3 Creations

[-Jrabbit]

Still, quite interesting. Thank you, Starchild.

[Odin]

Originally posted by Starchild
Luca's a theory. A hypothetical organism living in the primordial soup that managed to outcompete its competition and its children inherited the Earth. I happen to like it since its a neat explanation for why all life on earth seems to be based on the same molecular machinery even if the life in question is dissimilar as humans, archae living in acid hot springs or worms living in the darkest ocean depths.

I've recently read this article by Thomas Cavalier-Smith, and he suggests that (going against suggestions by folks like Carl Woese that LUCA was a pre-cellular "progenote") LUCA was a fairly well advanced organism, a green non-sulfur bacterium to be precise. An interesting article, athough I can't accept his very late dates for the origin of the Eukaryotes.

[Elok]

Originally posted by DaShi
Remember your 5 kingdoms:

1. Animals 2. Plants 3. Fungi 4. Bacteria 5. And um. . .uh. . .Magical Beings (Arcania. Yeah, that's it)

I've only made a cursory scan so I'm not sure Starchild didn't answer this already, but protists, the "algae and things that give you dysentary" group. And the technical name for the kingdom of bacteria is monerans, or at least it was in my high school AP Bio class. Now, do I get a cookie?

EDIT: Wait, maybe it's spelled "dysentery." No, that doesn't look right. Ehh, I'm too lazy to look it up.

And BTW, I approve of the biology geeks getting a chance to shine for once. The physics and comp sci people have been getting all the attention around here of late. I don't expect us literary types to get a turn any time soon, but that's okay. You know why? Because unlike physics equations or biology theories, the fine arts can get you laid, that's why. Er, not that it ever has for me, or that I've tried.

[Addled Platypus]

if we were soup

who are the crackers

[Drake Tungsten]

who are the crackers

The people posting on this board...

[Grandpa Troll]

Wasn't it in the University of Calcutta at Bourgedesh (Spelling??) that discovered planctum with inert forms of Ce58 (my chemical table is off just a bit I believe, will check on it though) which when mixed with a nocturnal salaious form of tripe slime in a 30:1 ratio of salt-seawater, with <2% natural ambient lighting, gave a foaming effect causing a mass hysteria in the pseudo-science community of India prestigoius Aynong Koo Societ who had already refuted this as heresy?

I personally found it all to be tripe but still, it makes one wonder if under conditions found to be favorable below the sea's ambient light flourescence, could not this in fact come about?

I remember while doing a paper on possible lifeforms back in the latter 1970's while stationed in Germany, doing an extension course from the University of San Diego Sea Aquarium, that certain bacteria from some sea mammals (Mammalicious mammari gigantous) could mix with and regenerate a newer and quite possible undetected previous, for a lack of better terminology, sperm, which we all know helps breed life into a being, furthermore on a short course I passed at the Max Planck Institute for Marine Biology in Bremen, Germany we further circumvented traditional findings and obscure unrelated data to piece together some very unique findings!

Now, this is like 28 years ago when I did the paper, but got a passing grade for my research, which was pre-pc bases, had to use a controlled environment and what literature was available at the time, my Professor was Archellata Bjorg Sagutten, a Danish-Deutche Physics Professor who dabbled in organic residue producing cultures. He later taught another student I went to school with,Bo Thamdrup, a microbiologist from the University of Southern Denmark, Odense. He really knew his stuff.

I am hear to tell ya, nothing is impossible given the right circumstances, we need only to go with our feelings and plunge forth into the realmn of the unknown, not taking my word or any other persons word, but seeking the truth through trials and compiled data to support these findings.


Ok, hopes this helps, it all came rusing back to me in a wave when reading this thread.

Good luck!

Gramps

[molly bloom]

Originally posted by DaShi
Bacteria came later. From Mars!!!!!!!!!!!

Thus is Ned explained.


Many thanks.

[Grandpa Troll]

Originally posted by Odin


I've recently read this article by Thomas Cavalier-Smith, and he suggests that (going against suggestions by folks like Carl Woese that LUCA was a pre-cellular "progenote") LUCA was a fairly well advanced organism, a green non-sulfur bacterium to be precise. An interesting article, athough I can't accept his very late dates for the origin of the Eukaryotes.

