| Revision as of 03:23, 1 September 2005 editVsmith (talk | contribs)Administrators272,935 editsm Reverted edits by 24.249.128.128 to last version by Awolf002← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 10:22, 20 February 2023 edit undoFinnusertop (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users89,204 editsNo edit summary | ||
| (952 intermediate revisions by more than 100 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| #REDIRECT] | |||
| :''This article focuses on modern scientific research on the origin of life. For alternate uses, see ].'' | |||
| {{r mentioned in hatnote}} | |||
| ] ] in the Siyeh Formation, ]. In 2002, William Schopf of ] published a controversial paper in the ] '']'' arguing that geological formations such as this possess 3.5 billion year old ] ] microbes. If true, they would be the earliest known life on earth.]] | |||
| Research into the '''origin of life''' is a limited field of research despite its profound impact on ] and human understanding of the natural world. Progress in this field is generally slow and sporadic, though it still draws the attention of many due to the gravity of the question being investigated. | |||
| A few facts give insight into the conditions in which life may have emerged, but the mechanisms by which non-life became ] are elusive. | |||
| For the observed evolution of life on earth, see the ]. | |||
| ==History of the concept: abiogenesis== | |||
| ''Main article'': ] | |||
| Research into the origin of life is the modern incarnation of the ancient concept of '''abiogenesis'''. Abiogenesis, in its most general sense, is the generation of life from non-living matter. The term is primarily used in the context of biology and the origin of life. Abiogenesis was long considered to be a very common occurrence until the ''Law of Biogenesis'' (] or "all life from other life") became firmly established in modern biology. | |||
| The ''modern'' definition of abiogenesis is concerned with the formation of the simplest forms of life from primordial chemicals. This is significantly different from the concept of ] abiogenesis, which postulated the formation of complex organisms. This article reviews different hypotheses for modern abiogenetic processes that are currently under debate. | |||
| ==Current models of the origin of life== | |||
| There is no truly "standard" model of the origin of life, however most currently accepted models build in one way or another upon the following discoveries, which are listed in a rough order of postulated emergence: | |||
| # Plausible pre-biotic conditions result in the creation of certain basic small ]s (monomers) of life, such as amino acids. This was demonstrated in the ] by ] and ] in ]. | |||
| # ]s (of an appropriate length) can spontaneously form ]s, one of the two basic components of a ]. | |||
| # The ]ization of ]s into random ] molecules might have resulted in self-replicating '']s'' (''RNA world hypothesis''). | |||
| The origin (see ]) of the basic ]s, while not settled, is less controversial than the significance and order of steps 2 and 3. The basic inorganic chemicals from which life was formed are methane (CH4), ammonia (NH3), water (H2O), hydrogen sulfide (H2S), carbon dioxide (CO2), and phosphate (PO4). ], no one has yet synthesized a "protocell" using basic components which has the necessary properties of life (the so-called ''"bottom-up-approach"''). Without such a proof-of-principle, explanations have tended to be short on specifics. However, some researchers are working in this field, notably ] at ]. Others have argued that a ''"top-down approach"'' is more feasible. One such approach attempted by ] and others at ] involved engineering existing prokaryotic cells with progressively fewer genes, attempting to discern at which point the most minimal requirements for life were reached. | |||
| ===Origin of organic molecules: Miller and Wächtershäuser's theories=== | |||
| ] | |||
| The "]s" (including the original Miller–Urey experiment of 1953, by ] and his graduate student ]) are performed under simulated conditions resembling those thought at the time to have existed shortly after Earth first accreted from the primordial solar nebula. The experiment used a highly ] mixture of gases (], ] and ]). However, it should be noted that the exact composition of the prebiotic atmosphere of earth is currently somewhat controversial. Other less reducing gases produce a lower yield and variety. It was once thought that appreciable amounts of molecular oxygen were present in the prebiotic atmosphere, which would have essentially prevented the formation of organic molecules; however, the current scientific consensus is that such was not the case. | |||
| The experiment showed that some of the basic organic ]s (such as amino acids) that form the building blocks of modern life can be formed spontaneously. Simple organic molecules are of course a long way from a fully functional ] life form; however, in an environment with no pre-existing life these molecules may have accumulated and provided a rich environment for ] ("soup theory"). On the other hand, the spontaneous formation of complex ]s from abiotically generated monomers under these conditions is not at all a straightforward process. Further, according to Brooks and Shaw (1973), there is no evidence in the geological record that any soup existed. | |||
