IMPORTANT CORRECTION! Well this was short lived lol. Thank you to commenter ritac9769 kzitem.info/news/bejne/p4yo2JmQqWZ0h20 Also to everyone saying endosymbiosis occurred twice, it actually probably occurred many times. But this is after eukaryotes (EU carriots, banned by Brexit) evolved phagocytosis. Hence why I said it is thought endosymbiosis is thought to have occurred only once to a *prokaryote*. But who knows, it’s still mostly guesswork
@ritac9769
8 ай бұрын
Sorry to burst your bubble (pun intended) but in 2020 some of the authors made the following statement in a follow up paper "We found that the host bacterium was not intact and the cell wall was broken; hence, the bacteria found inside of the host were not endosymbionts, but happen to be associated independently within cytoplasm of dead bacteria." The key thing to note is that they had a sample of ONE SINGLE CELL that was immobilized in epoxy resin and imaged. The image was very interesting but in no way is n=1, with no culturing, genetic, or biochemical analysis, sufficient to be making claims about the relationships between the apparent microbes present, i.e. endosymbiosis. As we now know, it was just a biased interpretation based on a single view of the cell, and reminds me of the parable of the blind men and the elephant.
@ritac9769
8 ай бұрын
Nick Lane briefly referenced the organism in a review he wrote as "mysterious" and nothing else. No doubt he was being very speculative about the image. Although, I've had The Vital Question on my bookshelf for years so maybe I should read it.
@PMX
8 ай бұрын
DOI: 10.1508/cytologia.85.209 for anyone interested
@pattheplanter
8 ай бұрын
Except that quote was not referring to the Parakaryon specimen, they were discussing several bacteria they had found that had other bacteria inside the dead cell. In the discussion section they clearly skirted around the possibility that the Parakaryon specimen was just a recently attacked bacterium with the attacker inside it. They dismiss Wujek's interprettion of intracellular bacteria in a cyanobacterium but then propose a vague mechanism by which Parakaryon could have been real. In two other papers in 2016 and 2018 they discussed two other discoveries they made at that location, a spiral bacterium that looks exactly like the "endosymbiont" of "Parakaryon" and an amorphous bacterium that could look like the larger cell, in my non-academic opinion. I would postulate that the spiral bacterium breaks the cell wall of the prey carefully so that it does not all spill out all at once as would happen with many such attacks. We don't have enough information, perhaps the spiral bacterium is about to be digested? The "nucleoid membrane" may simply be the inner cell wall that has separated. "Parakaryon myojinensis" looks like an embarrassingly overenthusiastic interpretation of minimal evidence in the light of subsequent discoveries but I don't think the authors have actually admitted it yet.
@施素珊
8 ай бұрын
I don't see any "bubble" here, but I'm sure everyone interested in this topic (including RF) would appreciate relevant links to more information, particularly if there was a partial or complete retraction. Less snark, more info, please!
@HotelPapa100
8 ай бұрын
@@施素珊 "bubble" referred to the pseudo-nucleus.
@jcortese3300
8 ай бұрын
Minor quibble: this isn't proof that it's only happened twice, but that it's only happened and lasted twice. It could have happened many times, but for some reason it only caught in a big way once and has hung on for who knows how long again in a small way. It's a bit like lightning strikes and forest fires. You can have lots of strikes, but it only takes ONE to catch in a big way and consume the fuel, making other strikes irrelevant. The other strikes can happen, they just don't have anything left to catch on or only catch on in a transient, niche way.
@OmniversalInsect
8 ай бұрын
That makes a lot more sense. All the other times the smaller cell was probably either digested or ended up killing the bigger cell.
@AelwynMr
8 ай бұрын
My guess would be that it happened many many times, but our version of the symbiosis was more efficient or versatile and drove all the other extinct. Same with the origin of life: I seriously doubt that it happened just once, if the environment was the right one, but only one way to be alive remains, as far as we know.
@kb-jz2hu
8 ай бұрын
A previous occurence might still be viable and we just haven't been lucky enough to have come across it.
@jcortese3300
8 ай бұрын
@@kb-jz2hu Agreed! Clearly, we missed this one for a long time. Who knows what else is hiding in the nooks and crannies where conventional life can't get?
