De-extinction—The Resurrection1 of Extinct Animals 反滅絕
——復活滅絕動物

文/鮑勃·斯特勞斯 譯/鄭淑明 王敏 By Bob Strauss

De-extinction—The Resurrection1of Extinct Animals 反滅絕
——復活滅絕動物

文/鮑勃·斯特勞斯 譯/鄭淑明 王敏 By Bob Strauss

The pros and cons of reintroducing long-extinct mammals,birds and amphibians2amphibian兩棲動物。.復活早已滅絕的哺乳動物、鳥類和兩棲動物的利弊。

There’s a new buzzword making the rounds of trendy tech conferences and environmental think tanks: deextinction. Thanks to ongoing advances in DNA technology, as well as the ability of scientists to recover soft tissue from fossilized animals, it may soon be possible to breed Tasmanian Tigers3塔斯馬尼亞虎，又名袋狼（澳大利亞塔斯馬尼亞島特有的袋類動物）。,Woolly Mammoths and Dodo Birds back into existence, presumably undoing the wrongs that mankind inflicted4inflict使遭受打擊，使吃苦頭。on these gentle beasts in the first place, hundreds or thousands of years ago.

新潮的科技會議上和環保智囊團中，流行著一個新的時髦術語：反滅絕。借助不斷發展的DNA技術，以及從動物化石中恢復軟組織的技術，科學家可能很快就培育出塔斯馬尼亞虎、猛犸象和渡渡鳥，使這些動物繼續生存。科學家這么做恐怕是為了彌補人類數百或數千年前對這些溫順的動物所造成的傷害。

反滅絕技術

[2]我們在討論支持還是反對反滅絕之前，最好先研究一下這個快速發展的科學現狀。反滅絕的關鍵當然是DNA，它是提供任何特定物種基因“藍圖”的分子。為了復活絕種動物，比如懼狼，科學家需要大量復原這種動物的DNA。這沒那么難，因為懼狼在大約一萬年前才滅絕，各種懼狼的化石標本存有軟組織。

The technology of de-extinction

[2] Before we get into the arguments for and against de-extinction, it’shelpful to look at the current state of this rapidly developing science. The crucial5crucial關鍵性的。ingredient of de-extinction, of course,is DNA, the molecule6molecule分子。that provides the genetic “blueprint” of any given species.In order to de-extinct, say, a Dire Wolf7Dire Wolf（古生物）懼狼。,scientists would have to recover a sizable chunk of this animal’s DNA, which is not so far-fetched8far-fetched牽強的；不可信的；靠不住的。considering that Canis dirus only went extinct about 10,000 years ago and various fossil specimens have yielded soft tissue.

[3] Wouldn’t we need all of an animal’s DNA in order to bring it back from extinction? No, and that’s the beauty of the de-extinction concept: the Dire Wolf shared enough of its DNA with modern canines9canine犬。that only certain specific genes would be required, not the entire Canis dirus genome10genome基因組。.

[4] The next challenge, of course, would be to find a suitable host to incubate11incubate孵（卵），孵化。a genetically engineered Dire Wolf fetus12fetus胎，胚胎。;presumably, a carefully prepared Great Dane or Grey Wolf13Grey Wolf大灰狼（產于亞歐大陸和北美）。female would fit the bill14fit the bill正合適；正符合要求。. (This is the technique popularly referred to as “cloning,” though it would involve the reconstruction, rather than the duplication, of a given genome.)

[3]復活一種滅絕動物，難道我們不需要獲取它所有的DNA嗎？不需要，這就是反滅絕理念的美妙之處：懼狼與現代犬科動物共有的DNA足夠多，因此我們只需要某些特定的基因，而不是懼狼的整個基因組。

[4]接下來的挑戰，當然是找一個合適的受體來孕育經基因工程改造過的懼狼胚胎；或許只有經過精心培育的母大丹狗或母大灰狼才符合要求。（這種技術通常被稱為“克隆”，盡管它涉及的是特定基因組的重建，而非復制。）

[5]還有另外一種不那么麻煩的復活方法，就是逆轉人們幾千年來對動物的馴化過程。換句話說，科學家可以選擇性地培育牛群，刺激而非抑制它們的“原始”特征（比如暴躁的性情，而不是溫和的性情），就可以培育出非常接近冰河時代的歐洲野牛。人們設想這種技術甚至可以用來“逆培養”犬屬動物，使它們變得像祖先大灰狼一樣兇猛、不合作。這可能對科學沒有多大作用，但肯定會使狗展賽更加有趣。

