Saving species from extinction is the least that mankind can do

THE notion that cloning could prevent the extinction of endangered species feels like the stuff of Jurassic Park. For many people it will raise the spectre of Frankenstein-style scientists meddling with the forces of nature and unleashing untold horrors on the world. But while cloning humans is rightly the stuff of nightmares, any attempt to use cloning technology for conservation must surely be applauded.

According to conservative estimates, between 200 and 2,000 species annually become extinct while 23,000 are critically endangered, mostly thanks to mankind’s activities.

So many species are vanishing that conservationists say we are going through the Earth’s sixth mass extinction – and the worst since the dinosaurs died 65 million years ago.

Seen in that light, cloning the odd panda, rhino or snow leopard seems the least mankind can do. Scientists have debated cloning endangered animals ever since Dolly was unveiled.

Since Dolly, scientists have cloned more than a dozen species – including cattle, dogs, deer, cats, goats, mice, rats, rabbits and horses.

But scientists have also cloned half a dozen endangered mammals, including the Pyrenean ibex and wild coyotes.

While the first cloned giant panda is many years away, its addition to these ranks would be a fine achievement. But there is a caveat – cloning remains difficult and unpredictable.

Far more animals’ clones have died before birth than survived, while the survival rate after birth has been low. And it is more diffi- cult to clone some species than others. In China, scientists have been working – unsuccessfully – on panda cloning since 1998.

Given the bear’s track record on breeding, the prospects of a cloned panda any time soon is unlikely. There’s another catch – in order to clone a panda, scientists will need to inject the nucleus of a panda cell into a hollowed-out egg cell from a donor. For each attempt to clone a panda, dozens of eggs will be needed.

Pandas are so rare – and their reproductive cycles so complex – that getting eggs from a female panda will be nigh on impossible.

Scientists will almost certainly have to use eggs from a related species. ‘Mixing and matching’ DNA and donor eggs from different species increases the risks of failure. If cloning is possible, it is unlikely to be the long-term answer. Clones are identical genetic copies of their ‘parents’ and a wild population of clones will be far more susceptible to a single genetic mutation or disease.

Still, it’s worth the risks. And rather than fretting about whether cloning is tampering with the natural order, perhaps we should be more concerned with doing what we can to repair some the damage we have done to nature. That way future generations can enjoy one of the world’s best-loved mammals.

David Derbyshire is a leading science and environment writer who has written extensively about cloning.