Sex, Genitals and the Origin of Species

I haven't posted in a while due to "other commitments", but things have eased up and I'm back. And it looks like the Science Gods have smiled upon me because I found a wonderful article on ScienceDaily to comment on as my first "return" post. Depending on how you feel about beetles, research done by Armin Moczek and Harald Parzer could either have you giving thanks you're not a scientist or extolling the virtues of horny, or better yet, not-so-horny, bugs.
Dr. Moczek and Dr. Parzer, in essence, went around analyzing the horns and genitals of four populations of Onthophagus taurus horned beetles. They found that the larger the horns, the smaller the reproductive equipment, so to speak, and viceversa. This information in and of itself was not all that new; apparently biologists LOVE checking out beetle genitalia, because another study was published in 2006 reporting similar findings. The conclusions drawn by Moczek and Parzer are what's creating the buzz: they argue that SINCE natural selection is working on "changing" horn size, AND since changes in genital size go along for the ride as well, AND changes in genital size often mean creating incompatibilities in sexual reproduction, THEN natural selection operating through secondary sex characteristics (horns, used by males to drive off competing males and secure mates) can drive speciation. So changes in horn size could be responsible, indirectly, for the origination of different species of horned beetle. Horn size can change for any number of reasons, argue the researchers; for example, depending on population density, it might not be advantageous for a male to spend all of his time dueling with a large number of competitors and so large horns wouldn't really be necessary. There is a great deal of variation among the species of beetles studied, so the mechanism isn't really all that cut and dry. And the question still hasn't been addressed as to how life originated in the first place. If there was no life on Earth, not to mention genitalia, how did the very first instance of speciation occur? Natural selection had no horns to work on, so something else had to be occurring...

Mars Buzz

As a quick update to the buzz regarding Phoenix lander data that was being kept "hush-hush": apparently, there had been no Presidential briefing made by NASA, AND the fact that perchlorates would indicate that life could NEVER have developed on Mars is not exactly true, either. At this point, it's too early to say what the presence of perchlorates would mean to the potential for finding life on the Red Planet. NASA, for the first time, actually had to go public with its news before scientists had completed their analysis of the Phoenix lander data because of all the buzz being generated, some false, especially online.

BEYOND's "Origins Initiative"

There doesn't seem to be much information on it at the moment, but the BEYOND Center at Arizona State University is organizing a symposium, to be held in April 2009, to launch ASU's "Origins Initiative". The speakers scheduled include none other than the mighty Stephen Hawking himself, as well as Richard Dawkins, Craig Venter and Lawrence Krauss, the author of "The Physics of Star Trek", and others.

Exploring Life's Origin

This site on the origin of life on Earth is visually quite captivating. What's interesting, though, is the fact that, as reflected even on other sites, scientists seem relatively comfortable with the variety of possible situations that led to the appearance of the first cells, while the appearance of multi-cellularity just boggles everyone's minds. One of the most common explanations given for the existence of multi-celled organisms is that they evolved as a result of symbiotic relationships between types of cells that were already in existence. When it comes to providing details regarding the mechanism that led from symbiosis to full-fledged multi-cellularity, though, the data come up somewhat short. Once multi-cellularity appears, scientists breathe a sigh of relief and once again feel comfortable speculating on mechanisms and processes, invoking natural selection and other safety blankets. But that HUGE gap between the first cells and structurally complex organisms sticks out like a sore thumb and will have to be addressed sooner or later.

Bad news from Mars?

Right after news started circulating that the Phoenix lander had more data from Mars relating to the planet's "potential for life", New Scientist Space Blog, as well as other sources, reported on some preliminary information that may not be what scientists had hoped for. According to the blog, a chemical with extraordinary oxidizing capability, perchlorate, has been found in Phoenix soil samples. Such a substance is very harmful for life and could even "consume any fossil remains of life", according to planetary scientist Mark Bullock. Evidence of strong oxidants in the soil on Mars had also been found by Viking landers. Because perchlorate is also associated with rocket fuel, though, there is the possibility that the soil samples were contaminated. NASA is being very cautious in drawing conclusions, as there have been soil samples taken that show no evidence of perchlorate or other chemicals that seem to be so detrimental to life.

