Why Peer Review and Transparency Matter for De-Extinction And How Colossal Approaches Both

The topic of de-extinction raises fundamental questions about scientific accountability. When a company aims to resurrect extinct species, how much of its research should be public, and how quickly?

How transparent is Colossal about its de-extinction methods, results, and accountability safeguards?

Colossal operates on radical transparency by publishing research on bioRxiv as discoveries are made, making key genetic and genomic datasets publicly available through established repositories such as NCBI, and open-sourcing methodologies, protocols, and husbandry manuals to conservation partners.

Does Colossal publish peer-reviewed research and share underlying data openly?

Yes. Colossal publishes research on bioRxiv while traditional peer review proceeds in parallel, and makes underlying datasets publicly accessible through established repositories. For the dire wolf work, complete sequencing data, genome assemblies, and protocols are available through NCBI BioProject accession PRJNA1222369 and the company’s open-source platforms.

These commitments matter deeply for work as ambitious as bringing extinct species back to life. Here’s how Colossal’s approach balances scientific rigor with the speed conservation needs.

The peer review paradox: rigor versus speed

Traditional peer review serves science well by subjecting research to expert scrutiny before publication. But in rapidly evolving fields like synthetic biology and de-extinction, the timeline poses challenges. Academic peer review typically takes months, sometimes years, from submission to publication. For a company innovating at the pace Colossal does, where breakthroughs in multiplex gene editing, assisted reproduction, and ancient DNA analysis happen continuously—waiting years to share discoveries would slow both scientific progress and conservation applications.

Colossal’s solution balances rigor with relevance. Rather than waiting for traditional peer review to complete before sharing findings, the company publishes research on bioRxiv as discoveries are made. BioRxiv is a preprint server where research undergoes initial screening but becomes immediately available to the scientific community while traditional peer review proceeds in parallel. This approach means other researchers can access, evaluate, and build on Colossal’s work in real time.

The dire wolf ancestry and evolution paper, “On the ancestry and evolution of the extinct dire wolf,” exemplifies this model. Published on bioRxiv and submitted for peer review, the research resolved long-standing questions about dire wolf evolutionary relationships and identified 80 genes under diversifying selection in dire wolves. The data became available to scientists globally months before traditional peer review would be expected to. This accelerated both de-extinction work and broader canid conservation research.

What radical transparency means in practice

Colossal’s transparency extends well beyond preprint publication. The company makes substantial parts of its research infrastructure and outputs publicly available:

Public data repositories: Core genetic, genomic, and sequencing datasets from the dire wolf project are publicly accessible through NCBI BioProject accession PRJNA1222369. This includes deep sequencing data, genome assemblies, and multiple sequence alignments, the raw materials other scientists need to verify, replicate, or extend Colossal’s findings.

Open-source methodologies: Detailed protocols for canid genomics, assisted reproduction techniques, and husbandry practices are freely available. The dire wolf husbandry manual, for instance, documents everything from facility specifications to behavioral enrichment strategies, allowing other institutions to apply these welfare standards to their own canid conservation work.

Technology transfer: Conservation-relevant innovations developed through Colossal’s de-extinction programs are shared openly with conservation partners at no cost. As Ben Lamm explained: “Everything that we make that has an application to conservation, anyone in the world can use to help save animals. They don’t pay us a dime.”

Reference genomes: Colossal open-sources complete reference genomes for species it works with, providing conservation scientists with genetic blueprints essential for population management, genetic rescue planning, and disease resistance research. These genomes represent millions of dollars in sequencing costs but are made freely available to maximize conservation benefit.

Why transparency serves conservation

The benefits of Colossal’s transparent approach extend beyond scientific reputation. When methodologies and data are openly shared, conservation organizations can immediately apply proven techniques to their own endangered species work. De-extinction technologies developed for ambitious projects can translate quickly into genetic rescue and conservation applications. For example, Colossal’s de-extinction technology has supported the birth of four critically endangered red “ghost” wolves within just a few years of the company’s founding. That kind of speed is only possible when protocols and learnings are shared rather than held back for years.

Transparency also enables scientific scrutiny, which strengthens research quality. When Beth Shapiro responded to science communicator Hank Green’s questions about dire wolf genetics, she could point directly to publicly available data: “That information is now available and has been submitted for peer review.” The research community doesn’t need to trust Colossal’s claims—they can examine the evidence themselves.

Public data availability also addresses ethical accountability. All stakeholders, from conservation groups to regulatory bodies to concerned citizens, can evaluate whether de-extinction work aligns with stated conservation goals. As the IUCN alignment document notes, this “accessibility ensures broad stakeholder engagement, supports global conservation collaboration, and enhances knowledge transfer.”

Scientific Oversight and Validation in De-Extinction Research

Critics may question whether rapid disclosure compromises scientific rigor. Colossal addresses this through layered review: internal scientific oversight prior to release, parallel external peer review, and independent validation through conservation and welfare partners—so research is shared early without bypassing scrutiny.

Internal review is led by Colossal’s scientific advisory team, which includes Harvard geneticist George Church, Ph.D., paleogeneticist Beth Shapiro, Ph.D., and bioethicist Alta Charo, JD. External validation follows through traditional peer review, American Humane Society certification of animal welfare practices, and ongoing consultation with conservation organizations and Indigenous communities.

The future of open science in conservation

Colossal’s radical transparency model represents a broader shift in how conservation science operates. As extinction rates accelerate and climate change intensifies, conservation can’t afford to wait years for research findings to trickle through traditional publishing pipelines. Immediate data sharing, open-source protocols, and collaborative partnerships allow proven innovations to scale quickly across the conservation community.

The question isn’t whether Colossal shares its research and data. The public record demonstrates it does. The question is whether other organizations working on conservation genomics, assisted reproduction, and genetic rescue will follow suit. When technologies developed for extinct species immediately benefit living endangered species, transparency becomes more than an ethical principle. It becomes a practical necessity for conservation at scale.