Colossal Biosciences races to freeze wildlife DNA before extinction

In a world where wildlife numbers are collapsing, a US biotechnology company is working to freeze genetic material from thousands of at-risk animals, on the belief that future technology could help pull them back from the edge.

A race against mass extinction

Wildlife is doing more than merely declining: its numbers are falling dramatically. According to the WWF, worldwide populations of vertebrates - mammals, reptiles, amphibians and birds - have dropped by about 73% on average since 1970. A growing number of scientists contend that the planet is now experiencing a sixth mass extinction.

Around the world, species are vanishing at rates tens or even hundreds of times higher than the natural rate recorded across the past 10 million years. The destruction of habitats, climate change, pollution, invasive species and overexploitation are forcing ecosystems beyond their limits.

For many animals, the question has shifted from “how do we protect them?” to “can we preserve any trace of them at all?”

Colossal Biosciences, a Texas-based firm known primarily for its aim of reviving extinct icons including the woolly mammoth and the dodo, has entered this bleak landscape. Its latest initiative focuses on species that still survive, but only just.

Archiving life before it vanishes

The company has set out a stark, ambitious objective: create an enormous genetic archive of endangered wildlife before extinction severs the final link.

Colossal intends to preserve DNA from over 10,000 threatened animal species, beginning with the 100 most vulnerable. Rather than collecting merely symbolic specimens, it plans to assemble detailed stores of frozen tissue, cell lines and fully sequenced genomes.

The goal is to create a “back‑up hard drive” for the biosphere, one deep-freeze at a time.

This model extends beyond conventional seed banks, which have protected crop varieties for decades in vaults built into mountains or placed beneath ice. The emphasis here is on animals close to extinction, ranging from small amphibians losing their habitats to large mammals whose territories have been fragmented by human activity.

What “advanced cryoconservation” really means

Central to the scheme is what Colossal describes as advanced cryoconservation. Put simply, it involves bringing biological material down to extremely low temperatures, allowing it to be held for decades or even centuries with very little deterioration.

Over the coming years, the company says its sites will contain:

• Frozen tissue specimens collected from living animals or recently deceased carcasses
• Established cell lines that can be cultivated in laboratories
• Completely sequenced genomes, digitally stored for open research

The intention is for these samples to support several areas of work: fundamental research into biodiversity decline, the development of assisted reproduction techniques, and eventually ambitious “de-extinction” programmes intended to restore lost traits within living populations.

A global network of Colossal BioVaults

Colossal does not envisage operating a single vast frozen-storage facility. Instead, it wants to establish a global network of BioVaults distributed physically across several nations.

Every location would hold genetic material from species found locally and regionally. The facilities would serve as a safeguard alongside conservation in the wild, rather than replacing it.

The message from researchers remains clear: frozen DNA is a safety net, not a licence to let nature burn.

Conservation biologists emphasise that genetic collections are worthwhile only when they reinforce - rather than weaken - habitat preservation and legal protections. Colossal likewise presents its BioVaults as an “exit route” should a species vanish completely, not as justification for disregarding animals that remain alive.

How it could support future rewilding

In principle, stored cells and genomes may let researchers restore lost genetic variation to shrinking populations, or even recreate individual animals through reproductive methods that have not yet fully developed.

Scientists are discussing several possible future uses:

Such possibilities remain on the outer edge of current scientific capability. Efforts to clone endangered animals have achieved uneven results, while carrying complex animals outside a womb is still experimental. The drive to preserve genetic material today is nevertheless founded on the expectation that technology may eventually catch up.

Ethical fault lines and political questions

Preserving the blueprints of life creates difficult questions. Who should determine which species are granted a place in these vaults? Who has ownership of genetic material, particularly when it originates in countries of the Global South? And who would have authority over the samples’ future use?

Critics worry that a techno‑fix mindset could let governments delay the hard work of cutting emissions and protecting habitats.

Indigenous communities have also voiced fears about “biocolonialism” - the removal of genetic resources without equitable benefits for the people living alongside, and often protecting, those species. Rules governing access and benefit-sharing, including the Nagoya Protocol, only partly cover the new territory created by de-extinction technologies.

There is also a moral-hazard concern. Should the public come to believe frozen DNA can simply restore a species, political pressure to conserve nature may weaken. Many ecologists caution that when a complex animal disappears - together with its behaviour, culture and ecological connections - no laboratory can genuinely reproduce it.

How cryoconservation actually works

Cryoconservation is based on straightforward physics. Water inside cells that freezes gradually produces sharp ice crystals, which rupture cell membranes. Technicians prevent this by using cryoprotectant chemicals alongside exceptionally rapid cooling. This technique, called vitrification, changes water into a glass-like solid without allowing crystals to form.

Specimens are generally kept in liquid nitrogen at roughly −196°C. At this temperature, biochemical processes slow almost entirely to a standstill, and deterioration effectively ceases.

Even so, maintaining such storage is far from simple. Sites require uninterrupted power, dependable upkeep and close monitoring. An extended power outage or a failure of equipment could destroy years of work.

Key terms worth unpacking

Several terms help explain what Colossal and comparable initiatives seek to achieve:

• Genome: The complete collection of an organism’s genetic instructions, encoded in DNA.
• Cell line: A group of cells originating from an initial tissue specimen that can be grown in a laboratory over long periods.
• Cryobank: A facility or repository that keeps biological specimens at ultra-low temperatures.
• De‑extinction: Efforts to recover traits, or even approximate forms, of extinct species through genetics and breeding.

In a real conservation setting, a programme could collect tissue from the final surviving members of a rare frog species, preserve it in a BioVault, and subsequently use the cells to study the frog’s genetics or potentially support captive-breeding efforts.

Future scenarios: from sci-fi to fieldwork

Picture an uncommon island bird wiped out by a cyclone during the 2040s. If its genome, sperm and eggs had been stored in a BioVault, a future team could potentially use sophisticated gene editing, artificial incubation and surrogate parents from a closely related species to establish a small founder population.

That group would still require secure habitat, legal safeguards and attentive management. Without them, the bird would probably disappear once more. A vault provides the raw materials, not a full rescue strategy.

Over a shorter timeframe, genetic archives could assist researchers in monitoring how populations react to climate change. Comparing genomes from the past with those of the present can reveal which genes change as temperatures rise and habitats shift. That understanding can inform decisions about which animals should be relocated, bred or protected in the field.

This American company’s wager occupies an unusual space between grief and optimism: it recognises that a large share of today’s wildlife could disappear, while declining to shut the door on future restoration. Whether this frozen insurance policy becomes a central pillar of conservation or a technological dead end will depend less on the freezers than on the political resolve to preserve enough of the living planet for whatever is stored to have value.