Origins - A Skeptics Society Conference

On October 3rd and 4th, the Skeptics Society will be holding a conference entitled "Origins" and hosted by Dr. Michael Shermer and Dr. Philip Clayton. Partly funded by the John Templeton Foundation, the conference aims to discuss what have been called the "Big Questions", such as the origin of the universe, the origins of the laws of nature, the origin of time, the origin of life and complex life and the origin of brains and consciousness. The conference also claims to address the controversial issue of whether science makes belief in God obsolete.

The speakers at the conference, which will be held at the California Institute of Technology, include Dr. Sean Carroll, Senior Research Associate in Physics at the California Institute of Technology, Dr. Philip Clayton, Professor of Religion and Philosophy at Claremont Graduate University and Ingraham Professor at Claremont School of Theology, Dr. Paul Davies, a theoretical physicist, cosmologist and astrobiologist at Arizona State University, Dr. Stuart Kauffman, a founding director of the Institute for Biocomplexity and Informatics, a professor of biological sciences, physics and astronomy at the University of Calgary and Emeritus Professor of Biochemistry at the University of Pennyslvania, Dr. Christof Koch, a Professor of Cognitive and Behavioral Biology at Caltech, Dr. Kenneth Miller, a Professor of Biology at Brown University, Dr. Nancey Murphy, Professor of Christian Philosophy at Fuller Theological Seminary, Dr. Donald Prothero, Professor of Geology at Occidental College, Dr. Hugh Ross, Ph.D. in astronomy and founding director of Reasons to Believe, Dr. Michael Shermer, cofounder of the Skeptics Society and an adjunct professor at Claremont Graduate University, Dr. Victor Stenger, Emeritus Professor of Physics and Astronomy at the University of Hawaii and adjunct professor of Philosophy at the University of Colorado, and Dr. Leonard Susskind, the discoverer of string theory and Professor of Theoretical Physics at Stanford University.

For more information on the conference and on the Skeptics Society, visit skeptic.com.

NASA surprise

Well, looks like NASA scientists haven't quite revealed everything they've learned so far from the Mars Phoenix lander. The announcement regarding the discovery of water was just a teaser, one that didn't come as a surprise to many researchers. There are far more interesting results obtained from Phoenix lander samples and NASA is being a bit hush-hush about it, stating that they don't want to make any announcements until they've thoroughly analyzed the data. The public will hear the results sometime in mid-August or September, though the President's office has already been briefed. The new data apparently have something to say about the potential for Mars to support life.

NASA's Astrobiology Roadmap

Because Astrobiology is such an interdisciplinary field, requiring input from a vast array of scientific areas, NASA decided to put together a document that outlines concepts and research "pathways" to help organize this still emerging field. It was first published in 2003, but is scheduled for regular updates to accommodate new discoveries. A large part of the Roadmap, and of Astrobiology in general, is dedicated to understanding the origin of life. Indeed, if scientists aren't sure as to how life originated on Earth, or what conditions are necessary (besides the mere presence of liquid water) for the emergence of life, how will they know what to look for on other planets, short of the presence of living creatures (or their obvious remains) in existence at the moment of exploration? Therefore, origin of life research, as well as research studying the evolution of life, is at the core of astrobiological initiatives.

The visibility of the field of Astrobiology and its scientists is continuing to increase. Check out Suzan Mazur's interview with Roger Buick, University of Washington.

