Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

Last Universal Common Ancestor was a “sophisticated organism,” not a “crude assemblage of molecular parts”

Share
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Flipboard
Print
Email
Early earth?/Dave, Fotolia

From “Last Universal Common Ancestor More Complex Than Previously Thought,” ScienceDaily (Oct. 5, 2011), we learn:

Scientists call it LUCA, the Last Universal Common Ancestor, but they don’t know much about this great-grandparent of all living things. Many believe LUCA was little more than a crude assemblage of molecular parts, a chemical soup out of which evolution gradually constructed more complex forms. Some scientists still debate whether it was even a cell.

New evidence suggests that LUCA was a sophisticated organism after all, with a complex structure recognizable as a cell, researchers report. Their study appears in the journal Biology Direct.

And they still have a job? Amazing?

“You can’t assume that the whole story of life is just building and assembling things,” Whitfield said. “Some have argued that the reason that bacteria are so simple is because they have to live in extreme environments and they have to reproduce extremely quickly. So they may actually be reduced versions of what was there originally. According to this view, they’ve become streamlined genetically and structurally from what they originally were like. We may have underestimated how complex this common ancestor actually was.”

No argument here. There are many no-speculation examples of life forms
shedding complex parts for survival – the way one might abandon a grand piano in the wilderness.

We’ll leave the giant, gaping question for later.

Follow UD News at Twitter!