@medlife2
8 ай бұрын
Of course, but we can only go on what we find. One of the theories is that this happens frequently (but then why have we never seen it another time) or that it only happened once but this is just a living fossil that hasn’t evolved for billions of years (unlikely that is the case if it exists in such tiny numbers that it’s only been found once). So it seems we only have robust evidence for once, and this flimsy evidence for twice, even if we can logically conclude it’s probably a higher number.
@dan_goodman
8 ай бұрын
Nature loves messing with biologists and their fancy classification systems Also: You carriots
@imightbebiased9311
8 ай бұрын
What do you mean YOU carriots?!
@Antoine893
8 ай бұрын
My existence as a carriot feels attacked
@phillyphakename1255
8 ай бұрын
Nature likes messing with biologists fancy classification systems, and the KZitem auto captions algorithm likes messing with biologists fancy classification words.
@andrewharrison8436
8 ай бұрын
@@imightbebiased9311 It's part of the text on screen!
@LafayetteCCurtis
8 ай бұрын
Yeah, how dare he call us carriots
@jimbobur
8 ай бұрын
2:53 Shout-out to all you carriots out there!
@yhubtfufvcfyfc
8 ай бұрын
I met Nick Lane at a seminar right before I started university and we talked a bunch about the origins of life. Eventually he wondered about what I wanted to study and helped me crystallize my conflicting thoughts about doing physics or biology and said something that has shaped my path in life significantly. "The most important questions in physics are in biology". Understanding exactly how life works on the smallest scale will be important and I hope that I will be able to help with that eventually.
@yairlll
8 ай бұрын
Yay for the second channel! ❤ Yet another quibble, though - IIRC the endosymbiotic story is known to have happened a second time in eukaryotes - chloroplasts.
@medlife2
8 ай бұрын
Agreed, that’s why I said only happened once to prokaryotes, as endosymbiosis over eukaryotes had evolved phagocytosis has probably occurred multiple times, including chloroplasts being incorporated
@GinoGiotto
8 ай бұрын
No, we are probably not in front of a new domain of life (outside Bacteria, Eukaryotes and Archaea). The original author published a following article admitting that it was likely a dead bacteria with a broken cell wall (so no endosymbiosis and no new domain of life). Unfortunately it seems that the truth failed to be spread to the general public here, considering also the fact that the corresponding wikipedia page is not updated (I would like to link the article of the original author, but yt hid my first comment).
@cerocero2817
8 ай бұрын
Your comment seems to have been cut off. ¿Can you name the article so that I can find it?
@pattheplanter
8 ай бұрын
Most youtube comments don't allow links except to youtube itself. Just name the paper and anyone can find it on Google Scholar.
@pattheplanter
8 ай бұрын
I have updated the Wikipedia article as far as I can. If only some world-famous microbiologist would stand up, point at it and laugh, on the record in a citable form.
@施素珊
8 ай бұрын
Terrific! With all the meaningless pseudoscience out there, I depend on a handful of reliable science communicators like you to point out the genuinely significant science news. Thanks for this!
@ritac9769
8 ай бұрын
The authors retracted this in 2020 as completely incorrect.
@施素珊
8 ай бұрын
Source? I can't find any mention of a retraction, or even a controversy about retraction.
@Barnaclebeard
8 ай бұрын
I've got some bad news for you... Beyond this little gaff, our host has shown before that he is willing to assay on things he doesn't know as much about as he thinks.
@bilboswaggings
8 ай бұрын
You can't take any youtubers claims as gospel, so please check claims rather than just believing what they say They might research stuff, but are always biased
@bilboswaggings
8 ай бұрын
@@ritac9769where?
@LeoStaley
8 ай бұрын
"Mitochondria are the power" Oh, he's gonna say the correction!, "station of the cell" Everyone: yassss
@davidwood6109
8 ай бұрын
That’s amazing, thank you. Wasn’t there an idea that chloroplasts were also from endosymbiosis?
@sciencenerd7639
8 ай бұрын
I would love to find out whether it's ribosomes resemble prokaryote 70S ribosomes or eukaryote 80S ribosomes (or neither even). That would be an important clue. It could be a eukaryote which lost several features. I hope they find more of it so we can learn more of its ribosome structure as well as its DNA.
