Abiogenesis takes another step forward.....

by snare&racket 48 Replies latest jw friends

  • snare&racket
    snare&racket
    Spark of life: Metabolism appears in lab without cells

    Metabolic processes that underpin life on Earth have arisen spontaneously outside of cells. The serendipitous finding that metabolism – the cascade of reactions in all cells that provides them with the raw materials they need to survive – can happen in such simple conditions provides fresh insights into how the first life formed. It also suggests that the complex processes needed for life may have surprisingly humble origins.

    "People have said that these pathways look so complex they couldn't form by environmental chemistry alone," says Markus Ralser at the University of Cambridge who supervised the research.

    But his findings suggest that many of these reactions could have occurred spontaneously in Earth's early oceans, catalysed by metal ions rather than the enzymes that drive them in cells today.

    The origin of metabolism is a major gap in our understanding of theemergence of life. "If you look at many different organisms from around the world, this network of reactions always looks very similar, suggesting that it must have come into place very early on in evolution, but no one knew precisely when or how," says Ralser.

    Happy accident

    One theory is that RNA was the first building block of life because it helps to produce the enzymes that could catalyse complex sequences of reactions. Another possibility is that metabolism came first; perhaps even generating the molecules needed to make RNA, and that cells later incorporated these processes – but there was little evidence to support this.

    "This is the first experiment showing that it is possible to create metabolic networks in the absence of RNA," Ralser says.

    Remarkably, the discovery was an accident, stumbled on during routine quality control testing of the medium used to culture cells at Ralser's laboratory. As a shortcut, one of his students decided to run unused media through a mass spectrometer, which spotted a signal for pyruvate – an end product of a metabolic pathway called glycolysis.

    To test whether the same processes could have helped spark life on Earth, they approached colleagues in the Earth sciences department who had been working on reconstructing the chemistry of the Archean Ocean, which covered the planet almost 4 billion years ago. This was an oxygen-free world, predating photosynthesis, when the waters were rich in iron, as well as other metals and phosphate. All these substances could potentially facilitate chemical reactions like the ones seen in modern cells.

    Metabolic backbone

    Ralser's team took early ocean solutions and added substances known to be starting points for modern metabolic pathways, before heating the samples to between 50˚C and 70˚C – the sort of temperatures you might have found near a hydrothermal ventMovie Camera – for 5 hours. Ralser then analysed the solutions to see what molecules were present.

    "In the beginning we had hoped to find one reaction or two maybe, but the results were amazing," says Ralser. "We could reconstruct two metabolic pathways almost entirely."

    The pathways they detected were glycolysis and the pentose phosphate pathway, "reactions that form the core metabolic backbone of every living cell," Ralser adds. Together these pathways produce some of the most important materials in modern cells, including ATP – the molecule cells use to drive their machinery, the sugars that form DNA and RNA, and the molecules needed to make fats and proteins.

    If these metabolic pathways were occurring in the early oceans, then the first cells could have enveloped them as they developed membranes.

    In all, 29 metabolism-like chemical reactions were spotted, seemingly catalysed by iron and other metals that would have been found in early ocean sediments. The metabolic pathways aren't identical to modern ones; some of the chemicals made by intermediate steps weren't detected. However, "if you compare them side by side it is the same structure and many of the same molecules are formed," Ralser says. These pathways could have been refined and improved once enzymes evolved within cells.

    Reversible reaction

    Detecting the metabolite ribose 5-phosphate is particularly noteworthy, Ralser says. This is because it is a precursor to RNA, which encodes information, catalyses chemical reactions and most importantly of all, can replicate.

    "I think this paper has really interesting connotations for the origins of life," says Matthew Powner at University College London. It hints at how more complex enzymes could have evolved, he says, because substances that made these early processes more efficient would have been selected for.

    There is one big problem, however. "For origins of life, it is important to understand where the source molecules come from," Powner says. No one has yet shown that such substances could form spontaneously in the early oceans.

