Newly found microbe is close relative of complex life.

Hadn't seen this in the O&C forum yet:

Newly found microbe is close relative of complex life.

All organisms on Earth are classified as either prokaryotes, which have simple cells, or eukaryotes, which have larger, more complex cells.

But the two cell types are so divergent that understanding how one evolved from the other has foxed biologists.

The new microbes, reported in Nature journal, go some way to bridging that gap.

They have been named Lokiarchaeota, partly after the Loki's Castle volcanic vent system lying 15km away from the site where the microbes' genetic material was isolated in cold marine sediments of the Arctic Mid-Ocean Ridge.

If anyone wants to spring for the actual published paper in Nature, here's the link.

Editor's summary:

Eukaryotic cells are so very different from prokaryotes that understanding eukaryote origins and ancestry has been a puzzle. Genetic work places archaea closer than bacteria to eukaryotes, but biochemically and morphologically, archaea are closer to bacteria than to eukaryotes. But now Thijs Ettema and colleagues have identified archaea — from a core sample from the Loki's Castle hydrothermal active venting site — that fit the bill as a genomic 'starter-kit' to support the increase in the cellular and genomic complexity that is characteristic of eukaryotes. This novel archaeal group, named Lokiarchaeota, is an immediate sister group of eukaryotes in phylogenetic analyses and has a repertoire of proteins otherwise characteristic of eukaryotes.

Exciting developments in understanding how modern organisms emerged from earlier ones here on Earth!

Fascinating article. S&F. Great example of how scientific discovery fills in the holes and gaps in the fossil record and improves our understanding of how it all comes together.

a reply to: iterationzero

Whelp add another piece of proof to the growing mountain in favor of Evolution. How you can have doubts that this is a real process still is beyond me.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

I have come to the conclusion that denying it must be a willful act, as the evidence is there in abundance and the process is easy to understand.

a reply to: stumason

Or maybe people can have differing opinions on the same fact? Novel idea I know...

a reply to: Dem0nc1eaner

Thing is, we don't have "differing opinions on the same fact" - they believe in something else entirely, namely some imaginary cloud being directing life forms when it has been shown, over and over, it is a simple biological process.

No need for Sky fairies.

a reply to: Dem0nc1eaner

No, the people who have are of the opinion that evolution is not the explanation for biodiversity are wrong.

Not all opinions are equal.