Never before seen: Bioelectricity on single tadpole cell forms "face of frog"!!!

reply to post by Arbitrageur


Remember good old OIL RIG?


Yeah, I see it. The author of the article breaks it in to two and I can understand your reservations concerning this.

Also yeah, paying for these scientific papers sucks. I am always looking for nefarious methods for laying hands on them when I need them. I think it should all be open source. There aren't enough Bioinformatics undergrads to handle the work load anyhow, so I don't know why these guys get all precious about their papers.

The way I understand it pH is a measure of voltage. A pH meter works by measuring the volatge in a given solution and then converting the information with a mathematical algorithm that yields the numbers we would expect to find on a pH chart (0-14; 7 being neutral).

What is producing the voltage is the presence, more or less, of hydrogen ions. The dye in question responds to the presence of negatively charged ions; therefore I would assume that means regions that are acidic and have a low pH.

The dye is only a marker that denotes the presence of the sought after voltage. In other words what we are probably seeing is another redox reaction; the negatively charged regions are 'lighting up' due to oxidation reduction reactions and that is what causes the dye to flare.

We are not really seeing electricity; it is an exchange of electrons between the negatively charged regions, where all the folding and morphing is happening, and the dye which is meant to behave in that manner.

I think I got that.





I will see if I can dig up that article.

reply to post by Frater210


I need to edit this last post a little.

Don't get me wrong. What we are seeing is ground breaking stuff and really is probably one of the most important things to come along in a while.

Why? because although we are not actually seeing the visual 'presence' of the 'electricity', or voltage, we are seeing the marker that denotes its presence. And the shapes that the dyes take prior morphogenesis are phenomenal in their implications.

Realize also, that the computers that we would need (theoretical, quantum computers) to model this efficiently and exploit these implications do not exist yet (to the public knowledge, anyhow) unless you believe D-Wave and I kinda do. www.dwavesys.com...

Also, if this is good, and I have no reason to believe that it is not, none at all, this means that, well... lowundertheradar said it best on page 3...

But this is absolutely the proof that Prof. Rupert Sheldrake has been looking for, in his theory of "formative causation" and morphogenesis!

en.wikipedia.org...

en.wikipedia.org...

If this is, in fact a scientifically authored experiment with video evidence, than I am MORE than thrilled to have witnessed a momentous occasion for the advancement of biological science! Thanks op, for the great thread!

Originally posted by Frater210
The way I understand it pH is a measure of voltage. A pH meter works by measuring the volatge in a given solution and then converting the information with a mathematical algorithm that yields the numbers we would expect to find on a pH chart (0-14; 7 being neutral).

I am not sure how to respond to that except to tell you that one of my past hobbies was maintaining a saltwater aquarium.

The fish were very sensitive to pH. I had several different pH test kits. I'd dip a sample jar in the aquarium, and meter out an exact amount of the sample water to test.

Then I'd meter out a specific number of drops of the pH dye with a special eyedropper.

Then I'd compare the color of the dye-colored water sample to a pH color chart, and by matching the color of the sample to one of the sample colors on the chart, I could determine the pH.

If there were any electrical processes taking place at a microscopic level, they were not apparent to me at all. But I never saw or used any electricity at all in the entire process. I assumed there were some chemical bonds at work with the dye. This may be a rough description of how that dye worked:

www.elmhurst.edu...

Acid - Base Indicators:

The most common method to get an idea about the pH of solution is to use an acid base indicator. An indicator is a large organic molecule that works somewhat like a " color dye". Whereas most dyes do not change color with the amount of acid or base present, there are many molecules, known as acid - base indicators , which do respond to a change in the hydrogen ion concentration.

reply to post by LordBaskettIV

I wonder what those frequency ranges were? Would recording the freqency of the bioelecticity "explosions" in the tadpole experiment produce a similar structure as in the russian luminous wave structure experiment?

Totally love the way you think about this stuff.

Yeah, I bet if we could somehow encode and compile the information in the 'explosions' we could make a lump of stem cells do what ever we want. But I am fully guessing as I am just a fan and not a pro on any of this stuff so that might be kind of sci fi.

But I think we are already doing this in a crude way. Researchers have learned to implant these homeotic 'master control' genes in places where they do not belong, producing some pretty strange results...



