[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 35 KB, 500x500, 1283974315527.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2141843 No.2141843 [Reply] [Original]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/12/02/nasa-new-life-arsenic-bacteria_n_791094.html

Arsenic based bacteria

What do you think? Maybe there's life on those balls of poison out there.

>> No.2141884

Can't fuck it.

Not interested.

>> No.2141919

Also it doesn't eat arsenic

It's actually BASED upon arsenic. All other life has phosphate-deoxyribose as the backbone for its DNA, this bacteria uses arsenic-deoxyribose.

>> No.2141945
File: 7 KB, 407x405, fat-nerd-blank.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2141945

ALSO IT DOESN'T EAT ARSENIC GUYZ
IT DUZNT HAVE ANY TEETH THEREFORE NO MASTICATION GUYZ

>> No.2141973

>>2141919
Technically it's arsenate.

>> No.2142018

There are a subspecies of sheep in Scotland that eat seaweed high in arsenic. In order to survive, they have adapted an interesting and complex arsenic metabolisms, replacing arsenic for phosphorous.

Arsenophospholipids, for example, instead of just the usual phospholipids.

And phospholipids are just as important a building block for life as DNA. This new discovery, while a new discovery, isn't all that much more exciting.

There are other well known organisms besides the sheep that have interesting arsenic metabolism.

So either these astrobiologists at NASA are unaware of the work of others in arsenic metabolism, which means they're incompetent. Or they're purposefully exaggerating the consequences, which makes them dishonest.

Either way, I am upset with them.

>> No.2142075

>>2142018
From what I heard they're not talking about arsenic metabolism at all being the focus so you must be the dishonest one.
YOU'RE LYING TO YOURSELF!

>> No.2142077

>>2142018
It isn't arsenic metabolism, it's replacing a central part of the DNA backbone with a completely different element

who the fuck keeps spreading this metabolism shit?

>> No.2143305
File: 149 KB, 400x283, Picture+1.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2143305

>mfw the bacteria do "eat" arsenic in that they absorb it selectively
>mfw /sci/ thinks that means they metabolize it

ya'll niggas be stupid

>> No.2143333

>>2142077
Are you saying that synthesis of DNA building blocks is not a part of metabolism?

>> No.2143351

>>2143333
metabolism is an extremely wide 'genre' of body functions
DNA 'creation' is usually not included

>> No.2143366

>>2143333
Well, technically that is called catabolism. Although metabolism provides a pool of macromolecules for DNA synthesis. However, this finding is important because these bacteria use arsenate (sp?) in lieu of phosphate on the sugar-phosphate backbone of DNA. I think that this type of DNA must have been novel and not an adaptation derived from "standard" DNA.

>> No.2143376

>>2143366

>I think that this type of DNA must have been novel and not an adaptation derived from "standard" DNA.

You realize that the lack is less then a million years old, right?

>> No.2143382

>>2143351
You are wrong. Nucleic acid synthesis is a part of metabolism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anabolism
>Anabolism (Greek "mound" from ana = upward + ballein = "to throw") is the set of metabolic pathways that construct molecules from smaller units.

Also, bacteria don't have a body

>> No.2143389

>>2143376


I am assuming that you mean lake? That really wouldn't change anything. Perhaps the evolution occurred undergroud?

>> No.2143396

>>2143366

oops I messed up my definitions,,,i meant anabolism

>> No.2143403

>>2143376
The vacant lot across the street is only two decades old. Therefore, the crackhead living in it must have evolved recently.

>> No.2143413

>>2143366
What is more likely?
That the enzymes for nucleotide synthesis changes substrate specificities from phosphates to arsenate, or that life evolved from scratch in that lake with everything else similar to other existing life?

>> No.2143415

>>2143403

Thank you for seeing the reason behind my hypothesis.

>> No.2143432

>>2143413

My only qualm with that is that all of the prokaryotic polymerases would also have to adapt at the same time. Otherwise the bacteria would not be able to survive

>> No.2143439

>>2143403

The vacant lot next to you is less then twenty years old.

Therefore, the crack head probably came from somewhere else and adapted himself to living there. Instead of evolving abiogenetically, and independently from all other organisms.

>> No.2143450

>>2143432

>Implying the polymerases don't get along just fine with the nucleotides unchanged, and the deoxyriboses going unchanged, and only a minor change to the backbone itself.

>> No.2143461

>>2143432
That's not the case. Difference between phosphate and arsenate is not that big. Most enzymes have active sites that are promiscuous enough to accommodate both, albeit with slightly different affinities

>> No.2143464

>>2143415
No problem friend!
I hope you don't mind if I cite your work in my paper on Transient Hobosynthesis appearing in Life

>> No.2143469

>>2143439

If you can come up with a theory about how all of the polymerases required for DNA synthesis would simultaneously adapt to arsenic-sugar linkages then you are on to something. However, if these polymerases are not working at high efficiency, the DNA transactions will have a high rate of error and the bacteria will be toast.

>> No.2143487

>Fox News
>Alien life has been among us all along, according to new biological findings announced by NASA Thursday.

Well, at least Fox is smart enough to know how to use wording to fool people. Now if only they didn't try and fool people in the first place, instead of doing it so well.
http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2010/12/02/alien-life-nasa-titan-arsenic-bacteria/#ixzz17089Zorj

>> No.2143489

>>2143469

I know that arsenate would form a weaker bond than would phosphate. Perhaps this is why the polymerases were more forgiving with regard to annealing/repair?

>> No.2143492

>>2143469
Proofreading activity of DNA polymerases checks the nucleotide pairing, not the phosphate/arsenate bond.

>> No.2143494
File: 673 KB, 1024x850, hobosynthesis.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2143494

>>2143439
>implying a micelle of heroine, arm pit oil, and old english wouldn't be the perfect evolutionary breeding ground for a crackhead.

I've successfully grown a half dozen crackheads in only 3 years under the right conditions.

>> No.2143505

>>2143492

What about annealing and repair?

>> No.2143534

Do you think it would be possible for life to exist in a sun? Almost all life on earth gets it's energy from the sun in one way or another. If there's enough nutrients and life is able to adapt, I don't see any reason why life can't exist in the sun. Am I wrong? Also what about the center of the earth? We have bacteria which lives off of thermal vents. Why not bacteria that lives off of the thermal energy in the molten core of the earth?

>> No.2143536

>>2143505
Same thing, it relies on hydrogen bonding between nucleosides, and integrating arsenate apparently doesn't alter the geometry of DNA significantly.

>> No.2143574

>>2143534
The sun would not permit molecules to form.
end of story

>> No.2143615

so something adapted to an unfilled niche, good for it

now fuck off back flying things in space nasa

>> No.2143690

Life evolves based on its surroundings. Its surroundings aren't a prerequisite for life. It always surprises me that scientists think they know the constraints of life in such a relatively minuscule environment. This isn't news.