Author
|
Topic: Scientists replicate key evolutionary step in life on earth
|
Butterflytyrant
Member (Idle past 4443 days) Posts: 415 From: Australia Joined: 06-28-2011
(1)
|
|
|
|
|
Message 1 of 11 (648709)
01-17-2012 5:29 PM
|
|
|
Hey Guys, Another step forward for the science guys - More than 500 million years ago, single-celled organisms on Earth's surface began forming multi-cellular clusters that ultimately became plants and animals. Just how that happened is a question that has eluded evolutionary biologists. Now scientists have replicated that key step in the laboratory using common Brewer's yeast, a single-celled organism. The yeast "evolved" into multi-cellular clusters that work together cooperatively, reproduce and adapt to their environment--in essence, they became precursors to life on Earth as it is today. rest of the story here - http://www.physorg.com/...plicate-key-evolutionary-life.html Yay for us!
Replies to this message: | | Message 2 by Evlreala, posted 01-17-2012 10:19 PM | | Butterflytyrant has not replied | | Message 3 by xongsmith, posted 01-18-2012 2:55 AM | | Butterflytyrant has not replied | | Message 4 by Panda, posted 01-18-2012 5:56 AM | | Butterflytyrant has not replied | | Message 10 by Dr Jack, posted 01-19-2012 3:05 AM | | Butterflytyrant has not replied |
|
Evlreala
Member (Idle past 3097 days) Posts: 88 From: Portland, OR United States of America Joined: 08-12-2009
|
That's aboslutly fascinating, thank you so much! This completely made my night.
|
xongsmith
Member Posts: 2587 From: massachusetts US Joined: 01-01-2009 Member Rating: 6.5
|
Butterflytyrant report:
...Now scientists have replicated that key step in the laboratory using common Brewer's yeast, a single-celled organism.... Cant wait to find out what the beer will taste like. - xongsmith, 5.7d
|
Panda
Member (Idle past 3734 days) Posts: 2688 From: UK Joined: 10-04-2010
|
Would that count as evolving into a different 'Kind'? Or do creationists consider all micro-organisms to be a single 'kind'? If I were you And I wish that I were you All the things I'd do To make myself turn blue
|
Tangle
Member Posts: 9504 From: UK Joined: 10-07-2011 Member Rating: 4.7
|
|
Message 5 of 11 (648738)
01-18-2012 6:40 AM
|
|
|
It seems to have been surprisingly easy to do. Now that we have people like Venter creating new species by computer, it can't be too long before someone starts building life itself from scratch. Of course this will still bring forth claims of intelligent design but it's chip, chip, chipping away at the idea that only a supernatural being can do it. Once that is out of the way they will claim that only God can create the chemical elements that then go on to build life. Just pushing god further and further back into the firmament. Life, don't talk to me about life - Marvin the Paranoid Android
|
Wounded King
Member Posts: 4149 From: Cincinnati, Ohio, USA Joined: 04-09-2003
(1)
|
|
|
|
|
Message 6 of 11 (648741)
01-18-2012 7:05 AM
|
|
|
The actual paper is available through Open Access on the PNAS website. It would be interesting to compare this with the similar previous observations on the unicellular algae chlorella ( Boraas et al, 1998). TTFN, WK
Replies to this message: | | Message 11 by Blue Jay, posted 01-25-2012 2:04 PM | | Wounded King has seen this message but not replied |
|
hooah212002
Member (Idle past 823 days) Posts: 3193 Joined: 08-12-2009
|
|
Message 7 of 11 (648813)
01-18-2012 5:21 PM
|
Reply to: Message 4 by Panda 01-18-2012 5:56 AM
|
|
Still the yeast kind, no? Mythology is what we call someone else’s religion. Joseph Campbell
This message is a reply to: | | Message 4 by Panda, posted 01-18-2012 5:56 AM | | Panda has replied |
Replies to this message: | | Message 8 by Panda, posted 01-18-2012 10:47 PM | | hooah212002 has replied |
|
Panda
Member (Idle past 3734 days) Posts: 2688 From: UK Joined: 10-04-2010
|
Surely it is obvious...
Hooah writes: Still the yeast kind, no?
I would need creationists to actually describe how they delineate kinds before I can know for sure...but it looks different to yeast. Isn't that enough? (And I can also make the claim that it is obviously not the same kind.) If I were you And I wish that I were you All the things I'd do To make myself turn blue
This message is a reply to: | | Message 7 by hooah212002, posted 01-18-2012 5:21 PM | | hooah212002 has replied |
Replies to this message: | | Message 9 by hooah212002, posted 01-18-2012 11:11 PM | | Panda has seen this message but not replied |
|
hooah212002
Member (Idle past 823 days) Posts: 3193 Joined: 08-12-2009
|
|
Message 9 of 11 (648861)
01-18-2012 11:11 PM
|
Reply to: Message 8 by Panda 01-18-2012 10:47 PM
|
|
Re: Surely it is obvious...
I would need creationists to actually describe how they delineate kinds Have you got multiple lifetimes???? Because they still haven't figured it out and they've had 2,000 years..... Mythology is what we call someone else’s religion. Joseph Campbell
This message is a reply to: | | Message 8 by Panda, posted 01-18-2012 10:47 PM | | Panda has seen this message but not replied |
|
Dr Jack
Member Posts: 3514 From: Immigrant in the land of Deutsch Joined: 07-14-2003 Member Rating: 8.4
(2)
|
|
|
|
I'm dubious, frankly. They seem to be highly overtaking things to me, for these reasons: 1. Bakers yeast is unusual in being strictly unicellular. It evolved from multicellular ancestors. 2. Apoptosis occurs in many unicellular organisms, it seems a leap to think they're behaving in a multicellular way because of it. 3. Sticking together hardly counts as multicellular anyway. But I've not read the paper yet, only the article.
|
Blue Jay
Member (Idle past 2719 days) Posts: 2843 From: You couldn't pronounce it with your mouthparts Joined: 02-04-2008
(1)
|
|
|
|
Hi, Wounded King.
Wounded King writes: The actual paper is available through Open Access on the PNAS website. It would be interesting to compare this with the similar previous observations on the unicellular algae chlorella (Boraas et al, 1998). This was my original thought when I read this article. To me, this yeast research is really little more than a replication of the Chlorella work, which I had been taught during my undergraduate and have taught to my introductory-biology students. It kind of embarrassed and offended me when this new team came out touting their work as novel and unique. They were apparently aware of Boraas et al. (1998), because they cited it in the introduction. However, I can't find anything in this new study that really, clearly differentiates it from the Chlorella experiment, so it was a real disappointment to me to see the way these researchers spun their work as profoundly novel for both the lay and technical audiences. On the positive side, though, it was a very good study with very interesting results. I particularly liked their discussion of "within-cluster division of labor": that's the real key for understanding the transition from clusters of cells to true multicellularity. I hope it stimulates more interest in this area of research, because these sorts of case studies are excellent tools for demonstrating evolutionary principles in a classroom.
-Bluejay (a.k.a. Mantis, Thylacosmilus) Darwin loves you.
This message is a reply to: | | Message 6 by Wounded King, posted 01-18-2012 7:05 AM | | Wounded King has seen this message but not replied |
|