“In the case of the wild buffalo clone ‘DeepAsha’, it has probably inherited a few mitochondrial DNA (genes found within mitochondria, a powerhouse of cells) from domestic buffalo since the oocytes used for cloning were from a domestic buffalo. At present, with the available technology for endangered species, a complete match of both nuclear and mitochondrial DNA in cloned and free-living wild animal (donor) is not possible”, stated a CCMB report.Defending cloning as a promising methodology to maintain the gene pool of dwindling population, the Principal Chief Conservator of Forest (wildlife management and planning) Prem Kumar told TNIE that the scientific innovative endeavour inherently involves uncertainties that should not discourage efforts to protect nature and wildlife.“The CCMB report does not provide an absolute conclusion on the feasibility of creating a replica of a wild buffalo through cloning compared to its wild counterpart”, said Kumar.The wildlife enthusiasts nevertheless expressed their resentment against the forest department following the CCMB report.“Why DeepAsha, looking like a Murrah buffalo, is kept in captivity for over half her life and not allowed to live in a natural habitat? I had demanded a DNA test of DeepAsha and sought her release. The forest department has spent crores of rupees on the project”, asked Nitin Singhvi, a wildlife enthusiast.The forest department said that it sought the opinions of NDRI Karnal and CCMB before execution of the project that was intended to conserve the endangered gene pool of wild buffalo species in Chhattisgarh, cited as innovative and the first of its kind.
Source link
