Evolution Intelligent Design Origin Of Life

New life form more different from others “than animals are from fungi”

Spread the love
two identified types, Spironema, and Hemimastix kukwesjijk/Yana Eglit, Nature

Hemimastigotes:

Like animals, plants, fungi and ameobas — but unlike bacteria — hemimastigotes have complex cells with mini-organs called organelles, making them part of the “domain” of organisms called eukaryotes rather than bacteria or archaea.

About 10 species of hemimastigotes have been described over more than 100 years. But up until now, no one had been able to do a genetic analysis to see how they were related to other living things. Emily Chung, “Rare microbes lead scientists to discover new branch on the tree of life” at CBC

 

Eglit watched carefully as it hunted. Hemimastix shoots little harpoons called extrusomes to attack prey such as Spumella, a relative of aquatic microbes called diatoms. It grasps its prey by curling its flagella around it, bringing it to a “mouth” on one end of the cell called a capitulum “as it presumably sucks its cytoplasm out,” Eglit said. Emily Chung, “Rare microbes lead scientists to discover new branch on the tree of life” at CBC

Note: “But Simpson noted that discoveries like this one are pretty rare: ‘It’ll be the one time in my lifetime that we find this sort of thing.’”

Just a minute here. The new organisms “were found in dirt collected on a whim” on a hike. Why should we assume that they are rare, as opposed to unsought? One can only wonder what new insights we would gain if there were less Darwin in our system and more open-minded exploration.

We are also told at CBC, “ … you’d have to go back a billion years — about 500 million years before the first animals arose — before you could find a common ancestor of hemimastigotes and any other known living things.”

Hmmm. Half a billion years is a long time. Why start by assuming that we even have a common ancestor?: Who decided that that should be our main focus just now when everything else has been a century-long mystery?

Two types of these organisms were found (and who knows how many others there may be?):

Opening sentences of the Letter to Nature Almost all eukaryote life forms have now been placed within one of five to eight supra-kingdom-level groups using molecular phylogenetics1–4. The ‘phylum’ Hemimastigophora is probably the most distinctive morphologically defined lineage that still awaits such a phylogenetic assignment. First observed in the nineteenth century, hemimastigotes are free-living predatory protists with two rows of flagella and a unique cell architecture5–7; to our knowledge, no molecular sequence data or cultures are currently available for this group. Here we report phylogenomic analyses based on high-coverage, cultivation-independent transcriptomics that place Hemimastigophora outside of all established eukaryote supergroups. They instead comprise an independent supra-kingdom-level lineage that most likely forms a sister clade to the ‘Diaphoretickes’ half of eukaryote diversity (that is, the ‘stramenopiles, alveolates and Rhizaria’ supergroup (Sar), Archaeplastida and Cryptista, as well as other major groups). The previous ranking of Hemimastigophora as a phylum understates the evolutionary distinctiveness of this group, which has considerable importance for investigations into the deep-level evolutionary history of eukaryotic life—ranging from understanding the origins of fundamental cell systems to placing the root of the tree. We have also established the first culture of a hemimastigote (Hemimastix kukwesjijk sp. nov.), which will facilitate future genomic and cell-biological investigations into eukaryote evolution and the last eukaryotic common ancestor. (open access) More.

Follow UD News at Twitter!

The story reminds some of us a bit of new findings about viruses.

See also: Virus expert highlights the conflict over whether viruses are alive In short, it is an open question. The question relates to the role viruses can play in evolution, among other things. Are they precursors of life, detritus of life, or something in between? Or all three? Keep the file open.

Viruses invent their own genes? Then what is left of Darwinism?

Why viruses are not considered to be alive

Another stab at whether viruses are alive

Phil Sci journal: Special section on understanding viruses

Should NASA look for viruses in space? Actually, it’s not clear that RNA came first. Nor is it clear that viruses precede life. A good case can doubtless be made for viruses being part of the scrap heap of existing life. But no matter. If you think you can find viruses in space, boldly go.

Why “evolution” is changing? Consider viruses

The Scientist asks, Should giant viruses be the fourth domain of life? Eukaryotes, prokaryotes, archaea… and viruses?

Viruses are alive.

and

Are viruses nature’s perfect machine? Or alive?

4 Replies to “New life form more different from others “than animals are from fungi”

  1. 1
    daveS says:

    The researchers describe hemimastigotes as representing a major new branch on the evolutionary tree—standing above the level of a kingdom.

    Read more at: https://phys.org/news/2018-11-hemimastigotes-major-evolutionary-tree-life.html#jCp

    😮

    So I guess this would not be “just” another kingdom, but rather would represent a new grouping at an even higher level?

  2. 2
    News says:

    The authors’ use of the term “supra-kingdom” implies that but right now everything seems a bit fuzzy. No surprise there.

  3. 3
    Ed George says:

    Note: “But Simpson noted that discoveries like this one are pretty rare: ‘It’ll be the one time in my lifetime that we find this sort of thing.’”

    Just a minute here. The new organisms “were found in dirt collected on a whim” on a hike. Why should we assume that they are rare, as opposed to unsought?

    I think they were referring to discoveries like this being rare, not that organisms like this were necessarily rare.

  4. 4
    PaV says:

    This is the ‘meat’ of the paper (‘letter’):

    Hemimatigophora appears to lie close to all of these positions on the unrooted tree (Fig 4), and could be our only know representative of one of the most ancient divisions amongst extant eukaryotes. Accordingly, we searched the single-cell transcriptomes for genes that could have arisen during the divergences between supergroups. We found several genes in hemimastigotes that are not known from Diaphoretickes, including those for myosin II—preveiously known from Amorphea, and one subgroup of Discoba—and Golgi protein GCP16 (also know as golgin A7) (previously specific to Amorphea). The presence of such genes in hemimastigotes either pushed back their likely origins to before the last eukaryotic common ancestor (or supports this inference) or—more controversially—could be due to the root of eukaryotes being further from the base of Amorphea than generally supposed—that is, Amorphea and Hemimastigophora being on the same side of the root (shown by the top variant of position c in Fig 4).

    However, another hemimastigote myosin-family gene was previously unknown outside the Sar clade. . .: irrespective of the final position of the root, this survey demonstrates that the antiquity of gene origins tends to be underestimated until all major lineages are considered. This bias can result in the underestimation of the gene content of ancient eukaryotes, and thus overestimations of the simplicity of their cell biology. Examining hemimastigote genomes—and ultimately their cell biology—will be valuable for better understanding eukaryote evolution at the deepest levels.”

    So, “underestimation of the gene content of ancient eukaryotes,” and “overestimations of the simplicity of their cell biology” has taken place heretofore.

    IOW, climbing Mount Improbable just became more difficult. How many more difficulties await discovery?

    Here’s an interesting comparison of the hemamastigotes to other early eukaryotes:

Leave a Reply