Knocking on the Door of Life: RNA That Replicates Itself

[JBeukema]

The scientists have synthesized for the first time RNA enzymes that can replicate themselves without the help of any proteins or other cellular components, and the process proceeds indefinitely....


To make the process proceed indefinitely requires only a small starting amount of the two enzymes and a steady supply of the subunits....

Not content to stop there, the researchers generated a variety of enzyme pairs with similar capabilities. They mixed 12 different cross-replicating pairs, together with all of their constituent subunits, and allowed them to compete in a molecular test of survival of the fittest. Most of the time the replicating enzymes would breed true, but on occasion an enzyme would make a mistake by binding one of the subunits from one of the other replicating enzymes. When such "mutations" occurred, the resulting recombinant enzymes also were capable of sustained replication, with the most fit replicators growing in number to dominate the mixture. "To me that's actually the biggest result," says Joyce.

That's right, evolution and natural selection among self-replicating RNA....

"What we've found could be relevant to how life begins, at that key moment when Darwinian evolution starts."....

Joyce says that only when a system is developed in the lab that has the capability of evolving novel functions on its own can it be properly called life. "We're knocking on that door," he says, "But of course we haven't achieved that."....

The subunits in the enzymes the team constructed each contain many nucleotides, so they are relatively complex and not something that would have been found floating in the primordial ooze. But, while the building blocks likely would have been simpler, the work does finally show that a simpler form of RNA-based life is at least possible, which should drive further research to explore the RNA World theory of life's origins.

Getting closer...

Journal reference:
Science Daily, Jan. 10, 2009

1. Lincoln et al. Self-Sustained Replication of an RNA Enzyme. Science, Jan 8, 2009; DOI: 10.1126/science.1167856

 

[Josan]

Getting closer indeed!

This is so interesting! Not only have they shown that natural selection and mutation occur from the most basic levels, but also that self-replicating systems can form by themselves.

Probably some creationist douche will claim this prooves nothing and state that it simply shows that "intelligence created it". Like Kent Hovind has said himself on several occasions. Of course that is just yet another stupid, ignorant, logic fallacy for obvious reasons. And I wait in glee to see some of the more smarter people royaly bring the carnage. :lol:

 

[JBeukema]

What I don't get is why this wasn't all over the news. This is a huge leap for modern science.

 

[AndromedasWake]

Very exciting.

What I don't get is why this wasn't all over the news. This is a huge leap for modern science.

In my experience, huge leaps for modern science rarely make the mainstream news. :cry:

 

[MachineSp1rit]

I hate Hovind but yet on this level u can't object him, you see, Self replicating RNA enzymes is s step towards the origin of life, but RNA itself, enzymes and else, are very complex to be created by itself. the self replication is significant, but since the process is perpetual it needs some kind of regulation, nucleotides for synthesis of new RNA, amino acids for proteins and else. so until we dig deeper Hovind is kind of right. if i don't understand something please tell me.

 

[PuppetXeno]

I hate Hovind but yet on this level u can't object him, you see, Self replicating RNA enzymes is s step towards the origin of life, but RNA itself, enzymes and else, are very complex to be created by itself. the self replication is significant, but since the process is perpetual it needs some kind of regulation, nucleotides for synthesis of new RNA, amino acids for proteins and else. so until we dig deeper Hovind is kind of right. if i don't understand something please tell me.

No, Hovind is not "kind of right". His argument is that because it is so complex, an intelligence must have created it, there would be no other option. It's a god of gaps argument: because we don't understand some parts of the process yet, god must have done it. Wrong, wrong, wrong. It's just pushing the problem a step further: so if an intelligent being did it, where did that intelligent being come from....

More research will reveil more about the process from getting the first self-replicating molecules, getting to the first primitive cells... I'm excited and greatly looking forward to find out more about it.

 

[MachineSp1rit]

are u being dumb on purpose or what??? that's EXACTLY what i said.

 

[starfedrogue]

are u being dumb on purpose or what??? that's EXACTLY what i said.

It's not "exactly" what you said, is it? You just said Hovind was right and left the question of what he is right about hanging.

What PuppetXeno is saying that our current ignorance of some of the processes involved does not validate the God of the Gaps argument: it can never be correct because it is a logical fallacy.

 

[MachineSp1rit]

how about learn to read and stop being a smartass?

i said, until we dig deeper Hovind is kind of right

 

[starfedrogue]

Yes you did, and he isn't.

The fact that we don't yet fully understand where life comes from is not his proposition, it's incidental to it.

 

[ImprobableJoe]

how about learn to read and stop being a smartass?

i said, until we dig deeper Hovind is kind of right

You're still wrong. Posting it in a larger font doesn't change it.

 

[MachineSp1rit]

u are actually right it does not make me right or wrong, it only helps certain words to reach brains of most stupid people, never hurts to try.

 

[PuppetXeno]

u are actually right it does not make me right or wrong, it only helps certain words to reach brains of most stupid people, never hurts to try.

Well you are kind of right to try, but it would've helped if you were kind of right about the point you were trying to get across.

 

[felixthecoach]

Nice post JB. I like it.

 

[Th1sWasATriumph]

u are actually right it does not make me right or wrong, it only helps certain words to reach brains of most stupid people, never hurts to try.

**FIRST WARNING**

If you will behave like an idiot, you will get treated like one. There's a difference between disagreeing in debate and being unproductively rude.