I also tend t agree with you for the bacteriophage MS2 or Bacillus phage M2 (Caudovirales, Podoviridae) infects Bacillus subtilis. Thus with this knowledge we are well aware that the nucleic acids formely thought to be only found in the "nucleus" were later found also in prokaryotic cells, which low and behold have NO NUCLEUS!!

Thanks to 1968 Nobel Prize winner Robert W. Holley we now know for a fact that the yeast of RNA has 77..SEVENTY-SEVENnucleotides!!

Now if that just doesnt fly in the face of traditional thinking pre-60's, nothing does.

Goes to show you for as old as the world is, we are relative new comers to but the tip of the iceberg of knowledge.

Gramps

[Starchild]

Originally posted by Grandpa Troll
Thanks to 1968 Nobel Prize winner Robert W. Holley we now know for a fact that the yeast of RNA has 77..SEVENTY-SEVENnucleotides!!

Oh my. No. So very much no.

Firstly, I'll assume you mean the RNA of yeast.

Holley got his Nobel prize for describing transfer RNA (tRNA). It doesn't have 77 nucleotides. Like all RNA, it has the four nucleotides (building blocks if you will) of cytosine, uracil, adenine and guanine. It also includes the two unusual nucleotides of inosine and pseudouridine that allow non-conventional pairing (conventional pairing being A-U, C-G).

tRNA is an adaptor molecule, linking the amino acids that proteins are built from with the genetic information encoded for in the messenger RNA (mRNA) that ultimately is stored in the DNA. A process known as transcription (think taking a manual written in New Times Roman and re-writting it in Courier) takes the information from DNA and puts it in mRNA form.

Next, a process of translation (like taking the information in the manual that's written in English and putting it in Korean) takes the information in the mRNA and makes a protein by being fed through the molecular machine of the ribosome.

tRNA is a specially folded form of RNA (remember, these are large molecules able to adopt specific 3D shapes). They carry the amino acids to the ribosome where they are put in specific order following the information on the mRNA.

Since there are so many varieties of amino acids, there are a large variety of tRNA. Holley got the Noble Prize for sketching out how this entire system works and the structure of one of the tRNA (the one that carries alanine if you're interested).

However, given how quickly the field of the biological sciences, especially biochemistry and molecular biology, progresses the work done in the 60's (hell, the 80's really) was incredibly crude and basic by modern standards.

[Geronimo]

Wow, Grandpa troll caught one!

I was sure he was wasting his time with that bait.

[Starchild]

Originally posted by Geronimo
Wow, Grandpa troll caught one!

I was sure he was wasting his time with that bait.

Revising my basic knowledge for whatever reason, troll or not, is still preferable to actually working on my presentation for Thursday. Anything is preferable to trying to condense 8 weeks of membrane proteins involved in electron transfer research into a 10 minute talk.

[Grandpa Troll]

Originally posted by Geronimo
Wow, Grandpa troll caught one!

I was sure he was wasting his time with that bait.

Hraddeee Harr Har

/me feels sorry for having actually contemplated posting but then thought..NAHHH....I gots to have me sum fun YO



Ok

My badd

Please forgive me and here..today we have a catch N release special

[Elok]

Come to think of it, Starchild, have you ever heard of an early biophysicist (born late nineteenth/early twentieth century) named Kenneth Cole? I know he did some research that was later built on by two guys named Huxley and Hodgkins or some such who won the nobel prize, and he invented some sort of instrument for measuring the conductivity of nerves. I think. I was never quite clear on the details, he died like a year after I was born (he was my grandfather). I looked him up on JSTOR once, but only found a brief announcement from the thirties of the clamps he invented.

He specialized in membrane properties (which is why I suddenly remembered him, reading your post), and also nerves. I remember he studied the large and extremely primitive nerves of giant squid, since he worked before the invention of the electron microscope and couldn't see more delicate structures.

[Geronimo]

Originally posted by Starchild


Revising my basic knowledge for whatever reason, troll or not, is still preferable to actually working on my presentation for Thursday. Anything is preferable to trying to condense 8 weeks of membrane proteins involved in electron transfer research into a 10 minute talk.

8 weeks of what involving those membrane proteins?

[Starchild]

Originally posted by Geronimo


8 weeks of what involving those membrane proteins?

Mostly proving the antibodies we ordered in from America not only find the protein I wanted but all the proteins in the bloody complex.

My western blots look a mess

Oh well. This is why my dissertation is so much fun to write up.