Water on Mars

Credit and Copyright Ellen Roper

NASA announced this week that "for the first time, Martian water has been touched and tasted". According to results obtained by heating a soil sample taken by the Phoenix Mars Lander's robotic arm, vapors released by the heating process gave clear indication of the presence of water. A number of different sources are reporting on the story, including Astrobiology Magazine. What does this mean for the field of Astrobiology? Water is the stuff of life, so any planet that can be shown to contain or have contained water is a prime candidate for being able to support life. A prime question to be answered is: given the fact that Mars has water, like Earth, may we expect the life to be found to be like Earth life? While the physics and chemistry and mineralogy on Mars is the same as on Earth, we probably can't expect much resemblance if life is presumed to have evolved based on the lengthy, complex system of environmental changes that occurred on Earth over millions of years. On the other hand, if life is the result of self-organized phenomena, as are chemicals, crystals and minerals, then the people we meet on the Red Planet will look very familiar to us.

J. Craig Venter

One of the most prolific scientists intent on creating synthetic life is Dr. J. Craig Venter. The man's actually got a whole institute named after him. Earlier this year, the Science section of wired.com reported on findings published in the magazine Science regarding the creation of the "first man-made genome" by Venter and colleagues. Essentially, yeast was used to "stitch together four long strands of DNA into the genome of a bacterium". This research, though, isn't focused so much on the origin of life but rather on how humans can control the output of synthetic organisms to their own advantage. Think indentured bacteria spewing forth biofuels.

Artificial Life

There are a number of labs throughout the US and around the world trying to understand just how life originated in the universe and/or on planet Earth. A number of these labs approach the question by attempting to synthesize life themselves, by using software, hardware, or chemical processes. Obviously, creating a computer program that is able to simulate the patterns of stripes on a zebra doesn't lead directly to the conclusion that mother nature is actually a computer programmer, but may shed some light on possible mechanisms for the creation of biological form and how to search for those mechanisms.

As mentioned above, there are three different types of methods used in the field of artificial life. Simulations using computer programs are referred to as "soft" artificial life, those using robotic applications are referred to as "hard" artificial life, while those using biochemistry are referred to as "wet" artificial life. While computer simulations and robots are neat-looking, the creation of synthetic life, or primitive-looking cells that could represent the ancestors of biological life, is the holy grail of Astrobiology, as well as a multitude of fields in the Life Sciences.

The First Cells?

Harvard scientists believe they are closer to understanding how cells arose, nearly 3.5 billion years ago. Under just the right conditions, fatty acids (which were stirred up by the ever-popular hydrothermal vents) would spontaneously arrange themselves, or self-organize, into small vesicles. These vesicles could have led, then, to what researchers have endearingly dubbed "protocells". This protocell theory has been around for quite a while, but the Harvard team took it a step further by modeling a protocell that is "capable of building, copying and containing DNA". This seems to imply that once DNA is accounted for within a cell, then the question becomes merely one of time; given enough of it (time, that is), all other, more complex, forms of life can be easily explained through the process of natural selection. While the protocell theory is an interesting one, perhaps the question of increasing complexity should not be merely waved away with the convenient wand of natural selection.

So what exactly is ASTROBIOLOGY and why is it important? (Better yet, why are millions of dollars of government funding being spent on it annually?) NewScientistSpace has a special section on the field of astrobiology, which you can check out here. (It's a few years old, but it gives a good overview)

According to Astrobiology Magazine, "Many of the ingredients for life formed in outer space. The Earth formed from star dust, and later meteorites and comets delivered even more materials to our planet. But scientists are still unsure which molecules played the most important roles in life's origin." The Pinwheel Galaxy, pictured above, is being studied to further the theory that organic molecules present in outer space could have been responsible for the origin of life on Earth. Read more here.

From Molecular Clouds to the Origin of Life

Many evolutionary biologists are wary of the "origin of life" debate, as Darwinian dogma and the laws of natural selection can do little to explain how life arose from non-life. A great number of astrobiologists, on the other hand, don't fear the issue, as they are not limited by Darwin. They look to concepts of self-organization, though they mainly focus on chemical processes, as discussed in this paper, authored by researchers in the Astrobiology Group at Leiden University.

Interview with Robert Hazen

Independent journalist Suzan Mazur, of "Altenberg 16" fame, has recently posted her interview with Geophysicist (and trumpet player, it turns out) Robert Hazen. Read the interview here.