dire wolves were a highly divergent lineage that split from living canids around 5.7 million years ago. In contrast to numerous examples of hybridization across Canidae2,3, there is no evidence for gene flow between dire wolves and either North American grey wolves or coyotes. This suggests that dire wolves evolved in isolation from the Pleistocene ancestors of these species. Dire Wolves then lost the battle to wolves when they crossed from Asia. This is not returning grey wolves to a range they were market hunted from.

I said these things when they crossed a lion with a tiger to create a non-viable science fair mutant.