Modern WisdomThe Man Bringing Extinct Creatures Back To Life - Ben Lamm
CHAPTERS
- 0:00 – 1:06
De-extinction as a climate & biodiversity strategy (and what Ben actually does)
Chris opens by framing Ben’s mission as “fixing global warming” by bringing back mammoths. Ben clarifies Colossal’s aim: restoring ecosystems and combating biodiversity loss, not single-handedly solving climate change, then explains how he describes his work in everyday terms.
- •Colossal’s focus: biodiversity crisis, ecosystem collapse, and Arctic tundra restoration
- •Why the “we’ll fix climate change” headline is overstated
- •Ben’s practical ‘cocktail party’ explanation of his job
- •De-extinction positioned as a tool for conservation outcomes
- 1:06 – 2:33
What “de-extinction” really means: proxy species and core genes
Ben defines de-extinction as reconstructing lost genetic traits to build functional proxy species rather than resurrecting an exact historical individual. He uses the dodo as an example to show how semantics can distract from the practical goal: restoring key traits and ecological roles.
- •De-extinction as “core genes” + proxy species, not literal revival of the dead
- •Why closest living relatives matter for rebuilding extinct traits
- •The dodo example: essentially a flightless pigeon with distinct genes/traits
- •Goal: increase biodiversity and reuse the toolkit for modern conservation
- 2:33 – 4:18
How you bring back a mammoth: reference genomes, trait genes, and cloning steps
Ben walks through the nuts-and-bolts pipeline for a mammoth: find the closest living relative (Asian elephant), assemble many mammoth genomes, identify mammoth-defining genes, then engineer edits into elephant cells. He outlines the modernized cloning workflow and eventual embryo implantation into a surrogate.
- •Mammoths’ closest living relative: Asian elephant (surprisingly closer than Asian to African elephant)
- •Building a mammoth reference genome from dozens of samples
- •Pinpointing key mammoth traits (hair, fat, cranial shape, tusks, cold tolerance)
- •Engineering edits into elephant cells, then cloning and embryo implantation
- 4:18 – 7:14
Where ancient DNA comes from: permafrost, bones, teeth, and preservation limits
The conversation shifts to the practical realities of obtaining usable DNA from long-extinct organisms. Ben explains what gets preserved (from bone/beak to flesh and hair), why DNA degrades quickly, and which tissues (teeth, petrous bone) tend to yield higher-density samples.
- •Mammoths: permafrost preservation; sometimes flesh/hair/meat (with heavy bacterial load)
- •Dodo: DNA sourced from bone and inner beak drilling
- •Thylacine: museum specimen preserved in alcohol improves DNA quality
- •Best sources: teeth and petrous bone; DNA still degraded but denser in protected tissues
- 7:14 – 10:02
Assembling genomes from many samples: coverage, reads, and why 100% isn’t required
Chris and Ben discuss how multiple degraded samples can be combined to reconstruct a strong reference sequence. Ben explains sequencing confidence via coverage (e.g., 20–50X reads) and notes that perfect completeness isn’t necessary because not all regions are functionally critical.
- •More samples can probabilistically overcome degradation gaps
- •Coverage (X reads) increases confidence in base-calling accuracy
- •Regulatory vs non-regulatory regions: not all missing data is equally important
- •Adopt-a-Mammoth: education + radiocarbon dating + population genomics for Alaskan mammoths
- 10:02 – 11:46
From gene lists to real traits: functional assays, AI genotype-to-phenotype mapping
Ben describes how Colossal validates which edits actually produce desired phenotypes using molecular and functional testing. He explains their cross-species genotype-to-phenotype work, leveraging AI to learn general rules about development (size, hair types, fat patterns, cranial shapes) that can transfer to other applications.
