On the May 12th, 2025 cover of Time Magazine, you will see a picture of a white wolf below the bold word Extinct slashed through with a red block. Below it reads “This is Remus. He’s a dire wolf. The first to exist in over 10,000 years. Endangered species could be changed forever.”
This is also being reported widely by publications like New York Times, Newsweek, Live Science, and USA Today. Other publications have had a more muted response to this purportedly exciting scientific development. Gizomodo titles their article on the topic “In a Historic First, Scientists Have Resurrected the Dire Wolf—Sort Of.” New Scientist is even more bull, titling their article simply, “No, the dire wolf has not been brought back from extinction.”
The problem is–Colossal Biosciences, the company also responsible for developing “woolly mice” that caught social media by storm in early 2025–has done nothing of the sort. Instead, they made 20 germline edits to a grey wolf genome, including edits to match ancient genetic variants found in dire wolves. Talk about a bait and switch!
What did Colossal Do?
Colossal Biosciences “created” dire wolves through a sophisticated de-extinction protocol combining ancient DNA analysis, computational genomics, gene editing, cloning, and interspecies surrogacy. Researchers extracted ancient DNA from two dire wolf fossils—a 13,000-year-old tooth and a 72,000-year-old inner ear bone—to assemble high-quality ancient genomes (which they say will be published to the public soon). Comparative genomic analyses identified unique extinct genetic variants responsible for specific dire wolf traits, including larger body size, stronger musculature, and a lighter coat color.
Using CRISPR-based multiplex gene editing, Colossal incorporated 15 extinct dire wolf gene variants (and five additional beneficial edits) into the genome of the grey wolf, focusing on traits like coat pigmentation, hair length and texture, and skeletal structure. Genetically edited cell lines were then cloned via somatic cell nuclear transfer into donor egg cells, with embryos transferred into surrogate grey wolf mothers for gestation. This approach successfully produced three living animals—two males (Romulus and Remus) and one female (Khaleesi).
Who are Dire Wolves?
Based on anatomical similarities, scientists thought grey wolves and dire wolves were closely related canid species. However, recent genomic analyses have clarified the evolutionary placement of dire wolves (formerly, Canis dirus), revealing them as an ancient lineage distinct from modern wolf-like canids. Contrary to previous assumptions based primarily on morphological similarities, dire wolves diverged approximately 5.7 million years ago from the lineage leading to today’s wolves and coyotes (Perri et al. 2021). Despite coexisting geographically during the Late Pleistocene, dire wolves show no genomic evidence of interbreeding with grey wolves or coyotes, indicating prolonged evolutionary isolation. Their morphological resemblance to grey wolves thus results from convergent evolution rather than shared ancestry (Perri et al. 2021). This distinct evolutionary trajectory is further contextualized by research into other canids, such as the Sardinian dhole (Cynotherium sardous), which highlights widespread patterns of admixture and gene flow among many wolf-like canids, but notably excludes the dire wolf lineage (Ciucani et al. 2021). These findings highlight dire wolves were genetically isolated and evolutionarily distinct from both ancient and modern canids.
Scientific Clickbait
Colossal’s claim that incorporating 15 gene segments from dire wolves into a grey wolf genome has produced an authentic “dire wolf” is problematic from an evolutionary and biological standpoint. Although both dire wolves (Aenocyon dirus) and grey wolves (Canis lupus) belong to the family Canidae, recent genomic analyses confirm they are distantly related lineages separated by several million years of independent evolutionary history without admixture. Consequently, the notion that precise gene edits in a limited number of loci can meaningfully resurrect a dire wolf is scientifically dubious.
Biological organisms are more than the sum of isolated genetic traits. Species identity encompasses extensive genomic structure, complex regulatory networks, epigenetic mechanisms, and developmental processes shaped over millions of years. Dire wolves evolved unique skeletal morphologies, physiological traits, behavioral repertoires, and ecological adaptations. These characteristics depend on numerous interconnected genetic and developmental pathways, not merely isolated edits in pigmentation, coat length, or body size.
By editing 15 dire wolf-associated genomic variants into a grey wolf genome, Colossal has not recreated a dire wolf, but instead produced a genetically modified grey wolf with phenotypic approximations to certain dire wolf traits. Such animals may superficially resemble dire wolves in appearance or size, but they do not possess the complete genomic architecture, evolutionary heritage, or ecological identity of true dire wolves. Authentic de-extinction would require substantially reconstructing the dire wolf genome as a whole, including extensive noncoding and regulatory sequences, followed by appropriate developmental processes – none of which are achievable by current gene-editing technology alone.
Colossal’s use of the term “dire wolf” in this context is therefore largely for marketing, serving more as a promotional narrative than an accurate scientific representation. While the company’s achievement may be significant in demonstrating gene-editing capabilities and conservation-oriented biotechnology, it is inaccurate and misleading to characterize the resulting animals as dire wolves. Rather, these genetically modified canids should be viewed as experimental hybrids designed to evoke specific, selected traits reminiscent of an extinct species, not a biological resurrection of that species itself.
Beyond Clickbait
As an environmental anthropologist whose work currently centers on the Mexican gray wolf (Canis lupus baileyi), I find Colossal Biosciences’ announcement of resurrecting the extinct dire wolf troubling. Wolves worldwide face relentless violence from those who believe these animals should be eradicated. In the U.S., gray wolves, Mexican wolves, and coyotes experience significant hostility. Any progress in wolf conservation or reintroduction faces persistent resistance from ranching and hunting interests, who perceive wolves as threats to profit and recreational opportunities.
In Texas, where I currently live, efforts by the Texas Lobo Coalition aim to re-envision the state as wolf country, even though Mexican wolves have been extirpated from Texas since 1970, and red wolves were declared extinct there by the 1980s -although a remnant population may persist near Galveston (Barnes 2021). Meanwhile, in my home state of North Carolina, red wolves struggle for survival in the small habitat afforded them at Alligator River National Wildlife Refuge. Now, alongside these conservation struggles, Colossal proposes releasing genetically modified red wolf hybrids, further complicating ongoing conservation work.
Reintroducing large predators such as dire wolves demands a societal shift toward coexistence, a scenario far from current realities. Given the formidable opposition from influential lobbying groups–who have both the political influence and the literal firearms to eliminate wolves–the reintroduction of dire wolves appears untenable. Why, then, expend limited resources resurrecting an extinct animal that neither fits into 21st century landscapes nor would be tolerated by powerful interests determined to exclude them?
Coda
I also acknowledge that the animals created for an expensive project were intended to be kept in an artificial holding facility. Additionally, there are ethical concerns underlying this type of science, and I’ll leave those to people who are better equipped to address them.