If anyone is still wondering why all this is so damned significant then that might be a hint.

reply to post by Arbitrageur


Yes, it is electrical activity that involves the exchange of electrons at the molecular level.

Many of the dyes used in biological research function by reduction oxidation reactions, like methylene blue; but I don't know if your test strips do or do not.

Why dont we all just wait for the results to come back on this one.

I personally found this study amazing.. if only for the bioelectric signals going on here to create life itself..

Why the heck are we all arguing over "where the face is?"... I am pretty sure these scientists know what they are doing... and other scientists will look at it soon enough.

c'mon.. give the OP some credit on this find.. its a bloody good interesting read.. BRAVO!

Besides ... I have kept a saltwater aquarium before... and have no idea what the embryonic face of a tadpole looks like never mind a bioelectric signal!

S+F's for yous!!!

This is cool, but is there any chance that its nothing more than just a coincidence? I'm not saying it is, at all, I'm just thinking about that possibility, too. Even though those guys know what they're talking more than any of us here, probably.

I was skeptical of what you were alluding until I read the article. This is more evidence we are designed as bio-mechanical entities and evolution is crap. This gives more credence to an article I wrote. LINK

Originally posted by Cryptonomicon
You must watch the video here at the link to Physorg.

It appears that this single cell gets an "image" of the structure the cell will eventually grow into (frog face) BEFORE it begins growing!!! You can actually see the frog to be's face!

The face of a frog: Time-lapse video reveals never-before-seen bioelectric pattern

For the first time, Tufts University biologists have reported that bioelectrical signals are necessary for normal head and facial formation in an organism and have captured that process in a time-lapse video that reveals never-before-seen patterns of visible bioelectrical signals outlining where eyes, nose, mouth, and other features will appear in an embryonic tadpole.

This is ground breaking, and amazing. Is it the SPIRIT of the frog which "guides" the cells?? Or is it just science? YOU DECIDE!!!!

edit on 19-7-2011 by Cryptonomicon because: (no reason given)

Originally posted by SuperiorEd

I was skeptical of what you were alluding until I read the article. This is more evidence we are designed as bio-mechanical entities and evolution is crap. This gives more credence to an article I wrote. LINK

Why is it that on the one hand theists are happy to dismiss science that doesn't support their world view yet are more than happy to extrapolate and contort it to lend credence to their fairy tales when it suits them? You can't have it both ways. Even if (and it's a big IF) we take this pop-sci article at face value, it has nothing to do with evolution what so ever, let alone falsify it.

The only reason I became a member was to further study layman philosophy in the conflict between creationism and evolutionism. But Whew.... too much science in these opinions for me to handle. I agree with holding out until more research results come in and the phenomena is repeated in other species embryos. At the moment I kinda think it's an ink blot reaction where we see what we want. But it could also be my sisters sonogram; and the closer I look, the more I think it's a boy......

reply to post by Cryptonomicon


I'd say it is the work of GOD. God is the creator.

reply to post by TrueBrit


It's no wonder there are similarities because everything is from the same Creator.

as above
so below.
third line. it's a fractal effin omniverse.

I can only speak for me, but I have not seen a piece of science that does not lead to the conclusion of a creator. You make an assumption that I refer to God as the creator. Although I do see our conception of God as the only candidate, we may be able to one day see it differently. Today, by the evidence, we are designed. It becomes increasingly hard to deny. I value your perspective, but I value mine more, as it should be. My view is well presented if you follow the link. If you have an article or two to present your view, I'm sure we would all be interested. We all ride this spaceship together in the darkness of space.

Originally posted by john_bmth

Originally posted by SuperiorEd

I was skeptical of what you were alluding until I read the article. This is more evidence we are designed as bio-mechanical entities and evolution is crap. This gives more credence to an article I wrote. LINK

Why is it that on the one hand theists are happy to dismiss science that doesn't support their world view yet are more than happy to extrapolate and contort it to lend credence to their fairy tales when it suits them? You can't have it both ways. Even if (and it's a big IF) we take this pop-sci article at face value, it has nothing to do with evolution what so ever, let alone falsify it.

Hi, everyone.

Well, it appears that we are not to be rescued by any of ATS's science dynamos so I will continue to try to convey the importance of this video and it's meaning to other members.

I have been to Developmental Dynamics and the abstract and details of the paper V-ATPase-dependent ectodermal voltage and ph regionalization are required for craniofacial morphogenesis is easy to access...
onlinelibrary.wiley.com...


