New Issue: Orbital Catastrophe Ahead? Read Now

Extinction Wipes Out Evolution’s Hard Work

By killing off many of New Zealand’s endemic birds, humans destroyed 50 million years’ worth of evolutionary history. Christopher Intagliata reports. 

Illustration of a Bohr atom model spinning around the words Science Quickly with various science and medicine related icons around the text

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

New Zealand once had a Dr. Seuss–worthy assortment of birds—take the giant moa, a flightless bird twice as tall as an adult human, which weighed more than a sumo wrestler. Then there was the Haast’s eagle, the largest eagle ever known to exist. It hunted the moa. 

But, as the story often goes, then came humans: first the Maori, about 700 years ago, and then European colonists, a couple hundred years ago. Both sets of people drove many of New Zealand’s unique birds to extinction. And many of the surviving species are now threatened or endangered. 

“So you have species like the kiwi, the kakapo, kea, the kaka, the takahe—all with nice Maori names, but all in danger of going extinct.”


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


Luis Valente, an evolutionary biologist at the Natural History Museum of Berlin. Valente and his colleagues used genetic data to build a tree of New Zealand’s living and extinct native birds. They then used a model to estimate how long it took new species to emerge. Which allowed them to assess humans’ bird-killing habits—on an evolutionary time scale. 

“In a couple of centuries, humans wiped out 50 million years of evolutionary history. So the little impact we think we have is having repercussions for millions of years.” The analysis is in the journal Current Biology. [Luis Valente, Rampal S. Etienne and Juan C. Garcia-R., Deep macroevolutionary impact of humans on New Zealand’s unique avifauna]

Looking ahead, the scientists say it could take another 10 million years to recover species that are currently threatened, or near threatened, if nothing is done to save them. But it’s not all doom and gloom. 

“The conservation efforts being done in New Zealand at the moment are quite pioneering, and they’ve been quite successful. So I think we’re still at a position where we can still prevent lots of millions of years of evolution from further being lost.” As ecologist Aldo Leopold said, “To keep every cog and wheel is the first precaution of intelligent tinkering.”

—Christopher Intagliata

[The above text is a transcript of this podcast.]

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe