How Gene Editing Can Preserve Biodiversity

Saving Species From Extinction

Destruction of habitats, over-hunting, and other ecological damages have pushed many species into extinction, or close to it. It is an inherent characteristic of the so-called “Anthropocene”, a new geological era marked by the dominance of mankind over the Earth’s ecosystems.

Traditional conservation strategies like natural reserves, protection of hunted animals, and reproduction in zoos have helped save many species from the brink.

However, these strategies focus most of the time on saving the species as an overall concept, with usually only a limited pool of individual animals or plants, compared to the previous natural population.

This can indeed save a species, but still comes with a massive loss in genetic diversity. It can make the saved species more vulnerable to future threats, like climate change, habitat destruction, or pathogens.

An emerging alternative is genome editing technology, modifying not just one gene but large swaths of an individual’s genetics. This could help restore genetic diversity in a population whose gene pool has gone through the bottleneck of a quasi-extinction event.

Researchers at the University of East Anglia, University of Copenhagen, University of Kent, Mauritian Wildlife Foundation, Durrell Wildlife Conservation Trust, and the Colossal Foundation & Colossal Biosciences discussed the ethical, societal, and economic considerations of this technology in a publication in Nature Reviews Biodiversity¹, under the title “Genome engineering in biodiversity conservation and restoration”.

Genetic Bottlenecks

Plants and animal populations are segmented into species, with a common definition being that species cannot interbreed with each other.

The genetics of a species, however, is not a homogeneous block, with many subtle genetic variations leading to intra-species differences in behaviors, looks, capacity, tolerance to various stresses, resistance to diseases, etc.

When a lot of the individuals forming the species are killed or fail to reproduce, some of that genetic diversity can be lost with these individuals carrying it.

It creates what ecologists call a genetic bottleneck, with many traits being lost and no longer present in the surviving members of the species.

Source: Naturalis Historia

This can cause not only less genetic diversity, but also a concentration of a higher load of harmful mutations, a phenomenon known as genomic erosion. If too strong, genomic erosion can lead to the species’ extinction, irrespective of its environment and the resources available.

In less extreme cases, the surviving species might remain genetically compromised, with reduced resilience to future threats like new diseases or shifting climates.

While these lost genes are now absent from living individuals, they can still be present in historical samples, biobanks, and related species.

Case Study: Genetic Erosion in the Pink Pigeon

An example of a species brought back from the edge of extinction is the Mauritian pink pigeon, a bird native to Mauritius Island in the Indian Ocean. From 10 surviving individuals, breeding in captivity and reintroduction to their natural habitat brought their numbers back to 600 birds.

Source: Genetic Engineering & Biotechnology News

Genetic studies of these pigeons’ genetics have revealed that genomic erosion might lead to extinction in the next 50-100 years. With no other individuals in captivity or in the wild, it would previously have meant that the efforts to save this species have been ultimately futile.

So new solutions are needed for the pink pigeon, as well as many other endangered species.

“To ensure the long-term survival of threatened species, we argue that it is essential to embrace new technological advances alongside traditional conservation approaches.”

Prof van Oosterhout – University of East Anglia

Finding the Lost Genes

A lot of biological material has been saved in museums and biological databanks, especially for species that have become extinct or are at risk of extinction in the past few decades, once the importance of DNA became better understood in the scientific community.

This means that while the individual carrying this genetic diversity might have died decades or even centuries ago, their genetic legacy still exists in the hands of the very same humans who caused the loss of these genes.

Source: Stephen Turner

With genome analysis and gene editing becoming easier by the day, bringing back these important genes into the gene pool of endangered species is increasingly appealing.

“We’re facing the fastest environmental change in Earth’s history, and many species have lost the genetic variation needed to adapt and survive. Gene engineering provides a way to restore that variation.