[5] There is another, less messy way to “de-extinct” a species, and that’s by reversing thousands of years of domestication15domestication馴養（動物）。. In other words, scientists can selectively breed herds of cattle to encourage, rather than suppress16suppress抑制（生長、發展、起作用等）。,“primitive” traits (such as an ornery17ornery脾氣暴躁的。rather than a peaceful disposition), the result being a close approximation of an Ice Age Auroch. This technique could conceivably even be used to “de-breed”canines into their feral18feral（動物馴養后脫逃）恢復野性的。, uncooperative Grey Wolf ancestors, which may not do much for science but would certainly make dog shows more interesting.

[6] This, by the way, is the reason virtually no one seriously talks about deextincting animals that have been extinct for millions of years, like dinosaurs or marine reptiles19reptile 爬行動物。. It’s difficult enough to recover viable fragments of DNA from animals that have been extinct for thousands of years; after millions of years, any genetic information will be rendered completely irrecoverable by the fossilization20fossilization石化。process. Jurassic Park aside, don’t expect anyone to clone a Tyrannosaurus Rex in your or your children’s lifetime!

[6]順便一提，幾乎沒有人會認真談論如何復活已經滅絕了幾百萬年的動物，比如恐龍或海洋爬行動物，這便是原因所在。因為，對于已經滅絕了數千年的動物，要從它們身上復原有繁殖能力的DNA片段是相當困難的；若已滅絕了幾百萬年，任何遺傳信息都會因石化而徹底無法恢復。除了在《侏羅紀公園》中，別指望任何人能在你或你孩子的有生之年克隆出霸王龍！

Arguments in favor of de-extinction

[7] Just because we may, in the near future, be able to de-extinct vanished species, does that mean we should?

支持反滅絕的論據

[7]僅僅因為我們在不久的將來或許有能力復活已消失的物種，是否就意味著我們應該這么做？

[8] Some scientists and philosophers are very bullish21bullish（對未來）有信心的；樂觀的。on the prospect, citing the following arguments in its favor:

We can undo humanity’s past mistakes. In the 19th century, Americans who didn’t know any better slaughtered Passenger Pigeons by the millions;generations before, the Tasmanian Tiger was driven to near-extinction by European immigrants to Australia, New Zealand and Tasmania. Resurrecting these animals, this argument goes, would help reverse a huge historical injustice.

We can learn more about evolution and biology. Any program as ambitious as de-extinction is certain to produce important science, the same way the Apollo moon missions helped usher in the age of the personal computer. We may potentially learn enough about genome manipulation to cure cancer or extend the average human’s life span into the triple digits22digit（0到9的任何一個）數字。.

We can counter the effects of environmental depredation23depredation掠奪；蹂躪；破壞。. An animal species isn’t important only for its own sake; it contributes to a vast web of ecological interrelationships, and makes the entire ecosystem more robust.Resurrecting extinct animals may be just the “therapy” our planet needs in this age of global warming and human overpopulation.

[8]一些科學家和哲學家非常看好這一前景，并援引以下論據：

我們可以彌補人類過去犯下的錯誤。19世紀，糊涂的美國人屠殺了數以百萬計的旅鴿；幾代之前，歐洲移民使澳大利亞、新西蘭和塔斯馬尼亞的塔斯馬尼亞虎幾近滅絕。支持反滅絕的觀點認為，復活這些動物將有助于扭轉巨大的歷史不公。

我們可以進一步了解進化和生物學。任何像反滅絕這樣宏大的計劃肯定會催生重要的科學研究，正如阿波羅登月任務促進了個人電腦時代的到來。同樣，我們可以對基因組操作進行足夠的了解，從而治愈癌癥或將人類的平均壽命延長到三位數。

我們可以應對環境破壞所帶來的影響。一個物種的重要性不只在于其本身；它還有益于巨大的生態關系網，促使整個生態系統更加強大。當今時代全球變暖、人口過剩，復活滅絕動物可能正是地球所需要的“療法”。

Arguments against de-extinction

[9] Any new scientific initiative is bound to provoke a critical outcry,which is often a knee-jerk24knee-jerk本能反應的，自動做出反應的。reaction against what critics consider “fantasy”or “bunk25bunk瞎說，廢話。”. In the case of de-extinction,though, the naysayers may have a point,as they maintain that:

[10] De-extinction is a PR gimmick26gimmick把戲，噱頭。that detracts from real environmental issues. What is the point of resurrecting the Gastric-Brooding Frog when hundreds of amphibian species are on the brink of succumbing to27succumb to屈服，屈從；不再抵抗。the chytrid fungus28chytrid fungus壺菌。? A successful de-extinction may give people the false, and dangerous, impression that scientists have “solved” all of our environmental problems.

