Colossal Biosciences has stirred up controversy with its announcement of successfully gene-editing grey wolves to recreate traits of the long-extinct dire wolf. The company unveiled three genetically engineered wolf pups—Romulus, Remus, and Khaleesi—in an exclusive feature on Time magazine. Despite the excitement, the claim of “de-extinction” has been met with skepticism from scientists, who argue that the project results in hybrids rather than a true resurrection of the ancient species. This debate highlights the growing tensions around genetic manipulation and its potential for conservation efforts.

Gene-Editing Breakthrough or Overhyped Hybrid

Colossal Biosciences has sparked global attention by unveiling three genetically engineered wolf pups, which the company claims are a step toward “de-extinction.” Using CRISPR technology, researchers edited the DNA of grey wolves to introduce traits of the dire wolf, a species that roamed North America over 10,000 years ago. The pups, now aged between three and six months, already weigh around 36 kilograms and are expected to reach 63.5 kilograms as adults, closely mirroring the size of their ancient counterparts.

The pups, named Romulus, Remus, and Khaleesi, were created by editing 20 genetic markers found in fossil DNA. The researchers based their work on a 13,000-year-old tooth and a 72,000-year-old skull of the dire wolf. After editing the DNA of grey wolf blood cells, the altered genes were inserted into dog egg cells, with the embryos then implanted in dog surrogates. After a 62-day gestation period, the pups were born, showcasing a combination of ancient genetics and modern biotechnology.

However, Colossal’s framing of the project as “de-extinction” has been met with criticism from experts in the field.

The Controversy: Are These Wolves True Dire Wolves

While the pups may resemble dire wolves in their physical appearance, many scientists argue that they are not true resurrections of the extinct species. Vincent Lynch, a biologist from Buffalo, emphasized that gene editing cannot fully reconstruct extinct animals, but instead can only simulate their features. According to Lynch, “These pups aren’t dire wolves—they’re grey wolves modified to look like them.”

Supporting this view, Nic Rawlence, a scientist from New Zealand, stated that cloning is the only reliable method for truly resurrecting extinct species. Rawlence explained that the DNA recovered from fossils is often too fragmented to allow for accurate cloning, making gene editing a less effective method for species revival.

Colossal’s own animal expert, Matt James, acknowledged that the pups may never fully exhibit the behaviors of their ancient ancestors. Without wild dire wolf parents to guide them, the pups are unlikely to develop the same hunting techniques and survival strategies as the dire wolves that once dominated the continent. This highlights a fundamental flaw in the project: while the wolves may look like dire wolves, they lack the environmental knowledge and evolutionary context that would allow them to fulfill the ecological role of their extinct predecessors.

Can Gene-Editing Replace True Conservation Efforts

Despite the skepticism surrounding the project, Colossal continues to push forward with other gene-editing initiatives aimed at restoring extinct or endangered species. The company recently announced plans to clone four red wolves using DNA from critically endangered wild populations. The goal is to inject genetic diversity into the breeding programs aimed at saving these wolves from extinction.

Ben Lamm, CEO of Colossal Biosciences, defended the work, arguing that the public often underestimates how close scientists are to achieving true de-extinction. He pointed out that reviving lost traits could help restore ecosystems and preserve threatened species. The company is also working on projects to bring back the mammoth and the dodo, hoping to use gene-editing techniques to address the biodiversity crisis and prevent further species loss.

While Lamm maintains that genetic engineering is a safer and more ethical alternative to cloning, wildlife ethicist Christopher Preston raised concerns about the risks of manipulating genes in wild animals. In particular, Preston noted that extracting blood from endangered species requires sedating the animals, a process that could be harmful in the long run.

Government Support and the Future of Genetic Conservation

Colossal’s groundbreaking work has caught the attention of U.S. government officials as well. Recently, Lamm and his team met with the U.S. Interior Department to discuss their ongoing projects. Interior Secretary Doug Burgum praised the company’s efforts, calling them a scientific milestone. However, despite the positive recognition from government officials, many experts continue to question the broader implications of gene-editing and its potential to replace traditional conservation efforts.

As the debate over gene-edited species continues, the ethical and ecological concerns remain unresolved. While Colossal’s work represents a step toward combining cutting-edge biotechnology with conservation, it also raises questions about the role of science in preserving the natural world.

Colossal Biosciences’ gene-edited wolves have brought both excitement and controversy to the forefront of conservation science. While the pups may offer a glimpse into the future of species restoration, experts argue that the claims of “de-extinction” may be premature. As the debate unfolds, it is clear that gene editing will continue to play a significant role in conservation efforts. However, the question remains: can science truly bring back lost species, or are we simply creating something new with the echoes of the past?