Prof van Oosterhout – University of East Anglia

The research group outlined three main applications of the technology:

1. Restoring lost genetic variation. This can be done by bringing back through gene editing the genes present in a historical sample, but absent from the modern surviving population.
2. Improve adaptation. Genes known for being linked to traits like heat tolerance or pathogen resistance could be prioritized to improve a species’ survival rate and ability to adapt to its environment, especially in the wild.
3. Harmful Mutation Reduction. Targeted deletion of harmful mutations in the surviving population can increase survival, overall health, and reproduction rate for the long term. This can be especially important for individuals who will later be reintroduced to their natural habitat.

Genome Engineering Risks

The first risk is that the technology does not perform as intended. Notably, off-target genetic modifications can create extra-harmful mutations.

Too strong a focus on factorizing the reproduction of the modified individuals to spread the reintroduced gene and traits could inadvertently lead to further reductions in genetic diversity.

Lately, unexpected expression or effects of the reintroduced genes, especially when only reintroducing a fraction of the lost genes, could lead to unwanted new traits never present in the species in the first place. This could either further degrade the endangered species’ capacity for survival or even cause ecological damage if introduced into the broader ecosystem.

For all these reasons, the scientists recommend phased, small-scale trials and rigorous long-term monitoring of evolutionary and ecological impacts of any genome engineering project.

Another risk would be to adopt a “technology-first” mindset to conservation, while genetic interventions should only complement and not replace habitat restoration and traditional conservation actions.

“Genome editing is not a replacement for species protection and will never be a magical fix — its role must be carefully evaluated alongside established conservation strategies as part of a broader, integrated approach with species protection as a guiding principle.”

Associate Professor Hernán Morales of the Globe Institute.

Synergy With ”De-Extinction”

In the same way that genome engineering can introduce new genes into a population that has undergone a bottleneck, it could potentially reintroduce species that are entirely extinct. This is the concept called “de-extinction”.

A major supporter of this idea is the company Colossal. It notably recently made a major buzz in the news with its partial recreation of the dire wolf.

The next step for the company is recreating the woolly mammoth.

“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.

It is our responsibility to reduce the extinction risk faced today by thousands of species.”

Dr Beth Shapiro, Chief Science Officer at Colossal Biosciences.

De-extinction usually involves creating embryos of the extinct species and having them carried to term by related species. Such cross-species surrogacy is currently already being deployed to save the white rhinoceros.

Potentially, the same method could also be used for endangered species in combination with genome engineering, resulting in the capacity to almost “mass produce” a population with more genetic diversity, in parallel to the protected natural individuals.

Overall, this idea is part of the broader impact that synthetic biology could have on conservation efforts.

Source: iScience

Investing in the BioTech Sector

Ginkgo Bioworks: A Leader in Conservation Genomics

The company is producing on-demand organisms for specific applications. It has diversified its applications widely with many research programs and partnerships:

• Cannabinoids
• mRNA vaccine production and nucleic acid medicine
• Food proteins
• Biological fertilizer production in partnership with Bayer
• Programmable microbes for gut diseases
• Microplastics bioremediation
• Biosecurity and pathogen detection
• Recycling waste and contaminants

It generates money by being first paid upfront for the development process and then through royalties on the finished product.

The company has been at the forefront of innovation in engineering new organisms and developing techniques for new animals and plants.

This puts it in a strong position to potentially contribute to conservation efforts and develop new methods for multiplying endangered species, not only of large animals but also plants and even microbiomes. It could be a key partner for public programs and private environmental NGOs to implement such strategies.

(We covered this company in further detail in a dedicated report explaining its history, unique technologies, and business model.)

Latest Ginkgo Bioworks (DNA) Stock News and Developments

Study Referenced

^{1. Van Oosterhout, C., Supple, M.A., Morales, H.E. et al.  Genome engineering in biodiversity conservation and restoration. Nat. Rev. Biodivers. 18 July 2025. https://doi.org/10.1038/s44358-025-00065-6}