Aurochs

Dumb. They're just breeding look-alikes.
They could probably get closer to what they want if they went for the indian type auroch.

>>2292963
From what I've read they're using cattle based on DNA closest to that of DNA known to be from aurochs, so yeah they are also breeding them to look alike, but there is genetic science business too

>>2292967
Its still going to be a semi-domesticated animal that will never be released into the 'wild' aside from private reserves. Breeding back is bs, and it's impossible to truly breed back an extinct species through breeding. This is not how genetics work. In reality their main goal is to just make it look like one because they can. Which by itself is cool but thats it really.

>>2293019

Cattle turn feral pretty quick mate.

>>2293045
true but they don't turn into aurochs when they do.

just like dogs go feral but they don't turn back into wolves.

because the genes necessary are now missing.

>>2292963

On top of the aesthetics which could be found in a number of ancient breeds already, the Heck cattle were also designed to be stupidly aggressive. They aren't even good milk or meat producers, they're just mean bastards for the sake of producing mean bastards.

Yeah that's not how genetics and breeding works.

>>2293147
selectively breeding to get a cattle breed with msot similar DNA to aurochs is the goal

>>2292944
Why are we trying to play God so badly? We even delude ourselves into thinking were made in Gods imagine. What will it take for us to realise we shouldnt be perverting nature

>>2293288
Well aurochs were wiped out by humans (alongside almost all other megafauna), so it's understandable that there would be a movement to try and restore ecosystems. European ancient forest habitat is heavily fragmented and they'll all get ran over by trucks/trains, but it's a nice gesture nonetheless.

>>2293297
Most ecosystems have already adapted to change so bringing back the sabertooth or Tasmanian tiger would only disturb the balance. But I'm being extreme but I think you get me.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ysa5OBhXz-Q
Here's a video of how wolves saved Yellowstone ecosystem. But that was a natural thingy. If were gonna get involves were gonna have to be smart about this because what happened at Yellowstone seems like dumb luck it's so convoluted

>>2293045
A feral animal is still a domesticated animal.

>>2293144
I read on one of the projects they didn't add one of those ancient breeds due to their aggression, which seems odd to me. Aurochs were also said to be stupidly aggressive, but so are bison, african cape buffalo, gaur, etc. Does that not defeat the purpose? Gives off a red flag that they are indeed just breeding them to look like aurochs. They don't plan on reintroducing them.

File: thylacine_night_cam_photomanipulation_2_by_kiwano0-d5x2hty.jpg (52KB, 400x255px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 400x255px

>>2293309
>ecosystems have already adapted to change
But that's not true - the removal of megafauna, globalisation of weeds and pathogens, urbanisation etc. are incredibly recent things in geological time, the natural world is still reeling and things are only getting worse. Thylacines were only wiped out in the last century anyway (assuming they're all dead), so how would they disturb the balance if they came back?

They've been trying to "breed back" certain extinct species for a century now.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heck_cattle

It's a scam. You can't breed back what has been lost.

True cloning efforts through extracted auroch DNA would still only produce a hybrid cow-auroch creature.

>>2293329
I don't reckon they will disturb the ecosystem. But the ecosystem seems to be doing just fine without them. For now I think we should try concentrating on preserving what we have. And maybe in a few places try and reintroduce some extinct animals. I don't know the research but I don't think there is much of a good reason to bring back the dodo

>>2293344
I'm at uni doing conservation, I can assure you ecosystems aren't doing great (particularly European forests, where aurochs would be hypothetically reintroduced). I agree we should focus on what's still left to save, but ultimately, retracing our steps and rebuilding ecosystems isn't a terrible idea.

File: 6a0af6d3d5f1f767b23e640021a9ab11.jpg (26KB, 564x322px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 564x322px

>>2293336
Agreed. If they're gonna bring them back might as well be the real thing. I don't have to tell you to watch Jurassic Park again to see what happen's when you artificially clone animals
>>2293348
How do you sopose the aurochs will aid the European rainforest? Also why have I never seen a documentary of one? Are they sopose to be that shitty a place?

>>2293288
There is no god you. People are playing people.

File: Hohenzollern-Castle-Germany-2.jpg (651KB, 1920x1200px) Image search: [Google]

651KB, 1920x1200px

>>2293354
Aurochs would likely help create forest clearings, control reforestation and stuff. Keep in mind though, if you try and reduce a species to a quantified purpose and role, you can make anything look shit. Also in Europe we don't really have rainforests, and certainly not of the famous tropical and vibrant variety (not for a few million years anyway). Biodiversity is much lower in temperate areas so it's comparatively quiet and boring.

>>2293439
Sorry meant to say forest. I dont understand how creating forest clearings and reforestation correlate? Sounds contradictory to a layman like me. Good luck saving Europe and all though
>>2293371
Keep believing that. When we finally break the last straw and God comes down and smites us. I'll have the last laugh mate

>>2293329
>>2293344
The dingo has replaced the Thylacine for the most part.

>>2293477
My natures fragility is a meme like global warming

>>2293297
Where i come from, they raise roads and install tunnels under them just for /wild/ animal use. This is the Highway 101 in California.

>>2293620
in Ontario there are a couple wild life bridges and many wildlife tunnels to keep endangered turtles and snakes off the roads, and keep big game like deer and moose off the highways

Why don't they bring back something cool like mammoths?

>>2293062
>they don't turn back into wolves

if you give it enough time they do

>>2295300
Soon anon.
http://reviverestore.org/projects/woolly-mammoth/

>>2295729
imagine the poaching though. Mammoths carry way more ivory than african elephants

File: norris5.jpg (59KB, 300x280px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 300x280px

>>2295757
>implying a REVIVED SPECIES would be left to freely roam in any way

>>2296020
that's what it seems like the plan is in that article I responded to. The scientists want to reintroduce mammoths to fix the tundra or some shit like that