@therongjr
8 ай бұрын
Chloroplasts would have been the second time an endosymbiotic event took place. (Others have already pointed out that this here was likely an artifact of microscopy sample preparation.)
@hanshans387
8 ай бұрын
I think at one point the autosubtitles said "you carrots" xD
@ginnyjollykidd
8 ай бұрын
Amazing event! Certainly it seems an evolutionary step, as momentous as the discovery of urkaryotes.
@richardsmith5249
8 ай бұрын
Outstanding blooper in the subtitles: "all you carriots".
@loc4725
8 ай бұрын
Except chloroplasts in plants appears to be another example of endo-symbiosis. They have their own DNA just like mitochondria and perform a similar roll, which is perhaps interesting in itself.
@pattheplanter
8 ай бұрын
They were already eukaryotes when they decided to bring more pets into the menagerie.
@loc4725
8 ай бұрын
@@pattheplanter*"as far as we know that only happened to a prokaryote once in history"* (1:08). It appears to have happened twice, once with mitochondria and once with chloroplasts. I'm not aware of any research showing any ancestor who was both a eukaryote and who added chloroplasts, but would be happy to have a look if you have any references.
@pattheplanter
8 ай бұрын
@@loc4725 Chloroplasts are only found in eukaryotes, if you know of any research showing that any prokaryote added chloroplasts, I would be happy to have a look at it.
@yeasr7781
8 ай бұрын
The subtitles say You carriots And that just sounds like something a medical KZitemr would call his audience
@fyang1429
8 ай бұрын
In academia, if a discovery that looks truly amazing has no follow up for this long, we consider it fake or just some unreplicable artifact. As a result, we really warn ourselves a lot against drawing any conclusions from single papers. Also, considering the poor state of Japanese science these days (yes, even 10 years ago), it’s totally possible they just made some mistakes.
@ritac9769
8 ай бұрын
Yeah, spot on. The authors said in 2020 the cell was not intact and that those were not endosymbionts.
@pattheplanter
8 ай бұрын
@@ritac9769 Not what they said about Parakaryon in that 2020 paper, they were talking about a different specimen. Though perhaps only from deep embarrassment about their obvious overenthusiasm about declaring the discovery of a new domain of life. They still tried to justify "Parakaryon". For those who want to read that paper, it is called "Deep-Sea Bacteria Harboring Bacterial Endosymbionts in a Cytoplasm?: 3D Electron Microscopy by Serial Ultrathin Sectioning of Freeze-Substituted Specimen".
@pooroldnostradamus
8 ай бұрын
What's the matter with Japanese science?
@fyang1429
8 ай бұрын
@@pooroldnostradamus Structural issues likely stemmed from a 2003 law that may have led to less funding and more non-research duties for researchers. I don't know what's exactly wrong but it's retreating on all fronts based on all kinds of statistics. If you are in academia it only seems more astounding. In the 2000s you could find copious respectable and well-researched papers, but slowly into the later 2010s they turn into doing increasingly insignificant stuff. Personally, I haven't found a "good" Japanese paper in my field since ~2012.
@ooooneeee
8 ай бұрын
Aaand now Robin has apologized for this video. If it's too good to be true (and based on one single fricking cell) it's much more likely to be shoddy science then truth.
@drgoettinger
8 ай бұрын
You meant THIRD time, not second, didn’t you? 🤔 🌱 In plant cells it is believed there were two separate endosymbiotic events: one that led to mitochondria and another that led to chloroplasts. 🧬 This theory is supported by chloroplasts’ similarity to certain bacteria in terms of DNA, ribosomes, and reproduction by binary fission. 🧫 Regarding their construction, chloroplasts are enclosed by a double membrane and contain a fluid called stroma, further supporting the endosymbiotic theory and suggests a bacterial origin for chloroplasts. 3️⃣ So, as for the other form of life you are referring to, this would be the THIRD endosymbiotic event we would know of. Or am I relying on outdated or wrong information here?
@pattheplanter
8 ай бұрын
He specified prokaryotes, chloroplasts were added by an organism that was already a eukaryote.