- •Functional assays to confirm gene-to-trait effects (not guesswork)
- •Mammoths had multiple hair types controlled by different pathways
- •Dedicated genotype-to-phenotype (G→P) team using AI for cross-species insights
- •Spillover potential: applying discoveries to other animals (e.g., drought-resistant cattle)
- 11:46 – 13:41
The concrete creation pipeline: editing, off-target checks, and somatic cell nuclear transfer
Ben lays out the step-by-step operational process: compile target edits, edit elephant cells, confirm edits and minimize off-target effects, then clone via somatic cell nuclear transfer. He explains key terms (somatic cells vs germ/egg cells) and how embryos are induced to begin development before implantation.
- •Targeted gene list → iterative editing of Asian elephant cells
- •Validation via sequencing and off-target effect detection
- •Somatic cell nuclear transfer: nucleus from somatic cell inserted into egg cell
- •Electrification/media to initiate division; implant at the correct developmental stage
- 13:41 – 16:47
Bird de-extinction differs: primordial germ cells, chicken surrogates, and the dodo route
Ben contrasts mammal cloning with the current state of bird approaches, where cloning isn’t yet feasible. He explains how edited primordial germ cells (PGCs) can be placed into chickens so that mating chickens can produce offspring of the edited target species—enabling chickens to serve as practical surrogates for dodos.
- •Why bird cloning is hard today (nucleus timing/development constraints)
- •PGC approach: edit primordial germ cells (precursors to eggs/sperm)
- •Demonstrated concept: chickens with edited PGCs producing duck offspring
- •Colossal exploring both PGC workflows and potential bird cloning R&D
- 16:47 – 22:39
What will be born: ‘functional mammoth’ traits, naming debates, and gestation realities
Chris presses on what exactly the surrogate elephant would deliver. Ben frames early results as “mammoth 1.0”: an edited elephant expressing core mammoth phenotypes, plus internal cold-adaptation traits; he also discusses whether it’s a new species or a mammoth proxy and notes the 22-month gestation constraint.
- •Mammoth 1.0 concept: edited Asian elephant expressing mammoth-defining phenotypes
- •Core traits: domed cranium, curved tusks, shaggy coat, smaller ears/tail, fat/cold tolerance
- •Taxonomy/semantics: IUCN species definition vs functional proxy framing
- •Gestation: ~22 months; long timelines shape project sequencing and milestones
- 22:39 – 27:36
What could go wrong: technical failure modes and the real bottleneck (editing & synthesis)
Ben outlines the scientific and biological uncertainties: edits might not yield expected traits, cloning nuances differ by species, and gestation introduces risk. He argues that DNA quality is less limiting than the pace and reliability of multiplex editing and large-scale DNA synthesis/swapping strategies.
- •Risks: incomplete edits, unexpected phenotype expression, species-specific cloning nuances
- •Surrogacy plausibility: close relation + known interbreeding among elephants supports confidence
- •Why mammoth may not be the first success (gestation length)
- •Key constraint: multiplex editing capability and DNA synthesis ‘swap-in’ approaches
- 27:36 – 30:50
Why not dinosaurs: the time horizon for viable DNA and environmental constraints
The conversation addresses Jurassic Park comparisons directly. Ben explains that intact DNA doesn’t survive deep time; at best, researchers find proteins/collagen fragments in dinosaur fossils, not workable genomes, making true dinosaur de-extinction infeasible with current science.
- •Dinosaur fossils yield amino acids/proteins/collagen, not sufficient DNA sequences
- •Current workable ancient DNA horizon: roughly up to ~1 million years (order-of-magnitude)
- •Cold/dry environments preserve DNA best; warm/wet or acidic sites degrade it (e.g., tar pits)
- •Many viable targets exist in the late Pleistocene window due to better preservation
- 30:50 – 33:16
The ‘hit list’ and the point of resurrection: cool species vs ecological usefulness
Ben and Chris explore which extinct animals are enticing and which are strategically valuable. Ben mentions candidates like the great auk and saber-toothed cats, explains why some (e.g., Steller’s sea cow) face gestation barriers, and emphasizes that a ‘reason why’ matters for responsible targets.