| :"If there ever was a primitive soup, then we would expect to find at least somewhere on this planet either massive sediments containing enormous amounts of the various nitrogenous organic compounds, acids, purines, pyrimidines, and the like; or in much metamorphosed sediments we should find vast amounts of nitrogenous cokes. In fact no such materials have been found anywhere on earth." | |||
| Other sources of complex molecules have been postulated, including sources of extra-terrestrial stellar or interstellar origin. For example, from spectral analyses, organic molecules are known to be present in comets and meteorites. In ], a team ] traces of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (]'s) in a ], the most complex molecule, to that date, found in space. | |||
| It can be argued that the most crucial challenge unanswered by this theory is how the relatively simple organic building blocks polymerise and form more complex structures, interacting in consistent ways to form a protocell. For example, in an aqueous environment ] of oligomers/polymers into their constituent monomers would be favored over the condensation of individual monomers into polymers. Also, the Miller experiment produces many substances that would undergo cross-reactions with the amino acids or terminate the peptide chain. | |||
| A possible answer to this polymerization conundrum was provided in ] by ], in his ]. In this theory, he postulated the evolution of (bio)chemical pathways as fundamentals of the evolution of life. Moreover, he presented a consistent system of tracing today's biochemistry back to ancestral reactions that provide alternative pathways to the synthesis of organic building blocks from simple gaseous compounds. In contrast to the classical Miller experiments, which depend on external sources of energy (e. g. simulated lightning or UV irradiation), "Wächtershäuser systems" come with a built-in source of energy, ]s of ] and other minerals (e. g. pyrite). The energy released from redox reactions of these metal sulfides is not only available for the synthesis of organic molecules, but also for the formation of oligomers and polymers. It is therefore hypothesized that such systems may be able to evolve into ] of self-replicating, metabolically active entities that would predate the life forms known today. | |||
| The experiment as performed, produced a relatively small yield of dipeptides (0.4–12.4%) and a smaller yield of tripeptides (0.003%) and the authors note that: "under these same conditions dipeptides hydrolysed rapidly." Another criticism of the result is that the experiment did not include any organomolecules that would most likely cross-react or chain-terminate. (Huber and Wächtershäuser, 1998) | |||
| The latest modification of the iron-sulfur-hypothesis has been provided by William Martin and Michael Russell in 2002. According to their scenario, the first cellular life forms may have evolved inside so-called ] at seafloor spreading zones in the deep sea. These structures consist of microscale caverns that are coated by thin membraneous metal sulfide walls. Therefore, these structures would solve several critical points of the "pure" Wächtershäuser systems at once: | |||
| # the micro-caverns provide a means of concentrating newly synthesised molecules, thereby increasing the chance of forming oligomers; | |||
| # the steep temperature gradients inside a black smoker allow for establishing "optimum zones" of partial reactions in different regions of the black smoker (e.g. monomer synthesis in the hotter, oligomerisation in the colder parts); | |||
| # the flow of hydrothermal water through the structure provides a constant source of building blocks and energy (freshly precipitated metal sulfides); | |||
| # the model allows for a succession of different steps of cellular evolution (prebiotic chemistry, monomer and oligomer synthesis, peptide and protein synthesis, RNA world, ribonucleoprotein assembly and DNA world) in a single structure, facilitating exchange between all developmental stages; | |||
| # synthesis of lipids as a means of "closing" the cells against the environment is not necessary, until basically all cellular functions are developed. | |||
| This model locates the "last universal common ancestor" (LUCA) inside a black smoker, rather than assuming the existence of a free-living form of LUCA. The last evolutionary step would be the synthesis of a lipid membrane that finally allows the organisms to leave the microcavern system of the black smokers and start their independent lives. This postulated late acquisition of lipids is consistent with the presence of completely different types of membrane lipids in archaebacteria and eubacteria (plus eukaryotes) with highly similar cellular physiology of all life forms in most other aspects. | |||
| Another unsolved issue in chemical evolution is the origin of ], i.e. all monomers having the same "handedness" (amino acids being left handed, and nucleic acid sugars being right handed). Homochirality is essential for the formation of functional ribozymes (and probably proteins too). The origin of homochirality might simply be explained by an initial asymmetry by chance followed by common descent. | |||
| ===From organic molecules to protocells=== | |||
