• Re: The egg or the chicken

    From Bob Casanova@21:1/5 to All on Thu Nov 7 09:43:57 2024
    On Thu, 7 Nov 2024 09:39:14 -0600, the following appeared in
    talk.origins, posted by RonO <rokimoto557@gmail.com>:

    https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2024/11/241106132114.htm

    This news article claims that nature could create eggs long before it >invented chickens.

    There is a single celled eukaryote (Chromosphaera perkensii) that
    branched off from animal cellular life forms a billion years ago before >protists evolved. It is a single celled organism that can form balls of
    two types of cells that look like early stage embryos, and it exists in
    these balls for about 1/3 of it's life cycle.

    The article claims that single celled animals could form embryo like
    cellular complexes long before multicellular life forms evolved, but the
    most their work indicates is that the genes that could be used to evolve >multicellular life and future embryos may have existed that could allow
    the evolution of the convergent trait in two divergent lineages
    separated by half a billion years of evolution. It branched off from
    the lineage that led to multicellular life a billion years ago and some
    time during it's evolution since splitting off it evolved the means to
    form these balls of cells. A half a billion years after the divergence
    the lineage of multicellular animals evolved something similar. For all
    we know the lineage of multicellular animals evolved embryos half a
    billion years ago, and the independent lineage of C. perkensii evolved
    their ability more recently, unless they have evidence that these embryo
    like structures existed a billion years ago.

    You don't have to go that far back; even if we have no
    fossilized eggs of fish or amphibians (due to the lack of
    hard shells) we do have fossilized reptile and dino eggs,
    which preceded chickens (or any other avians) by quite a few
    million years. So I'd rate the article as "interesting, but
    nothing really new regarding the old question".

    --

    Bob C.

    "The most exciting phrase to hear in science,
    the one that heralds new discoveries, is not
    'Eureka!' but 'That's funny...'"

    - Isaac Asimov

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Bob Casanova@21:1/5 to All on Thu Nov 7 16:04:31 2024
    On Thu, 7 Nov 2024 14:41:23 -0600, the following appeared in
    talk.origins, posted by RonO <rokimoto557@gmail.com>:

    On 11/7/2024 10:43 AM, Bob Casanova wrote:
    On Thu, 7 Nov 2024 09:39:14 -0600, the following appeared in
    talk.origins, posted by RonO <rokimoto557@gmail.com>:

    https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2024/11/241106132114.htm

    This news article claims that nature could create eggs long before it
    invented chickens.

    There is a single celled eukaryote (Chromosphaera perkensii) that
    branched off from animal cellular life forms a billion years ago before
    protists evolved. It is a single celled organism that can form balls of >>> two types of cells that look like early stage embryos, and it exists in
    these balls for about 1/3 of it's life cycle.

    The article claims that single celled animals could form embryo like
    cellular complexes long before multicellular life forms evolved, but the >>> most their work indicates is that the genes that could be used to evolve >>> multicellular life and future embryos may have existed that could allow
    the evolution of the convergent trait in two divergent lineages
    separated by half a billion years of evolution. It branched off from
    the lineage that led to multicellular life a billion years ago and some
    time during it's evolution since splitting off it evolved the means to
    form these balls of cells. A half a billion years after the divergence
    the lineage of multicellular animals evolved something similar. For all >>> we know the lineage of multicellular animals evolved embryos half a
    billion years ago, and the independent lineage of C. perkensii evolved
    their ability more recently, unless they have evidence that these embryo >>> like structures existed a billion years ago.

    You don't have to go that far back; even if we have no
    fossilized eggs of fish or amphibians (due to the lack of
    hard shells) we do have fossilized reptile and dino eggs,
    which preceded chickens (or any other avians) by quite a few
    million years. So I'd rate the article as "interesting, but
    nothing really new regarding the old question".


    They are claiming that they have what preceded eggs. This is before
    sperm and egg produced embryos.

    So the Subject:, "The egg or the chicken", which what my
    comment was about, was just hype, and this all really had
    nothing to do with either eggs (the standard sort) or
    chickens? OK, but my comment was about "This news article
    claims that nature could create eggs long before it invented
    chickens.", a fact not in question.

    --

    Bob C.

    "The most exciting phrase to hear in science,
    the one that heralds new discoveries, is not
    'Eureka!' but 'That's funny...'"

    - Isaac Asimov

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Ernest Major@21:1/5 to RonO on Fri Nov 8 07:44:04 2024
    On 07/11/2024 20:41, RonO wrote:
    On 11/7/2024 10:43 AM, Bob Casanova wrote:
    On Thu, 7 Nov 2024 09:39:14 -0600, the following appeared in
    talk.origins, posted by RonO <rokimoto557@gmail.com>:

    https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2024/11/241106132114.htm

    This news article claims that nature could create eggs long before it
    invented chickens.

    There is a single celled eukaryote (Chromosphaera perkensii) that
    branched off from animal cellular life forms a billion years ago before
    protists evolved.  It is a single celled organism that can form balls of >>> two types of cells that look like early stage embryos, and it exists in
    these balls for about 1/3 of it's life cycle.

    The article claims that single celled animals could form embryo like
    cellular complexes long before multicellular life forms evolved, but the >>> most their work indicates is that the genes that could be used to evolve >>> multicellular life and future embryos may have existed that could allow
    the evolution of the convergent trait in two divergent lineages
    separated by half a billion years of evolution.  It branched off from
    the lineage that led to multicellular life a billion years ago and some
    time during it's evolution since splitting off it evolved the means to
    form these balls of cells.  A half a billion years after the divergence >>> the lineage of multicellular animals evolved something similar.  For all >>> we know the lineage of multicellular animals evolved embryos half a
    billion years ago, and the independent lineage of C. perkensii evolved
    their ability more recently, unless they have evidence that these embryo >>> like structures existed a billion years ago.

    You don't have to go that far back; even if we have no
    fossilized eggs of fish or amphibians (due to the lack of
    hard shells) we do have fossilized reptile and dino eggs,
    which preceded chickens (or any other avians) by quite a few
    million years. So I'd rate the article as "interesting, but
    nothing really new regarding the old question".


    They are claiming that they have what preceded eggs.  This is before
    sperm and egg produced embryos.

    Ron Okimoto


    A preprint of the paper is available on BioXRiv. What the paper actually
    claims is that the Chromosphaera division phase parallels early
    embryonic development.

    They report a life cycle of ~65 hours of a growth phase of single cells, followed by a division phase of ~30 hours during which the cell divides repeatedly, resulting in hundreds of cells, without a further increase
    in volume. On termination of the division phase the cells are released presumably to start the next growth phase. They report that the released
    cells are of 2 or 3 types - mitotic (aflagellate, capable of division)
    and flagellate/amoeboflagellate. They don't go on to investigate the
    roles of the different cell types in the life cycle.

    Different forms of borderline multicellularity occur in several other
    holozoan groups. I'd doubt that the state in Chromosphaera represents
    the ancestral state, though they do make a case for the involvement of
    the same genes in animals and Chromosphaera. (It's been known for some
    time that the basis of the tool kit for animal multicellularity is
    present in other holozoans.)

    They don't make much of this, but the Chromosphaera life cycle could
    still be ancient, which casts doubt on the animal interpretation of the Doushanto "embryos".

    --
    alias Ernest Major

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)