Comments
Why should LUCA and FUCA be the same thing? Agreed, they could but why should they be? Even creationists agree that Chromosomal Adam (the last common human paternal ancestor) was Noah, not Adam. Knowing (or inferring) who the last common ancestor doesn't tell you anything about who the first was. If the LUCA could exist, so could its parent.Elizabeth Liddle
October 7, 2011
October
10
Oct
7
07
2011
01:45 AM
1
01
45
AM
PDT
Elizabeth: As I already commented in the past, LUCA is a scientific concept, because we can support it with some facts: studying the existing proteome, we can make inferences (maybe right, maybe wrong, but anyway based on facts) about what proteins were present, say before the separation between bacteria and archea. That is scientific reasoning. FUCA, instead, is only myth. There are absolutely no facts supporting the existence of your "simpler precursors", least of all about what they could have been, if they ever existed. There is no evidence, either in nature (fossils or other) or in the lab, that your FUCA simply can exist. There is nothing wrong in pure hypothesizing, but unless and until hypotheses are supported by at least some trace of facts, they cannot be called scientific reasoning, or constructively used in a discussion confronting dofferent scientific theories about OOL. For all we know, LUCA and FUCA may well be the same thing. I believe, based on evodence, that LUCA existed, and that we can have some idea of what it was and how it worked, and which proteins were already presebt at that level. What about FUCA? What can you realistically say about it? Beyond myth and fairy tales?gpuccio
October 7, 2011
October
10
Oct
7
07
2011
01:02 AM
1
01
02
AM
PDT
OK, ba77, explain to me why you think the Last Universal Common Ancestor must also have been the first. Thanks.Elizabeth Liddle
October 7, 2011
October
10
Oct
7
07
2011
12:56 AM
12
12
56
AM
PDT
well then Timbo, I got a solution for your dislike of my posts, since you don't want to rewrite them to suit your tastes, how bout you not read my posts in the first place if they upset you??? I pretty sure my feelings won't be hurt if you stopped!! :)bornagain77
October 6, 2011
October
10
Oct
6
06
2011
07:49 PM
7
07
49
PM
PDT
No.Timbo
October 6, 2011
October
10
Oct
6
06
2011
07:19 PM
7
07
19
PM
PDT
Kutless - Shut Me Out http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D6flXRCLPS0bornagain77
October 6, 2011
October
10
Oct
6
06
2011
07:02 PM
7
07
02
PM
PDT
So are you saying that you don't want me to say stuff like 'Liar Liar pants on fire' to neo-Darwinists??? How about delusional dogmatists??? is that better??? more adult??? Better yet how about you give me your e-mail address and I'll send all my posts to you so you can proof read everything I write and preapprove it??? Would that make you happy???bornagain77
October 6, 2011
October
10
Oct
6
06
2011
05:52 PM
5
05
52
PM
PDT
BA, could you just try and write with a little bit of detachment? The childish petulant tone of your posts can be a real buzz kill.Timbo
October 6, 2011
October
10
Oct
6
06
2011
05:12 PM
5
05
12
PM
PDT
Anyhoo, my point is that it’s a bit silly posting these Gotcha! stories about the LUCA being complex,
Well I'm sure you will just imagine whatever you need to, so to placate any discomfort you may have felt.bornagain77
October 6, 2011
October
10
Oct
6
06
2011
04:37 PM
4
04
37
PM
PDT
Anyhoo, my point is that it's a bit silly posting these Gotcha! stories about the LUCA being complex, when there is no reason to think the LUCA had no ancestors. The last common ancestor between you and your cousin is not the same person as the second last common ancestor. Being the last common ancestor of a group doesn't mean you have no ancestors.Elizabeth Liddle
October 6, 2011
October
10
Oct
6
06
2011
04:18 PM
4
04
18
PM
PDT
First Universal Common ancestor. As opposed to the Last. They aren't the same thing. No reason why they should be, just as mitochondrial Eve needn't be contemporaneous with Y chromosome Adam.Elizabeth Liddle
October 6, 2011
October
10
Oct
6
06
2011
04:15 PM
4
04
15
PM
PDT
What for the love of peer review is the FUCA? The first self replicating molecule? Is this your camp?: "Much about LUCA remains enigmatic — many think it was little more than a primitive assemblage of molecular parts, a chemical soup from which evolution gradually built more complex forms." Therefore in conflict with this camp: "It was a dogma of microbiology that organelles weren't present in bacteria," said researcher Manfredo Seufferheld, a stress physiologist and cell biologist at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign." "Now, after years of research into a once-neglected feature of microbes, scientists suggest the last universal common ancestor was indeed complex, and recognizable as a cell." "The mysterious common ancestor of all life on Earth may have been more complex than before thought — a sophisticated organism with an intricate structure, scientists now suggest." http://www.livescience.com/16398-common-ancestor-complex.html If by FUCA you mean: it was little more than a primitive assemblage of molecular parts, then your idea is in conflict with current studies. It seems that FUCA is an illusion, the real issue being the complexity of LUCA. FUCA being an invention, a name your using to describe a less complex LUCA. The search for FUCA: FUCA FUCAIIjunkdnaforlife
October 6, 2011
October
10
Oct
6
06
2011
04:07 PM
4
04
07
PM
PDT
HMMM,
Yet again I’ll point out that the LUCA is not the FUCA.
Well since both LUCA and FUCA are imaginary constructs, born out of conjecture, perhaps you would care to show some ACTUAL EVIDENCE for something simpler than perhaps the parasitic mycoplasmal??? Remember Elizabeth, your belief that they must exist does not constitute ACTUAL EVIDENCE!!!
Three Subsets of Sequence Complexity and Their Relevance to Biopolymeric Information - David L. Abel and Jack T. Trevors - Theoretical Biology & Medical Modelling, Vol. 2, 11 August 2005, page 8 "No man-made program comes close to the technical brilliance of even Mycoplasmal genetic algorithms. Mycoplasmas are the simplest known organism with the smallest known genome, to date. How was its genome and other living organisms' genomes programmed?" http://www.biomedcentral.com/content/pdf/1742-4682-2-29.pdf Mycoplasma Genitalium - The "Simplest" Life On Earth - video http://www.metacafe.com/watch/4012738 First-Ever Blueprint of 'Minimal Cell' Is More Complex Than Expected - Nov. 2009 Excerpt: A network of research groups,, approached the bacterium at three different levels. One team of scientists described M. pneumoniae's transcriptome, identifying all the RNA molecules, or transcripts, produced from its DNA, under various environmental conditions. Another defined all the metabolic reactions that occurred in it, collectively known as its metabolome, under the same conditions. A third team identified every multi-protein complex the bacterium produced, thus characterising its proteome organisation. "At all three levels, we found M. pneumoniae was more complex than we expected," http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/11/091126173027.htm There’s No Such Thing as a ‘Simple’ Organism - November 2009 Excerpt: In short, there was a lot going on in lowly, supposedly simple M. pneumoniae, and much of it is beyond the grasp of what’s now known about cell function. http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2009/11/basics-of-life/ Simplest Microbes More Complex than Thought - Dec. 2009 Excerpt: PhysOrg reported that a species of Mycoplasma,, “The bacteria appeared to be assembled in a far more complex way than had been thought.” Many molecules were found to have multiple functions: for instance, some enzymes could catalyze unrelated reactions, and some proteins were involved in multiple protein complexes." http://www.creationsafaris.com/crev200912.htm#20091229a Was our oldest ancestor a proton-powered rock? - Oct. 2009 Excerpt: “There is no doubt that the progenitor of all life on Earth, the common ancestor, possessed DNA, RNA and proteins, a universal genetic code, ribosomes (the protein-building factories), ATP and a proton-powered enzyme for making ATP. The detailed mechanisms for reading off DNA and converting genes into proteins were also in place. In short, then, the last common ancestor of all life looks pretty much like a modern cell.” http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20427306.200-was-our-oldest-ancestor-a-protonpowered-rock.html
So much for 'simple' life!!! music & verse:
Casting Crowns - Until The Whole World Hears W/Lyrics http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C9jVK9cZ2aw Colossians 1:16 For by him all things were created, in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities—all things were created through him and for him.
bornagain77
October 6, 2011
October
10
Oct
6
06
2011
03:03 PM
3
03
03
PM
PDT
Yet again I'll point out that the LUCA is not the FUCA. Finding that the LUCA is complex tells you nothing about how complex its ancestors were.Elizabeth Liddle
October 6, 2011
October
10
Oct
6
06
2011
02:17 PM
2
02
17
PM
PDT
OT: Michael Behe has a new article up on ENV:
Wheel of Fortune: New Work by Thornton's Group Supports Time-Asymmetric Dollo's Law - Michael Behe - October 5, 2011 Excerpt: The need to pass through multiple neutral steps while avoiding multiple likely-deleterious steps to produce a protein that has lost 99% of its activity is not a ringing example of the power of Darwinian processes. Rather, as mentioned above, it shows the strength of TADL. Darwinian selection will fit a protein to its current task as tightly as it can. In the process, it makes it extremely difficult to adapt to a new task or revert to an old task by random mutation plus selection. http://www.evolutionnews.org/2011/10/wheel_of_fortune_new_work_by_t051621.html
bornagain77
October 5, 2011
October
10
Oct
5
05
2011
06:20 PM
6
06
20
PM
PDT
1 2

Leave a Reply