PubMed · 11348084
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
K S Betts. 2001-04-01. Attacking beach erosion.. https://doi.org/10.1021/es012322o
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
De-extinction, once the realm of science fiction, has evolved into a tangible scientific endeavor thanks to breakthroughs in genome sequencing, engineering, advanced assisted reproductive technologies, and stem cell biology. Alongside this work are innovations in reintroduction science and artificial intelligence, which are refining strategies for species translocations, rewilding, and long-term ecosystem monitoring of de-extinct species and populations. While the primary motivation for de-extinction is restoring lost ecological functions to eroded ecosystems, each of these technologies can also be applied to conservation biology for de-endangerment, offering new solutions for biodiversity preservation. This review synthesizes the technological advancements emerging from de-extinction science and explores their broad applications in conservation, demonstrating how de-extinction is both about resurrecting lost species and about expanding the conservation toolkit to sustain and rebuild biodiversity in the face of accelerating environmental change.
Conservation biology and restoration ecology are two essential yet distinct disciplines that address the growing challenge of biodiversity loss. Traditionally, these fields have relied on ecological principles and management practices aimed at protecting or reestablishing natural systems. The crisis is no longer just ecological; it is evolutionary and genomic. The accelerating pace of environmental change has outstripped the capacity of conventional approaches, creating a pressing need for innovative solutions. Biotechnology offers potentially transformative tools that can enhance the effectiveness and precision of both conservation and restoration efforts, especially for species where conventional conservation approaches have proved insufficient. Techniques such as genetic rescue, synthetic biology, and gene editing are increasingly being explored to address critical challenges, such as invasive species control, genetic diversity loss, and habitat fragmentation, to both invigorate endangered species and restore historical biodiversity. Despite its promise, the integration of biotechnology into conservation and restoration has raised ethical, ecological, and regulatory concerns. These include ecological unpredictability and public resistance to genetic interventions in wild populations. This perspective examines the current landscape of biotechnological applications in conservation and restoration, highlighting successful case studies, ongoing controversies, and optimism for additional progress. We argue that thoughtful, transparent integration of biotechnology that is grounded in ecological knowledge and stakeholder engagement can reconcile the goals of conservation and restoration. As ecosystems face mounting pressures, biotech-enabled strategies may prove essential for fostering resilience and ensuring long-term ecological sustainability.
Solid waste treatment options (recycling, incineration, and landfilling; the two latter processes both with co-generation of heat and electricity) have been studied for cardboard, newspaper, polyethylene, poly(ethylene terephthalate), polypropylene, polystyrene, and poly(vinyl chloride) waste. The conversion processes have been analyzed in terms of the second law of thermodynamics. The analysis allows calculating the exergy (useful energy) embodied in conversion products that can be obtained from the required inputs for the treatment processes. Taking into account the waste materials and the resources to convert them, it proved that recycling is the most efficient option for polyethylene with an efficiency of 62.5% versus 43.6% for incineration and 0.9% for landfilling. Next, waste treatment has been put into the broader perspective of industrial ecology. Exergetic efficiencies of industrial metabolic options have been calculated. Here resources for manufacturing and converting solid products have been considered. Furthermore, selection of one type of conversion excludes the generation of other potential conversion products. Therefore, it has to be taken into account that these latter products still have to be produced starting from virgin resources. Recycling proved to be the most efficient strategy: the ratio eta between exergy embodied in all delivered products on one hand, and all exergy withdrawn from the ecosphere or from waste materials on the other hand, is the highest. For polyethylene, eta proved to be 0.568, whereas eta is 0.503 and 0.329 for incineration and landfilling, respectively. On the other hand, if R the ratio between exergy of delivered products on one hand and exergy of virgin materials on the other hand is calculated, the differences between the industrial metabolic options are larger. Recycling polyethylene showed a ratio R of 0.936, whereas ratios of 0.772 and 0.531 were found for incineration and landfilling, respectively. It has been shown that the exergy concept allows a quantitative comparison of different industrial metabolic options, contributing to a better assessment of sustainability of technology with respect to resource management.