| The question "How do simple organic molecules form a protocell?" is largely unanswered. However, there are many different hypotheses regarding the path that might have been taken. Some of these postulate the early appearance of nucleic acids ("]s-first") whereas others postulate the evolution of biochemical reactions and pathways first ("]-first"). Recently, trends are emerging to create hybrid models that combine aspects of both. | |||
| ===="Genes first" models: the RNA world==== | |||
| ''Main article:'' ] | |||
| The RNA world hypothesis, for example, suggests that relatively short ] molecules could have spontaneously formed that were capable of catalyzing their own continuing replication. Early cell membranes could have formed spontaneously from ]s, protein-like molecules that are produced when amino acid solutions are heated. Other possibilities include systems of chemical reactions taking place within ] substrates or on the surface of ] rocks. At this time however, these various hypotheses have incomplete evidence supporting them. Many of them can be simulated and tested in the lab, but a lack of undisturbed sedimentary rock from that early in Earth's history leaves few opportunities to determine what may have actually happened in reality. At this time however, no prebiotically plausible experiment has confirmed this assumption. Further, recent experiments suggest that the original estimates of the size of an RNA molecule capable of self-replication were most probably vast underestimates. Worse, RNA itself does not appear to be a prebiotically plausible molecule; therefore, more-modern forms of the RNA World theory propose that a simpler molecule was capable of self-replication (that other "World" then evolved over time to produce the RNA World). | |||
| ===="Metabolism first" models: iron-sulfur world and others==== | |||
| Several models reject the idea of the self-replication of a "naked-gene" and postulate the emergence of a primitive metabolism which could provide an environment for the later emergence of RNA replication. One of the earliest incarnations of this idea was put forward in ] with ]'s notion of primitive self-replicating ]s which predated the discovery of the structure of DNA. More recent variants in the ] and ] include ]'s ] and models introduced by ] based on the chemistry of ]s. More abstract and theoretical arguments for the plausibility of the emergence of metabolism without the presence of genes include a mathematical model introduced by ] in the early ], and ]'s notion of collectively ]s discussed later in that decade. | |||
| However, the idea that a closed metabolic cycle, such as the reductive citric acid cycle proposed by Günter Wächtershäuser, could form spontaneously remains unsupported. Futher, according to Leslie Orgel, a leader in origin-of-life studies for the past several decades, there is reason to believe the assertion will remain so. In an article entitled "Self-Organizing Biochemical Cycles" (''PNAS, vol. 97, no. 23, ] ], p12503-12507''), Orgel summarizes his analysis of the proposal by stating, "There is at present no reason to expect that multistep cycles such as the reductive citric acid cycle will self-organize on the surface of FeS/FeS2 or some other mineral." | |||
| ====The Bubble Theory==== | |||
| Another theory holds that the turbulent shores of the ancient costal waters may have served as a mammoth labratory, aiding in the countless experiments necessary to bring about the first cell. Waves breaking on the shore create a delicate foam composed of bubbles. Winds sweeping across the ocean have a tendancy to drive things to shore, much like driftwood collecting on the beach. It is possible that organic molecules were concentrated on the shorelines in much the same way. Shallow coastal waters also tend to be warmer, further concentrating the molecules through ]. While bubbles comprised of mostly water burst quickly, oily bubbles happen to be much more stable, lending more time to the particular bubble to perform these crucial experiments. The ] is a good example of a common oily compound prevalent in the prebiotic seas. Phospholipids can be constructed in ones mind as a ] head on one end, and a ] tail on the other. Phospholipids also possess an important characteristic, that is being able to link together to form a ] membrane. A lipid monolayer bubble can only contain oil, and is therefore not conducive to harbouring water-soluble organic molecules. On the other hand, a lipid bilayer bubble can contain water, and was a likely precursor to the modern cell membrane. If a protein came along that increased the integrity of its parent bubble, then that bubble had an advantage, and was placed at the top of the ] waiting list. Primitive reproduction can be envisioned when the bubbles burst, releasing the results of the experiment into the surrounding medium. Once enough of the 'right stuff' was released into the medium, the development of the first ], ], and multi-celluar organisms could be acheived. This theory is expanded upon in the book, ''"The Cell: Evolution of the First Organism"'' by ] Ph.D. | |||
| ====Hybrid models==== | |||
| A growing realization of the inadequacy of either pure "genes-first" or "metabolism-first" models is leading the trend towards models that incorporate aspects of each. <!-- more needed here, some of Wachtershauser's ideas might fall in here --> | |||
| ==Other models== | |||
| ===Clay theory of the origin of life=== | |||