I am going to post some bits here and decipher them a little for you.

The Article:

Using voltage and pH reporter dyes, we have discovered a never-before-seen regionalization of the Xenopus ectoderm, with cell subpopulations delimited by different membrane voltage and pH.

This may clear up where the voltage is coming from...membrane voltage
Wikipedia:

Membrane potential (or transmembrane potential) is the difference in voltage (or electrical potential difference) between the interior and exterior of a cell (Vinterior − Vexterior). All cells are surrounded by a plasma membrane composed of a lipid bilayer with a variety of molecular structures embedded in it.

en.wikipedia.org...

So you can see that the dyes used are meant to react to 'membrane voltage'; regions of negative and positive ions. What is confusing people is that they do not realize the electrical nature of our organism and do not associate hydrogen ion potentials with electricity. But it is and they are.

Time-lapse movie of the dynamic patterns of regions distinguished by membrane voltage .Embryos were stained using the ratiometric CC2-DiBAC double dye technique .Brighter means the voltage is more negative inside the cell (more polarized), darker means less negative (less polarized).

OK. So we understand now that the dye is responding to areas with high concentrations of negative hydrogen ions. That is how the patterns are seen (remember; time lapsed over eighteen hours).

Three distinct types of dynamic pattern are illustrated. The earliest, course I, is best illustrated in the embryo on the right: Course I is a wave of hyperpolarization that travels across the gastrula. When this flash is over, the embryo begins to rotate in its vitelline envelope, and the dorsal midline appears, revealing that the view is now of the left side of the embryo.

So we see that we were correct in assuming that what we were seeing was the gastrula; so it is an embryo, a collection of cells that have been differentiated in to 'back' and 'front'. Go back to page three for the image related to gastrulation.

The end of course I and the second pattern, course II, are clear on the left embryo. The interior of the closing neural tube appears at the upper edge of the embryo and moves towards the viewer. As the tube closes and its signal disappears from view, other temporary regions of brightness appear in regions delineating the future face.

Now I understand why it is time lapsed from 18 hours. This would all be happening pretty slowly if viewed in real time. But that makes sense considering the incredibly complex nature of protein synthesis and all the folding and twisting of the new epithelial layers as the organism develops. Very important stuff as this confirms years of Biological research.

Course III is clear on both embryos. Randomly placed foci of brightness appear, spread, then disappear as the embryos change shape from spheres to flatter, elongated ovals.

So.

What we are seeing here does not require any stretch of the imagination. What we see is exactly what the abstract says that we see. Two tadpole gastrulae whose development beyond the stage of gastrulation is signalled by bioelectric voltage (membrane potentials) and that voltage can be marked and revealed using dyes.

Indeed, we are witnessing what seems to be the bioelectric 'template' that is involved in some mysterious manner with embryonic development and morphogenesis.


Sheldrake 1. Haters 0.

I need to let some of you know...

There is not too much science involved in understanding what these scientists were up to and what they have captured on video.

I have yet to discover one aspect of understanding this that is not covered in a basic college Freshman level Biology course.

It should be understood that we do not have to wait until these experiments are repeated with higher and higher order vertebrates until we get to humans. That is what Model Organisms are for...

Often used model organisms in developmental biology include the following:

Vertebrates:

Zebrafish (Danio rerio)

Medakafish (Oryzias latipes Fugu)

Pufferfish (Takifugu rubripes)

Frog (Xenopus laevis, Xenopus tropicalis)

Chicken (Gallus gallus)

Mouse (Mus musculus)

en.wikipedia.org...

en.wikipedia.org...

All they really have to do is move to the mouse next as I believe that the Mouse is the standard model organism used for Human embryology research.

The video is really groundbreaking.

And, although it will be exciting to watch as this develops, it is OK to go ahead and get excited now.

I see another thing that is throwing people...

Guys, this was an egg cell; a zygote.

Now it is a gastrula; but it is just about to become an embryo.




Just before the 'wave of chemical light' passes over it it was called a gastrula. I will try to explain.


You see, as the cells of a newly formed organism (Zygote) divide and divide and divide they go through a bunch of contortions because back needs to be differentiated from front and left from right and tissue layers need to differentiate themselves in to endoderm, ectoderm and mesoderm.

