|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Abiogenesis | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Black Member (Idle past 5205 days) Posts: 77 Joined: |
If abiogenesis were possible, we would expect to observe certain things. We would be able to predict that certain things were possible, namely:
(1) Amino acids could form naturally(2) Amino acids could link together (as peptides) and reproduce naturally (3) RNA could form from amino acids edit: I meant peptide nucleic acid, not amino acid peptides. (4) RNA would need neither DNA nor protein to catalyze its own replication These are what's predicted. We now know all these things can happen. So the only logical conclusion I make is that abiogenesis is possible and probably happened. [This message has been edited by Black, 04-10-2004] [This message has been edited by Black, 04-10-2004]
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Black Member (Idle past 5205 days) Posts: 77 Joined: |
OK, DNAunion, you asked me to back up my statements, well here we go!
quote: Amino acid chains have been observed that can reproduce naturally: David H. Lee, Juan R. Granja, Jose A. Martinez, Kay Severin & M. Reza Ghadiri; "A self-replicating peptide" Nature 382, 525 - 528 (1996). Natural selection also happens: Yao, S.; Ghosh, I.; Chmielewski, J.; "Natural Selection in Self-Replicating Peptides", Peptides: Chemistry, Structure and Biology, 1998, 15, 0000. More about this: Yao, S.; Ghosh, I.; Zutshi, R.; Chmielewski, J.; "Self-replicating Peptide under Ionic Control", Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. Eng., 1998, 37, 478-481. Yao, S.; Ghosh I.; Zutshi, R.; Chmielewski, J.; "A pH-Modulated Self-Replicating Peptide", J. Am. Chem. Soc., 1997, 119, 10559-10560.
quote: What I meant was RNA could come from peptide nucleic acids: Bhler, C., P. E. Nielsen, and L. E. Orgel, 1995. Template switching between PNA and RNA oligonucleotides. Nature 376: 578-581. See also: Piccirilli, J. A., 1995. RNA seeks its maker. Nature 376: 548-549. Also interesting, formamide has been found to catalyze the formation of nucleobases: Saladino R., C. Crestini, G. Costanzo, R. Negri, and E. Di Mauro, 2001. A possible prebiotic synthesis of purine, adenine, cytosine, and 4(3H)-pyrimidinone from formamide: Implications for the origin of life. Bioorganic and Medicinal Chemistry 9(5): 1249-1253.
quote: Yes, this is true: Jeffares, D. C., A. M. Poole and D. Penny, 1998. Relics from the RNA world. Journal of Molecular Evolution 46: 18-36. Poole, A. M., D. C. Jeffares, and D. Penny, 1998. The path from the RNA world. Journal of Molecular Evolution 46: 1-17. Leipe, D. D., L. Aravind, and E. V. Koonin, 1999. Did DNA replication evolve twice independently. Nucleic Acids Research 27: 3389-3401. Also, a deoxyribozyme can both catalyze its own replication and function to cleave RNA -- all without any protein enzymes: Levy, Matthew and Andrew D. Ellington, 2003. Exponential growth by cross-catalytic cleavage of deoxyribozymogens. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science USA 100(11): 6416-6421. Thus, the conclusion I come to is that abiogenesis is possible. BTW, I am sure I can find more references. If it interests you, let me know and I will... [This message has been edited by Black, 03-27-2004]
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Black Member (Idle past 5205 days) Posts: 77 Joined: |
OK, DNAUnion, you asked for details, well here we go:
quote: Wow. Chill, man! Don't get mad here. I am not just a reference babbler and I'll try to prove it! Let's start with autocatalyzing RNA. You say this don't exist. Let's find out. First let's make sure we have our terms defined.autocatalysis: Self-catalysis; catalysis of a substance by one of its own products, as of silver oxide by the silver formed by reduction of a small portion of it. RNA (ribonucleic acid): A polymeric constituent of all living cells and many viruses, consisting of a long, usually single-stranded chain of alternating phosphate and ribose units with the bases adenine, guanine, cytosine, and uracil bonded to the ribose. The structure and base sequence of RNA are determinants of protein synthesis and the transmission of genetic information.OK, what was originally thought was that "DNA makes RNA makes protein." Obviously, if all three of these are needed at the same time for life, it causes problems for abiogenesis. However, we now know that certain things do not need DNA but instead reverse transcribe their RNA. So we can illiminate DNA from that formula. Can we also illiminate proteins? Well, we also now know that RNA can do the function of proteins and act as an enzyme (this was proved by Nobel Prize-winning