| A hypothesis for the origin of life based on ] was forwarded by Dr A. ] of ] in ] and adopted as a plausible illustration by just a handful of other scientists (including ]). ] postulates complex organic molecules arising gradually on a pre-existing, non-organic replication platform - silicate crystals in solution. Complexity in companion molecules developed as a function of selection pressures on types of clay crystal is then ] to serve the replication of organic molecules independently of their silicate "launch stage". | |||
| Cairns-Smith is a staunch critic of other models of chemical evolution (see ''Genetic Takeover: And the Mineral Origins of Life'' ISBN 0-52123-312-7). However, he admits, that like many models of the origin of life, his own also has its shortcomings (Horgan 1991). | |||
| ==="Deep-hot biosphere" model of Gold=== | |||
| A controversial theory put forward by ] in the ] has life first developing not on the surface of the earth, but several kilometers below the surface. It is now known that ] life is plentiful up to five kilometers below the earth's surface in the form of ], which are generally considered to have originated around the same time or earlier than ], most of which live on the surface including the oceans. It is claimed that discovery of microbial life below the surface of another body in our ] would lend significant credence to this theory. He also noted that a trickle of food from a deep, unreachable, source promotes survival because life arising in a puddle of organic material is likely to consume all of its food and become extinct. | |||
| ==="Primitive" extraterrestrial life=== | |||
| An alternative to Earthly abiogenesis is the hypothesis that primitive life may have originally formed extraterrestrially (note that ''exogenesis'' is related to, but is not the same as the notion of ]). Organic compounds are relatively common in space, especially in the outer solar system where volatiles are not evaporated by solar heating. ]s are encrusted by outer layers of dark material, thought to be a ]-like substance composed of complex organic material formed from simple carbon compounds after reactions initiated mostly by irradiation by ] light. It is supposed that a rain of cometary material on the early Earth could have brought significant quantities of complex organic molecules, and that it is possible that primitive life itself may have formed in space was brought to the surface along with it. A related hypothesis holds that life may have formed first on early ], and been transported to Earth when crustal material was blasted off of Mars by asteroid and comet impacts to later fall to Earth's surface. Both of these hypotheses are even more difficult to find evidence for, and may have to wait for samples to be taken from comets and Mars for study, and neither of them actually answers the question of where life first originated, merely shifting it to another planet/comet. | |||
| ==Relevant fields== | |||
| * ] is a field that may shed light on the nature of life in general, instead of just life as we know it on Earth, and may give clues as to how life originates. | |||
| * ]s | |||
| ==See also== | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ]s | |||
| ==References== | |||
| *{{Journal reference | Author=JW Schopf et al. | Title=Laser-Raman imagery of Earth's earliest fossils. | Journal=Nature | Year=2002 | Volume=416 | Pages=73-76}} PMID 11882894 | |||
| *{{Journal reference| Author=Horgan, J |Title=In the beginning |Journal=Scientific American| Year=1991 |Volume=264 | Pages=100–109}} (Cited on p. 108). | |||
| *{{Journal reference| Author=Huber, C. and Wächterhäuser, G., |Title=Peptides by activation of amino acids with CO on (Ni,Fe)S surfaces: implications for the origin of life|Journal=Science| Year=1998 |Volume=281 | Pages=670–672}} (Cited on p. 108). | |||
| *Brooks, J. and Shaw, G., 1973. ''Origins and Development of Living Systems.'' Academic Press, London and New York, p. 359. | |||
| *{{Journal reference| Author=Martin, W. and Russell M.J. |Title=On the origins of cells: a hypothesis for the evolutionary transitions from abiotic geochemistry to chemoautotrophic prokaryotes, and from prokaryotes to nucleated cells | |||
| |Journal=Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society: Biological sciences| Year=2002 |Volume=358 | Pages=59-85}}. | |||
| ==External links== | |||
| * | |||
| * by ] | |||
| * | |||
| * | |||
| * | |||
| * | |||
| * | |||
| * | |||
| * | |||
| * | |||
| ===Creationist/Intelligent Design critiques=== | |||
| * | |||
| * (] website) | |||
| {{Biology-footer}} | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
Latest revision as of 10:22, 20 February 2023
Redirect to:
- Mentioned in a hatnote: This is a redirect from a title that is mentioned in a hatnote at the redirect target. The mention is usually atop the target article. It may, however, be directly under a section header, or in another article's hatnote (whenever the hatnote is under a section, {{R to section}} should also be used).
- The titles of redirects mentioned in hatnotes may refer to a subject other than that of the target page. It is possible that this redirect may need to be retargeted, or become an article under its own title (see {{R with possibilities}}). If the title is a good candidate for a Wiktionary link, it may also be added.