Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by chromas on Wednesday August 22 2018, @03:00AM   Printer-friendly
from the cradle-of-life dept.

Submitted via IRC for takyon

According to a paper released Monday in Nature Ecology & Evolution, the still-unidentified microbe that scientists believe is the ancestor to all cellular life on Earth was born sometime before 3.9 billion years ago. As it turns out, the last universal common ancestor — LUCA for short — emerged even earlier than scientists once believed.

Scientists previously pegged the LUCA's birth to a period 3.5 to 3.8 billion years ago, but the new evidence examined in the study0 suggests it happened one hundred million years earlier. The researchers from the Universities of Bristol and Bath determined the LUCA's new age using the concept of the "molecular clock," which does away with all of the issues with relying on fossils to build Earth's early-life timeline. With early life fossils, there are always older ones waiting to be exposed, which may seem exciting but makes creating an early-life timeline very difficult. The molecular clock, in contrast, uses differences in the genomes of individual species to tell how much time has passed since they shared a common ancestor. The basic idea is that the more mutations two species share, the more time has passed since their evolutionary paths diverged.

The team applied a variant of this approach to some of the oldest existing fossils ever found, hoping they'd reveal when LUCA was born. "We used a relaxed clock framework, which means that the branches across the [evolutionary] tree can have differing rates of evolution," explains first author and University of Bristol Ph.D. candidate Holly Betts to Inverse. Because the differences in age that the molecular clock technique gives are relative, she explains, "you then use fossil calibrations to anchor the tree in real time."

Source: https://www.inverse.com/article/48247-early-life-domain-molecular-clock

0DOI: 10.1038/s41559-018-0644-x


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 3, Interesting) by AthanasiusKircher on Wednesday August 22 2018, @11:34PM

    by AthanasiusKircher (5291) on Wednesday August 22 2018, @11:34PM (#724936) Journal

    It turns out the planet was pretty inhospitable during that period and yet life began anyway.

    Or... it could be that life only emerges in situations exactly like that... we simply don't know.

    I'm not trying to be contrarian. Life could be everywhere or it could be basically nowhere. It could form on any planet that had vaguely the right conditions or only on ones with very specific conditions. It could pop up in a few centuries even with the perfect conditions, or it could take millions of years -- and if those conditions change too rapidly, it might not emerge.

    All of these are possible. And statistically, until we either have a complete abiogenesis event in a laboratory (which we are NOWHERE near understanding) or until we find life elsewhere, it's all just speculating from one data point.

    (And yeah, I've said this before, but I hope life occurs frequently in the universe because it makes things more interesting. But I have no judgment about the likelihood until we have data.)

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +1  
       Interesting=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Interesting' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   3