At the final stages of the initial processes involved in this procedure what is called the Gastrula is produced. A gastrula looks like this. First it is a hollow ball but after 'gastrulation' you get this...





Now get this...We all look like that before our new tissue layers begin to differentiate and turn us in to what we are supposed to look like. We were all once a gastrula.

So what you are seeing in this video is a lump of cells that have just gone through gastrulation. It is a barely differentiated ball of cells. It could become just about any vertebrate at that point.

Then we see the wave of chemical light which denotes the presence of the voltage (negative ions) that pre-encodes in some way what the organism will become and then see that the organism does indeed become that.

Truly amazing.

I hope that that helps.

reply to post by Frater210


Excellent run down.

Also, this just an observation, but the picture you posted of the cell membrane with the + and - charges is an exact replica of how a capacitor works in an electronic circuit. The cell membrane is acting as the Dielectric. The way the dye/stain works now makes a little more sence to me to. The increase in negative charges suggests either charging, discharging, or even frequency filtering( which may point back to those russians using frequency to get ionic shapes to appear). As the capacitors(tiny cells in this case) start to fire up, the energy inflow makes the dye react. And lo and behold, it's an instuction(or something) that premaps just what this thing will grow up to be.

A capacitor can also do signal processing:

The energy stored in a capacitor can be used to represent information, either in binary form, as in DRAMs, or in analogue form, as in analog sampled filters and CCDs. Capacitors can be used in analog circuits as components of integrators or more complex filters and in negative feedback loop stabilization. Signal processing circuits also use capacitors to integrate a current signal.

Nerd Warning
This all reminds me alot of Oscillating Infinite State Machines, or OISM

"A synthetic nervous system capable of rudimental learning and self-organization for robotic applications having a control circuit and servo actuators to mimic natural bio-neural processes. Simple oscillators capable of being modulated in frequency, phase, amplitude and DC offset act as analog processing elements or oscillating infinite state machines. A central pattern generator utilizing periodic, quasi-periodic, or chaotic oscillators or phase shifters, or a combination thereof, along with a basic motor neuron circuit enables multiple servos to coordinate their behavior to enable bio-inspired locomotion such as walking, swimming, flapping, crawling, and the like. Sensors interfaced to the control circuit provide a wide range of adaptive behavior such as following a light source, avoiding an obstacle, and shifting balance point. Overlapping or concurrent sensor inputs can provide complex behavior with minimal circuitry."

Oscillating Infinite State Machine (OISM)

Have biologists really overlooked circuit theory? Must be taboo to be into biomimedics or whatever...

reply to post by LordBaskettIV

Have biologists really overlooked circuit theory? Must be taboo to be into biomimedics or whatever...

This is a crazy question that can only lead to much gnashing of teeth and rending of hair.

The answer is no. But if you go out to find the answer to your question (and you can) you will be sucked down the Rabbit Hole of all rabbit holes.

Something bad happened in the 50s and 60s. See, Cybernetics was just being born then from the carcass that was General Systems Theory and it looked like all the sciences were going to get an overhaul and everyone was going to start talking; and cooperating and then something bad happened. I don't know what it was.

But it has allowed things to remain the same on the surface while behind the scenes massive Bioinformatics programs all over the world generate vast amounts of data (The Human Genome Project) and proteins are mapped and categorized like crazy.

And then we just get these little drips and drops like this video. And by the time they get here Biology has changed so much from when everyone took it in high school that no one knows what the hell is going on.

People who have been out of it for a while have a lot to catch up with. Look at how much I had to cover just to make sense out of the dyes. The data is being generated faster than anyone can organize it and figure out what to do with it. That is why we are waiting on this huge leap in computing power that Quantum Computers may bring us.

Anyway, all that GST stuff I wrote above is just sort of an off the cuff rant but if you go out to see what's up with Biology and other sciences like Sociology and Linguistics you will probably come to similar conclusions.

"Cybernetics is a network of constant interactions and communications".

Norbert Wiener (1894–1964) coined the term in 1948 from the Greek word for steersman.

Yes, his name was Norbert Wiener.

reply to post by Frater210


Thanks for elaborating on this whole issue. Great posts.

One question, would it be fair to assume the electrical current has a certain frequency (carrying a signal)?

In that case I wonder what would happen if you tampered with the frequency?

Peace