researcher Thomas R. Cech). Enter the term ribozyme. ribozyme: An RNA segment that has the ability to catalyze the cleavage and formation of covalent bonds in RNA strands at specific sites. Back to autoctalysing RNA: autocatalyzing ribozymes DO exist. Let me give an example (and I'll give the details): the hammerhead ribozyme. Hammerhead ribozymes are small, catalytic RNAs that undergo self-cleavage of their own backbone to produce two RNA products. All hammerhead ribozymes contain three base-paired stems and a highly conserved core of residues required for cleavage. The cleavage reaction proceeds by an attack of a 2' hydroxyl oxygen of a catalytic site cytosine on the phosphorus atom attached to the 3' carbon of the same residue, breaking the sugar phosphate backbone and producing a 2', 3' cyclic phosphate. As for protein ribonucleases, a metal ion bound in the active site (Mg++) stabilizes the ionized form of the 2' hydroxyl oxygen, promoting the catalytic attack. The hammerhead ribozyme coordinates Mg++ in the proper geometry to stabilize the trigonal bipyramid intermediate formed by attack of the 2-OH on the phosphate. The end products are a 2,3 cyclic phosphate and a 5-OH. Now regarding self replicating peptides, uh, well first the details : There have been several self-replicating peptides discovered. The one I referenced was a 32-amino-acid peptide, folded into an alpha-helix and having a structure based on a region of the yeast transcription factor GCN4, can autocatalyse its own synthesis by accelerating the amino-bond condensation of 15- and 17-amino-acid fragments in solution. It uses a single-stranded DNA hexamer and its two trimer fragments) are based on a polymer catalysing its own formation from two fragments. Now you say this does not have any application for abiogenisis. I say it does. Self replicating peptides DO exist. I admit that they were not *formed* by some abiogenesis expirement, but they *exist* which is what I was saying. Currently, our knowledge of abiogenesis is like a puzzel. We have most of the pieces, we just have not put them together (and made life). Self replicating peptides ARE one of the pieces. Before we discovered self replicating peptides, we needed some way for amino acids to reproduce....and we did not have a way. The discovery of self-replicating peptides was in a way confirmation of a prediction that abiogensis theories made. If you think not, you should explain why not. Regarding RNA comING from peptide nucleic acids. I have not looked into that yet, but that will be the next thing I do, I will post the details that I find. BTW, DNAUnion, thanks for challenging me on this. You forced me to look things up and I learned alot. Unfortunately for you, even after doing the research, my conclusion remains the same. Note that if I had done the research and not found things to support my statements, I would have withdrawn them. I will post on peptide nucleic acids soon. I have not tryed to find anything about it yet.....Till then --Black P.S. I didn't get all the details. Want more? Ask me....or do the research yourself [This message has been edited by Black, 04-01-2004]
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Black Member (Idle past 5205 days) Posts: 77 Joined: |
quote: Oh, really? Let's see what you said before:
quote: You said you only agreed with #1 (amino acids forming naturally), therefore you disagreed with the others. Did you chance your mind? If so, then its two down and two to go. If you don't agree, why not? --Black P.S. I'll get to the other posts later today...until then, cya! [This message has been edited by Black, 04-07-2004]
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Black Member (Idle past 5205 days) Posts: 77 Joined: |
quote: But things have happened since that time. Ever here of peptidyl transferase? Peptidyl transferase catalyzes the synthesisof peptide bonds in vitro using substrates much smaller than the aminoacyl and peptidyl tRNAs that are the ribo-some’s normal fare. How does it work? The reaction that occurs when peptide bonds form on theribosome is a simple one: the aminolysis of an ester bond.The nucleophilic -amino group of the amino acid moietyof an aminoacyl tRNA bound to the so-called A site of thepeptidyl transferase center attacks the electrophilic carbonylcarbon of the ester bond linking the peptide moiety of apeptidyl tRNA bound to the so-called P site of the peptidyltransferase center. The resulting anionic, tetrahedral carbonintermediate subsequently rearranges to yield a dischargedtRNA bound to the P site, and an A-site bound tRNA joinedby an ester bond to a peptide that is one amino acid longerthan it was before the reaction occurred.
quote: It was based on a protein found in nature, an alpha-helical coiled coil.
quote: No, intelligent researchers are not needed 3.5-4 billion years ago. The reason is simple: the researchers were simulating natural processes. These peptides could have been synthesised naturally. An animated cartoon showing the self-replication process with the 32 residue peptidic template [GRAY] which binds a 15 residue nucleophilic fragment [RED] and a 17 residue electrophilic fragment [BLUE] which catalyses the thioester bond formation [YELLOW] hence catalyzing it's own formation. A 32-residue alpha-helical peptide [GRAY; template] based on the leucine zipper motif of GCN4 is shown to act autocatalytically in templating its own synthesis by accelerating the thioester-promoted amide bond condensation of a 15-residue [RED;nucleophilic] and 17-residue [BLUE; electrophilic] constitutional peptide fragments in neutral and dilute aqueous solutions. The self-replicating process displays parabolic growth and is goverend by square-root law kinetics in the initial period of product formation. Self-replication.
quote: No, its not a misplaced paragraph. Its what was published in Nature.
quote: You are right, Pentium 4 CPUs exist. So why aren't I bringing them up in this discussion? Because, as you said, they have nothing to do with abiogenesis. But self-replicating peptides do because they are kind of like one of the predictions of abiogenesis theories. Regarding RNA from peptide nucleic acids...I find that the evidence supports what I said before. PNA consists of N-(2-aminoethyl)glycine (AEG) and the adenine, uracil, guanine, and cytosine-N-acetic acids. AEG is produced directly in electric discharge reactions from CH4, N2, NH3, and H2O. Electric discharges also produce ethylenediamine, as do NH4CN polymerizations. AEG is produced from the robust Strecker synthesis with ethylenediamine. The NH4CN polymerization in the presence of glycine leads to the adenine and guanine-N 9-acetic acids, and the cytosine and uracil-N 1-acetic acids are produced in high yield from the reaction of cyanoacetaldehyde with hydantoic acid, rather than urea. RNA may be polymerized using the PNA as template accounts for enzymatic activities including PNA replication. So now let's review: Amino acids form naturally, as predicted by abiogenesis theories. If synthesised correctly, peptides (chains of amino acids) can self-replicate, as predicted by abiogenesis theories. The substances to create PNA (the precursor to RNA) form naturally, etc., as predicted by abiogenesis theories. RNA can do the function of DNA, as predicted by abiogenesis theories. RNA can act as a catalyst, as predicted by abiogenesis theories. RNA can do auto-catalysis, as predicted by abiogenesis theories. These things were required for abiogenesis...and now we know they are true. These are the pieces of the puzzel. I put them together....and come to the conclusion that abiogensis is possible....and is probably what happened! --Black
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Black Member (Idle past 5205 days) Posts: 77 Joined: |
quote: RNA can do the function of DNA. So the answer is, yes, we do not need DNA to show behavior attributed to living matter.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Black Member (Idle past 5205 days) Posts: 77 Joined: |
quote: Most of the Oxygen in our atmosphere comes from processes like photosynthesis which release Oxygen into the atmosphere as one of there waste products. So, of course when life was forming there would not have been any photosynthesis going on (and therefore, very little Oxygen)! We can also, through different methods, detect how much Oxygen was in the atmosphere back then...and what we find matches our predictions.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Black Member (Idle past 5205 days) Posts: 77 Joined: |
Well, before I start the message I would like to say a couple things. DNAUnion has make quite a lot of attacks on my character. He has repeatedly called me dishonest. I assure those of you reading this that through this entire discussion, I have tried to be very honest. I started posting hoping to have a real discussion about science. I came ready to listen to whatever DNAUnion or anyone else had to say. I was (and still am) ready to change my mind about anything that I am wrong about--if I really am wrong about them.