- •Interesting candidates: great auk, saber-toothed cats (Homotherium, Smilodon)
- •Steller’s sea cow: DNA may exist, but gestation/scale is a major blocker
- •Late-Pleistocene species often make the most practical targets
- •Distinction between “cool to see” and “ecologically meaningful” de-extinction
- 33:16 – 43:25
Dodo & thylacine use-cases: invasive species cleanup and restoring predator balance
Ben explains why Colossal chose dodo and thylacine beyond spectacle. Dodo rewilding requires removing invasive species in Mauritius (rats, pigs), forcing ecosystem restoration; thylacine restoration could help address trophic downgrading and potentially reduce impacts of Tasmanian devil facial tumor disease by reintroducing a predator dynamic.
- •Dodo: symbolic of human-caused extinction; project compels invasive species removal
- •Ecosystem restoration as a prerequisite to rewilding (local government + community collaboration)
- •Thylacine: apex predator role; predators stabilize ecosystems by removing weak/sick animals
- •Link to Tasmanian devils: disease spread and how predation could reduce afflicted individuals
- 43:25 – 49:03
Why mammoths matter for climate: permafrost, albedo, grasslands, and ‘ecosystem engineers’
Ben lays out the climate rationale: restoring Arctic grasslands and large herbivore activity can reduce ground temperatures and help preserve permafrost carbon stores. Mammoths (like elephants) could knock down dark conifers, compact snow/soil, promote grassland expansion, increase albedo, and enhance carbon sequestration—reducing the risk of massive carbon/methane release.
- •Permafrost holds enormous carbon/methane stores; thaw is a major climate risk
- •Pleistocene Park findings: removing taiga + restoring herbivore density can lower ground temps (up to ~8°C)
- •Mechanisms: snow packing, soil compaction, tree knockdown, nutrient cycling via manure
- •Grasslands: higher albedo (reflectivity) and stronger carbon storage via root structures
- 49:03 – 54:10
Scaling, artificial wombs, and rewilding governance: from prototypes to populations
Chris asks how you scale from a few births to meaningful herds and how rewilding would be handled. Ben describes an ambitious artificial womb (ex utero development) program as the path to scale, highlights transformative conservation implications (e.g., northern white rhino), and explains why regulatory, indigenous, and community collaboration must start early.
- •Traditional breeding is too slow for population-scale impact (especially elephants)
- •Artificial womb / ex utero development framed as engineering-heavy but feasible
- •Potential conservation breakthrough: rebuilding critically endangered populations with diversity
- •Rewilding requires long lead times: government regulators, indigenous groups, landowners, town halls
- 54:10 – 1:09:12
Beyond animals: what the de-extinction toolkit implies for human genetics and ethics
The discussion broadens to human applications—space adaptation, disease reduction, enhancement—while Ben stresses Colossal isn’t editing humans. He argues tech is moving faster than policy, compares gene editing to long-standing selective breeding, and explores ethical gray zones such as embryo selection, polygenic risk scoring, and the slippery slope toward enhancement and eugenics.
- •Colossal’s stance: not working on humans, but tech spinouts can translate tools to medicine
- •Near-term: gene therapies and edits targeting disease risks (e.g., cholesterol pathways)
- •Ethics: embryo selection vs genetic enhancement, and where ‘eugenics’ begins
- •Need for thoughtful regulation amid international differences and accelerating capability
- 1:09:12 – 1:09:42
Wrap-up: where to follow Colossal and Ben’s work
Chris closes by underscoring the fascination and pressure of the mission, then asks where to stay updated. Ben directs listeners to Colossal’s website, and the episode ends with the show’s outro.
- •Chris’s closing reflections on the scale and stakes of the work
- •Ben’s call-to-action: follow Colossal updates
- •Website: Colossal.com
- •Episode outro and subscription prompt
