So, living cells can be found in the faeces of endangered animals. It may consequently be technically feasible to culture these to increase species genetic diversity. Genetic impoverishment is often argued to result in extinction. It makes organisms less capable of responding to environmental changes (https://www.theguardian.com/science/2025/mar/16/animal-poo-can-be-used-to-save-endangered-species-from-extinction-research-finds). There appear to be a number of downsides to this 'technofix'. Even if it's feasible, the likely costs suggest that humans would have to be very picky about which species to attempt to 'save'. Choices are likely to be limited to popular, cuddly, 'flagship' species, rather than those conferring the biggest environmental benefits. Given, that the urgent requirement is functional ecosystems, with biodiversity, wouldn't it be better to invest in programmes where locations and their organisms are protected?
No comments:
Post a Comment