    A related issue is that the reactions observed so far only go in one direction; from complex sugars to simpler molecules like pyruvate. "Given the data, one might well conclude that any organics in the ocean would have been totally degraded, rather than forming the basis of modern metabolism," says Jack Szostak, who studies the origin of life at Harvard. "I would conclude that metabolism had to evolve, within cells, one reaction and one catalyst at a time."

    But Ralser disagrees. In his opinion, whether the reaction is catalysed by an enzyme or by a molecule in the Archean Ocean leads to the same result; "every chemical reaction is in principle reversible, whether an enzyme or a simple molecule is the catalyst," he says.

    Journal reference: Molecular Systems Biology, DOI: 10.1002/msb.145228

  • wizzstick
    wizzstick

    Wowsers - pretty important step forward.

    Thanks for that, good find.

  • prologos
    prologos

    and the activity before cells in cavities--.

  • ILoveTTATT
    ILoveTTATT

    Why don't they try the "top-down" approach, i.e. they start with life and reduce reduce reduce elements until there is no life... and then figure out how THAT step was formed...

    Do you understand what I mean?

  • KateWild
    KateWild

    Hey snare,

    Thanks for the article, but I am afraid it goes over my head. There is too much biology in it and not enough chemistry. The article does not explain clearly to me how chemistry became biology. I would prefer a more direct and simple explaination of what exactly happened in the lab in as far as the chemistry is concerned. There is no mention of smaller molecules such as amino acids, and sterio isomers.

    Sorry I will have to study this in more depth to try and understand it, and make a proper comment.

    Kate xx

  • cofty
    cofty

    Thanks Snare. I have been reading Nick Lane's "Oxygen - The molecule that made the world" recently so I can just about understand the chemistry in the OP.

  • cantleave
    cantleave

    Thanks for sharing snare.

    Some of the catalyzation required for the early biochemistry has been demonstrated in FeS2 alkaline thermal vents.

    I think we moving closer to understanding some of the mechanisms required to form nucleotides without the need for magic! The next few decades could see the emergence of some strong theories.

  • snare&racket
    snare&racket

    ILTTATT: That is what they are doing x

    Kate: This is chemistry ! It demonstrates spontaneous interaction in very important metabolic pathways for life, vital processes to life and all without a cell membrane!!!

    If you look at a thread I made abour 3 months ago, I mentioned that the scientists can reduce life to chemicals but theny need to find an enviroment on earth where they could spontaneously interact. They have done this now. We even mentioned on my thread that the ocean floor or other enviroments in the universe i.e. other planets, could have done it. This result is very important because we have brought abiogenesis closer to home!

    As for amino acids, we have already ticked that box, we are a lot further back than that Kate in reducing life to chemicals spontaneously interacting. Important metabolic processes providing energy and molecules important for early life, form without any coding, without DNA without RNA without a cell, they can do it spontaneously on ocean floors!

    So from non-life to life, to simplify we had.... chemicals spontaneoulsy interacting, a membrane of carbohydrates (lipid layer), formation of DNA, RNA, organelles including ribosomes, then amino acids which form proteins which form everything.

    This experiement has taken the process back to 'chemicals spontaneously interacting'....yes we have gaps between there and proteins, but we have only done this research for a lifetime at best. Abiogenesis... spontaneous formation of life here on earth, just got more viable.

    It makes sense we find it on ocean floor vents because we find mass colonies of bacteria and life, highly evolved to their enviroment, single celled prokaryotes. It is teeming with what we believe early life looked like, what a co-inky-dink !

    Snare x

  • jgnat
    jgnat

    I think I get what you are saying, I-L-TTATT. You are talking about reverse-engineering sort of, right?

  • Vidiot
    Vidiot

    It's looking more and more like life wasn't a one-in-a-bazillion lucky fluke, but an (evolutionary) inevitablility.

    Cool.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit