Endosymboint Theory

I was wondering if anyone can clarify what the Endosymboint Theory actually means. I am really confused. I mean is it about an evolution cycle? Well if anybody can help I will appreciate it much. Thanks.------------------
W.L.A

Sizter,Is the paper due this Friday or next? This page seems to have a good overview of Margulis's endosymbiont theory. It's all Greek to me.I can recommend a decent diploma service if your grade point average isn't holding up. You can have a degree on your wall in 10-14 business days!Let us know!Sincerely,
Customer Service, ND Center------------------
The bear thought his son could talk in space about the time matter has to rotate but twisted heaven instead.
-Brad McFall[This message has been edited by MrHambre, 11-04-2003]

Basically, it’s the idea that cell organelles were originally free-living bacteria, and that at some point they got engulfed by proto-eukaryotic cells, liked it in there (hence ‘endo-‘), and stayed on in symbiosis with the rest of the cell. Thus, ‘endosymbionts’.One main point to note is that things like mitochondria and chloroplasts have their own DNA, which is copied separately from everything else. I’ve mentioned the question this poses for creationists elsewhere.I gather there is evidence for this for chloroplasts, but haven’t come across it myself yet (haven’t actually looked, now I think about it!). But it’s pretty well confirmed for mitochondria. It turns out that they have a genome remarkably similar to Rickettsia prowazekii, which also happens to be the causative agent of epidemic typhus.See eg Rickettsia, typhus and the mitochondrial connection.Cheers, DT

HiSome interesting introductionshttp://www.geocities.com/we_evolve/Plants/chloroplast.html
Page not found | SF State Faculty SitesNCBIThe complete genome sequences of cyanobacteria and of the higher plant Arabidopsis thaliana leave no doubt that the plant chloroplast originated, through endosymbiosis, from a cyanobacterium. But the genomic legacy of cyanobacterial ancestry extends far beyond the chloroplast itself, and persists in organisms that have lost chloroplasts completely.Chloroplast and mitochondria are now tought to be the results of
( an hypothetical ? ) proto-cell "mergings" by endosymbiosis with cyanobacteria -types and ricketsia-types
However L.Margulis also proposes ( with her set- endosymbiont theory ) a fourth merging partner --->
a spirocheta - type responsible for flagella-like organelles and
flagellar motors(?)---> i'am not very sure about the latter ) ....This fourth "LUCA" -type is not yet accepted /or enough demonstrated /or provided with enough evidences to be a "valid" component of endosymbiont theorie ( actually recognising
three different protocels as the endosymbionts in the eukariot cell )There are other "hypotheses " proposing alternative and paralel explainations for the " origin of the eukariotic cell "---> It should also be noted that Margulis proposed , that life
started right at its emergence as "bacteria-like" PROTO- ENDOSYMBIONTS cells ...That these cells were panspermian "seeds" is an interpretation
However margulis thinks this panspermia idea is a POSSIBILITY
( convenient ___while making a "reductio ad infinitum ", in order to avoid the many questions of abiogenesis /and/or direct creation/ chemical natural processes /chemical evolution / RNA world .... etc ) but NOT A DEMONSTRATED /EVIDENCED /CONFIRMED FACT ....)University of Glasgow - Research - Research units A-Z
http://biology.unm.edu/.../teaching/mde/mde02/991004.web.pdf
Revolutionary New Theory for Origins of Life on Earth - SpaceRefa very "pop-science" and incomplete book ( but nevertheless a summarising introduction to the Margulis SET (Serial Endosymbiont theory ) is
L. margulis --> SYMBIONTIC PLANET
Amazon.comTsjok

In 1996 a French author who made a "gedakanen expt" out of the idea for mitchondria relative to programed cell death was unable to substantiate the cholorplast as well (this author only mentioned for the little green things the coordination of death for a bunch of them which I'll guess IS something I have seen happen in one of my jars) but rather than hold this jargon, "endosymbiosis" etc I am holding onto the idea of absolute force splitting into the descriptive space this idea covers rather than covering the language with more (theory). I guess I am conservative in this respect. This idea connot be categorized as creationist or evoluntionist as it would rather be decribable with the word "hybrid" I guess. There may have been more evidence since the end of the last century but I couldnt wait to get passed that divide.

CORRECTION
------------------------------------------------------------------
"
....However margulis thinks this panspermia idea is a
POSSIBILITY ...."
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Margulis is not thinking what I AM THINKING SHE IS THINKING ...
( I don't want to make some strawman )
Sorry for thatNEVERTHELESS
Margulis has been associated with lovelocks' Gaia theories , and
panspermia-proponents do use many of her scientific propositions ...

My paper is due on the 25th of November. Thank you for the link to the website.