[11] A de-extincted creature can only thrive in a suitable habitat. It’s one thing to gestate29gestate孕育。a Saber-Toothed Tiger fetus in a Bengal tiger’s womb30womb子宮。; it’s quite another to reproduce the ecological conditions that existed 100,000 years ago, when these predators31predator 捕食性動物。ruled Pleistocene32Pleistocene更新世（地球上大約兩百萬年前至一萬年前的一段時間，那時地球表面大部分被冰覆蓋）。North America. What will these tigers eat, and what will be their impact on existing mammal populations?

反對反滅絕的論據

[9]任何新的科學舉措勢必會引起強烈的抗議，人們往往下意識地反感批評家所認為的“幻想”或“胡言亂語”。不過，在反滅絕問題上，反對者的觀點可能確有道理，他們認為：

[10]反滅絕是一種公關噱頭，淡化了真正的環境問題。當數以百計的兩棲類動物物種受壺菌威脅瀕臨滅絕時，復活胃育溪蛙的意義何在？一個成功的反滅絕案例會帶給人們一種錯誤的、危險的想法，即科學家已經“解決”了我們所有的環境問題。

[11]被復活的滅絕生物只能在適宜的棲息地生存。在一只孟加拉虎的子宮里孕育一只劍齒虎胚胎是一回事；但要重現10萬年前的生態環境則是另一回事，當時這些劍齒虎作為掠食者統領著更新世時期的北美大陸。那么復活后，這些老虎吃什么？它們會對現有的哺乳動物帶來什么影響呢？

[12]究竟為什么有的動物會滅絕，往往都有充分的原因。進化是殘酷的，但永遠不會錯。一萬多年前，人類獵殺猛犸象使其滅絕；什么才能使我們避免重蹈覆轍？（如果你認為是“法治”， 那么請記住嚴重瀕危的哺乳動物每天都在遭遇非法獵殺， 特別是在非洲。）

[12] There’s usually a good reason why an animal went extinct in the first place33in the first place（用于句尾，談論某事為何或者是否應該做）究竟，到底，當初。. Evolution can be cruel, but it’s never wrong. Human beings hunted Woolly Mammoths to extinction over 10,000 years ago; what’s to keep us from repeating history? (If you say “the rule of law,” bear in mind that seriously endangered mammals are illegally hunted every day, especially in Africa.)

De-extinction: do we have a choice?

[13] In the end, any genuine effort to de-extinct a vanished species will probably have to win the approval of various government and regulatory agencies. Once introduced into the wild,it can be difficult to keep an animal from spreading into unexpected niches and territories—and, as mentioned above, not even the most far-sighted scientist can gauge the environmental impact of a resurrected species.

[14] (What if that herd of Aurochs develops a taste for grain, rather than grass? What if a burgeoning34burgeon急速增長。population of Woolly Mammoths manages to drive the African elephant to extinction?)One can only hope that, if de-extinction goes forward, it will be with a maximal amount of care and planning—and a healthy regard for the law of unintended consequences35意外后果定律，又稱墨菲定律。.

反滅絕：我們有選擇的余地嗎？

[13]最后，任何關于復活已消失物種的實際嘗試，可能都需要獲得政府和監管機構的批準。一旦將復活的生物放歸野外，就很難防止它們入侵一些意想不到的生態位和領地——如上所述，即使是最有遠見的科學家也無法評估復活物種對環境的影響。

[14]（如果那群歐洲野牛養成了吃谷物的喜好，而不吃草呢？如果數量快速增長的猛犸象將非洲象趕盡殺絕呢？）如果反滅絕繼續推進的話，我們只能期望對其給予最大程度的關照與規劃，并合理重視意外后果定律。

1 resurrection復活；恢復。