Did I really come across as dishonest? Did anyone besides DNA think so? If so, than I apologize. In the future I will try to be more clear about what I write. I'm new around here so please bear with me. Perhaps I am not as polished in my writing skills as others, but I assure you I am not dishonest. Now, I will get back to my discussion with DNAUnion. I will start again from the beginning so everyone will see I am not trying to set up strawmen or be dishonest in any way. Oh, before we start. I will freely admit that abiogenesis has NOT been observed. I believe that this is perhaps one of DNAUnion's problems, s/he thinks I am trying to prove that it has been observed. That is not my intention. All I am saying is the evidence we have indicates that it is possible and probably happened. So let us start with what I originally posted.
quote: Lets start with #1. This was the one point that DNAUnion did not dispute. However, some others on this forum have questioned this statement:
quote: Simply speculating is not science. I would have great doubts about evolution if all scientists did was speculate. However, that is not all they do--they also search for facts which help them determine the truth. For example, one way to tell if there was oxygen in the past is by checking for branded iron formations. Banded iron formations are layers of hematite (Fe2O3) and other iron oxides deposited in the ocean 2.5 to 1.8 billion years ago. Most scientists believe that oxygen was introduced into the atmosphere, for the first time in significant quantities, beginning about 2.5 billion years ago when photosynthesis evolved. This caused the free iron dissolved in the ocean water to oxidize and precipitate. Thus the banded iron formations mark the transition from an early earth with little free oxygen and much dissolved iron in water to present conditions with lots of free oxygen and little dissolved iron. This is one of the ways we can tell there was very little oxygen in the early atmosphere. Now, let us move on to #2. DNAUnion disputed this right away. Here is what DNAUnion has just posted regarding it:
quote: DNAUnion, apparently thought that there was no evidence to support my statement, and concluded that I was wrong. I believe there is evidence. Let me try to explain once again. First let me explain why self-replicating peptides were a prediction of most abiogenesis theories. We have established that amino acids can be formed naturally. But amino acids are not life. Just a bunch of amino acids floating around would do no good. However, amino acids can hook up together. So scientists predicted that if amino acids could hook up together in a certain way, the ones that had just hooked up would start hooking others up in the same way. If this were possible, it would be self-replication. As you can see self-replicating peptides have much to do with abiogenesis theories. Now, do these self-replicating peptides exist? Yes. The first one to be discovered was the GL peptide. I described it before but I will review again:
quote: The objection that DNAUnion has raised to this is that it is unlikely that this peptide and the other peptides that it bonds together could synthesis naturally. I agree with him. I do not believe (nor does anyone else that I know) that it was this exact peptide that was the first self-replicating peptide. The point I was trying to make by discussing this peptide was that self-replicating peptides are possible. I was not trying to say that this exact peptide was the first one. Perhaps DNAUnion misunderstood what I was trying to say here and that is the reason he thinks I am dishonest. However, this peptide does demonstrate that my statement #2 is true. The 3 peptides required could, in theory, have synthesized naturally. Please do not misunderstand me. I am not saying that this is what happened. I am saying that the existence of this peptides and what we know about peptide synthesis does technically prove that my statement #2 is correct. But now, perhaps you asking, if this peptide was not the first one, what was? Are we any closer to finding it? The answer is yes. For example, the Chmielewski Group has synthesised another self-replicating peptide. Their peptide E1E2 contains an acidic 'stripe' of glutamic acid residues along one side of the helix. They shortened the peptide to a length of 26 residues. Studying the self-replicating capacity of the new peptide, called RI-26, they observed catalytic efficiency (catalyzed rate constant:uncatalyzed rate constant) of 100,000, which is more than 20 times higher than the previous record for self-replicating molecules. Their peptide also exhibited cross-catalysis as well as auto-catalysis. Something interesting about probabilities: http://www.talkorigins.org/origins/postmonth/apr98.html. Something else interesting. The Chmielewski group has discovered how to convert a sixteen amino acid peptide into an eighty amino acid protein in one step. I don't know much about this yet. I'll try to post more about it. DNAUnion attacked the use of the word 'discovered' instead of 'synthesized'. He is correct in saying that it was synthesized. However, in synthesizing it, they discovered it was possible, so I am also correct in saying it was discovered: discover: To learn about for the first time in one's experience: discovered a new restaurant on the west side. I kind of feel silly arguing about this though since it is only a game of words. Now let us move on to #3. DNAUnion also challenged this. I will admit that this has not been observed. However, the evidence once again indicates that it is possible. I said previously that I meant peptide nucleic acid, not amino acids. I have edited my first post to reflect that. The evidence supports that peptide nucleic acid can form naturally: Peptide nucleic acid (PNA) consists of N-(2-aminoethyl)glycine (AEG) and the adenine, uracil, guanine, and cytosine-N-acetic acids. AEG can be produced directly in electric discharge reactions from CH4, N2, NH3, and H2O. Electric discharges also produce ethylenediamine, as do NH4CN polymerizations. AEG is produced from the robust Strecker synthesis with ethylenediamine. The NH4CN polymerization in the presence of glycine leads to the adenine and guanine-N9-acetic acids, and the cytosine and uracil-N1-acetic acids are produced in high yield from the reaction of cyanoacetaldehyde with hydantoic acid, rather than urea. Peptide nucleic acid (PNA) resembles RNA in its ability to form double-helical complexes stabilized by Watson-Crick hydrogen bonding between adenine and thymine and between cytosine and guanine. The difference is that it has a backbone that is held together by amide rather than by phosphodiester bonds. Oligonucleotides based on RNA are known to act as templates that catalyse the non-enzymatic synthesis of their complements from activated mononucleotides. However, RNA oligonucleotides facilitate the synthesis of complementary PNA strands and vice versa. DNAUnion has recently posted this:
quote: Unfortunately I cannot respond to this because I am not sure what s/he is talking about. What altered version?? What have not I supported? Perhaps if s/he will clarify this we will be able to discuss it better. Now we will move on to #4. DNAUnion once again disputed this. I will bring out the dictionary again. autocatalysis: Catalysis of a chemical reaction by one of the products of the reaction. replication: The process by which genetic material, a single-celled organism, or a virus reproduces or makes a copy of itself So auto-catalysis is replication because one of the products of it is the catalyzer--it has made a copy of itself. I described one such auto-catalyzer. Let me review it again:
quote: In conclusion, I still believe that all four of my statements were correct. However, before ending, I would like to directly address a few of the comment DNAUnion made on his most recent postings:
quote: DNA, I explained what I said earlier in this post. I assure you I am honest.
quote: I apologize if you got that impression, but I did not stuff words in your mouth or set up a strawman. Perhaps I am not as intelligent as some people, but I am not dishonest.
quote: Peptidyl transferase is catalyzing RNA, which is exactly what I was talking about. It is very revelent. I was not trying to point out a shortcoming in your knowledge (nor was I changing the subject).
quote: Correct. You misunderstood what I was saying. I did not mean to say that this exact peptide was the first one. It is simply a self-replicating peptide. I explained about this above.
quote: self-replication: Replicating oneself or itself What does the GL peptide do (and Chmielewski's peptide)? It replicates itself (I put the definition of replicate somewhere above). So yes it is self-replication.
quote: I said earlier that I wrote the wrong thing (didn't you read my post?). I meant nucleic acids not amino acids. I will edit my post to let people know I made that mistake.
quote: What kind of RNA polymer are you looking for?
quote: No, I did not drop anything. I have explained what I said before. As you can see I did not try to be dishonest at anytime. As you can also (hopefully) see, I have supported my statements, and my conclusion remains the same. I believe anyone looking at the facts should come to the same conclusion. Do you disagree? If you would like to discuss more about this, let me know. --Black
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024