We are living through the fastest period of environmental change in Earth’s history. Many wild populations no longer carry the genetic diversity they need to keep up.
Some scientists now believe that the same technologies behind drought-resistant crops and efforts to revive extinct species like the mammoth could be repurposed to tackle a more pressing challenge.
The goal is to restore lost genetic diversity in endangered species using gene editing – helping them better adapt to future threats.
In a new study, an international team of experts discusses both the promise and the perils of using cutting‑edge genome engineering for conservation and outlines a roadmap for how it could work in practice.
Restoring genetic diversity
Traditional conservation methods – protecting habitat, outlawing hunting, and running captive‑breeding programs – have saved more than a few species from the edge.
Yet those same species often emerge from population bottlenecks genetically impoverished. When numbers crash, chance replaces natural selection, and whole sets of gene variants disappear.
Even after head counts rebound, the population can remain stuck with a narrow genetic toolkit and a heavy load of harmful mutations. Biologists call this situation genomic erosion.
The authors of the new study, led by Professor Cock van Oosterhout at the University of East Anglia and Dr. Stephen Turner at Colossal Biosciences, argue that genome editing can address what traditional measures cannot: it can put lost diversity back into play.
Borrowing lost DNA
One avenue, the team suggests, is to recover genetic variation that disappeared long ago. Natural history museums, biobanks, and research collections hold feathers, skins, bones, and tissue samples gathered decades or even centuries in the past.
DNA extracted from those specimens can reveal gene variants that no longer occur in today’s populations. Using CRISPR or similar tools, scientists could reinsert those variants into living individuals and breed them back into wild populations.
In essence, the technique would give threatened species access to their own lost history, including immune‑system alleles that could help them stand up to new pathogens.
Gene editing for endangered species
A second option involves what the authors call facilitated adaptation. Closely related species or distinct populations often carry genes tuned to hotter climates, novel diseases, or different diets.
By moving those alleles into struggling populations, conservation biologists might give them a genetic boost in a warming, rapidly changing world.
A third potential use is to correct harmful mutations that became fixed during a population crash.
If a broken gene reduces fertility or increases disease risk, editors could swap it for the healthy sequence found in ancestral samples. The payoff could be higher reproductive success and better overall health.
A lesson from the pink pigeon
The pink pigeon of Mauritius illustrates why such interventions might be necessary. Intensive captive breeding and reintroduction lifted the pigeon from around ten surviving birds in the 1990s to more than 600 today.
Genetic studies, however, show that despite the species’ numerical recovery, it continues to lose genetic diversity and could vanish within a century unless scientists restore its gene pool.
The team argues that genome editing could restore lost DNA variants, boosting the pigeon’s resilience to disease and climate change.
Risk of reducing genetic diversity
Farmers already plant millions of acres with gene-edited crops altered for pest or drought resistance. The idea of applying similar tools to wildlife raises both hope and concern.
Off‑target edits, unintended side effects, and the possibility of further reducing genetic diversity are real risks.
Conservation genome editing must start with small, monitored trials grounded in ecology and guided by strong ethical oversight.
Treading carefully, working locally
Because conservation often intersects with livelihoods and cultural values, the paper calls for robust engagement with local communities and Indigenous groups.
It also urges involving the broader public before any genome‑engineered individuals are released.
The scientists stress that genetic interventions should never replace habitat restoration or established protections. Instead, they are meant to complement those efforts when conventional tools fall short.
From lab genes to wild species
The team proposes a phased strategy. First come proof‑of‑concept laboratory edits in cell cultures, followed by controlled experiments in captive animals to test fitness, fertility, and ecological interactions.
Scientists would release edited individuals into semi‑wild or wild settings only after rigorous vetting, regulatory approval, and local consent. Long‑term monitoring would then track both the target species and its ecosystem.
Biotech companies eager to showcase beneficial applications of their technologies may find common cause with conservation nonprofits. This partnership could potentially open new funding channels for endangered species programs.
“The same technological advances that allow us to introduce genes of mammoths into the genome of an elephant can be harnessed to rescue species teetering on the brink of extinction,” noted study co-author Beth Shapiro, chief science officer at Colossal Biosciences.
Endangered species: Beyond gene editing
Genome editing will not reverse habitat loss, curb poaching, or slow climate change by itself. But for species already hanging on by a genetic thread, it could supply the raw material evolution needs to do its work.
“Genome editing is not a replacement for species protection and will never be a magical fix,” said Professor Hernán Morales of the Globe Institute at the University of Copenhagen. “Its role must be carefully evaluated alongside established conservation strategies.”
With careful testing and collaboration, gene editing could become a valuable new tool for conserving Earth’s biodiversity. It may help keep endangered species from vanishing during the turbulent decades to come.
The study is published in the journal Nature Reviews Biodiversity.
—–
Like what you read? Subscribe to our newsletter for engaging articles, exclusive content, and the latest updates.
Check us out on EarthSnap, a free app brought to you by Eric Ralls and Earth.com.
—–