No, this isn’t Jurassic Park, even though the story sounds familiar. And no, Colossal hasn’t really de-extincted Jon Snow’s direwolf from Game of Thrones (actually an Aenocyon dirus, or dire wolf), a canine species that went extinct about 10–15,000 years ago. The feat announced by the American biotech startup is undoubtedly fascinating: they’ve modified the DNA of a modern wolf to give it some genetic traits of the dire wolf. But while the discovery may be an intriguing scientific exercise, it’s misleading in terms of its actual ecological or environmental utility for the planet.
That’s the firm opinion of Marco Oliverio, professor of zoology at La Sapienza University of Rome and evolutionary biology researcher. “Behind it, yes, there is an interesting and even scientifically intriguing operation,” stated the professor, but no, this is not Jurassic Park”. He enthusiastically acknowledges the scientific potential of the technique used — CRISPR, a sophisticated gene editing technology — and the value of the experiment in terms of research. However, he warns about a crucial point: this is not de-extinction. And it has nothing to do with environmental preservation.
SOUND ON. You’re hearing the first howl of a dire wolf in over 10,000 years. Meet Romulus and Remus—the world’s first de-extinct animals, born on October 1, 2024.
— Colossal Biosciences® (@colossal) April 7, 2025
The dire wolf has been extinct for over 10,000 years. These two wolves were brought back from extinction using… pic.twitter.com/wY4rdOVFRH
A wolf dressed as a dire wolf
As Oliverio explains, the dire wolf is not a direct ancestor of the modern wolf but belongs to a different genus (Aenocyon), which branched off evolutionarily about 5–6 million years ago. So Colossal’s geneticists haven’t truly “resurrected” an extinct species — they modified 14 genes out of tens of thousands in the wolf genome, partially altering its appearance to make it resemble — aesthetically only — the dire wolf. “99.9% of the DNA is still that of a wolf. So no, we haven’t brought anything back to life. It’s a wolf that looks like a dire wolf,” says the researcher.
The danger of a “salvation narrative”
The bigger issue, however, is something else: the illusion that technology can replace real conservation of ecosystems. According to Oliverio, projects like Colossal’s risk making people believe that extinction is no longer a problem because “species can just be recreated in a lab.” This is a dangerous narrative that shifts focus away from more urgent problems: stopping the causes of extinction — pollution, deforestation, climate change, habitat fragmentation — and saving what we can still save.
“We’re in the middle of the sixth mass extinction. We’re losing biodiversity at a rate never before seen in the planet’s history. And many of the species going extinct today we don’t even know about yet — we haven’t even had time to name them,” the researcher explains.
A technological exercise, not a solution
The return of the dire wolf — or something that looks like it — won’t change the planet’s fate. Nor does it make sense, according to the researcher, to consider reintroducing these organisms into the wild: “They are GMOs, genetically modified organisms. Releasing them into nature is risky, and biologically questionable.”
Even the idea of genetically enhancing existing species to make them more resilient to environmental changes is criticized: “We can only study the natural environment — thinking we can modify it ourselves using evolutionary mechanisms we don’t even fully understand yet is sheer arrogance. We’re playing God,” the professor concludes.
Symbols, yes — but useless ones
Finally, there’s a matter of priorities. “Who do we bring back? Iconic animals. The most photogenic ones, the ones that attract the most attention. But the organisms that are truly crucial for the planet’s functioning are often invisible: microorganisms, algae, bacteria. If a whale goes extinct, the ecosystem holds. If a species of phytoplankton disappears, everything collapses.”
As the case of Colossal shows, the supposed de-extinction of an iconic animal can arouse fascination and curiosity. Science is shown to be able to create a bridge between film fantasy and laboratory realities. However, doubts remain as to whether looking to the past can help solve the problems of the present.