@drgoettinger
8 ай бұрын
Thank you for your addition. 🙏🏽 Yes, you're right. I should probably have listened a little more carefully. Subtle but relevant difference. 💡
@holacabeza
8 ай бұрын
No YOU carriot
@pneudmatic
8 ай бұрын
Totally different. Three eyes, but I think I've seen that smirk before.
@joeyhinds6216
8 ай бұрын
This goes against my understanding that endosymbiosis has occurred multiple times evidenced by other organelles in plants such as chloroplast, chromophores, and leukocytes. There are even some organisms that seem to have taken up other eukaryotes that already went through primary endosymbiotic events evidenced by for example brown algae that have multiple cell walls surrounding the chloroplasts.
@ProfessorBeautiful
8 ай бұрын
I've read 3 Nick Lanes, now ready to crack a 4th! Thank you for unveiling this discovery.,.. news to me!
@PaarthurnaxXCIX
8 ай бұрын
Heard about this pretty recently too. I think the most fascinating thing about this discovery is how it is the only kind of its type, this organism is so different from others that it might as well be its own tree besides prokaryotes and archaea. Like what happened with other similar organisms? Is it a transition stage from prokaryotes to eukaryotes? Many many questions.
@pattheplanter
8 ай бұрын
One of the first questions: "Is it just a dead bacterium with another bacterium inside it eating it?" A spiral bacterium just like the "endosymbiont" was discovered in the same place by the same team and reported in 2016. The same team reported on the possibility of mistaking what was going on in dead bacterial samples but didn't admit that was what had happened here: "Deep-Sea Bacteria Harboring Bacterial Endosymbionts in a Cytoplasm?: 3D Electron Microscopy by Serial Ultrathin Sectioning of Freeze-Substituted Specimen"
@KorboQ
8 ай бұрын
It's surprising how many people don't know about archaea too!
@pattheplanter
8 ай бұрын
Considering they are old news 😉
@ChefJollyRoger
8 ай бұрын
You should put your second channel link in your channel "about" or "channels" section. Make it easier for people to fi d it
@matthewwakeham2206
8 ай бұрын
One day they might find intelligent life on Earth.
@Blabla130
8 ай бұрын
2:53 what did you just call us?!
@PMX
8 ай бұрын
2:52 "and out of all you carriots" 🤔
@BallyBoy95
8 ай бұрын
Sheeesh! All that sushi got the eukaryotes prokaryoting.
@user-zx8du3ik2j
8 ай бұрын
preaching a lot of theory as fact there
@christopherblare6414
8 ай бұрын
"Not clickbait" Amazing discovery! (13 years ago)
@acoldhand
8 ай бұрын
Amazing. Thanks for sharing.
@sjzara
8 ай бұрын
There have been many more that just one (or two) endosymbiotic events. There are mitochondria and chloroplasts. There are the non-mitochondrial bacterial endosymbionts of Mixotricha, the anoxic photosynthetic endosymbionts of Strombidium purpureum, and so on.
@Innuya
8 ай бұрын
What about the Hemimastigotes discovered in Nova Scotia? :)
@bilalsadiq1450
8 ай бұрын
Im liking these shorts but i think theyre a tad quiet. Maybe boost the audio a few decibels in your editor.
@pattheplanter
8 ай бұрын
Another totally valid translation of Parakaryons from the old Greek would be "beyond nuts".
@StefanLopuszanski
8 ай бұрын
"Carriots" is the text transliteration...
@LadyPelikan
8 ай бұрын
How is this not bigger than Taylor Swift?!
@pattheplanter
8 ай бұрын
There may also only be one specimen of Taylor Swift but she is alive and has been studied extensively by many researchers. There is no doubt about her identity and the characteristics that enable her fitness for her ecological niche. This cannot be said for "Parakaryon".
@LadyPelikan
8 ай бұрын
@@pattheplanter Good point. ☺️
@adashofbitter
8 ай бұрын
That’s amazing - I had never heard of this, and I have a whole ass degree in palaeobiology and evolutionary biology. One question that fascinates me about the origin of life is similar to the origin of eukaryotes - it’s so bizarre to me that all life stems from one original organism. Presumably, if the conditions for life were ideal on earth at one point, it would have happened again and again and again, and we would have multiple trees of life, rather than a single one… and yet, that’s not what we see. I have seen some people argue that we did indeed have multiple trees of life, but that we also see bacteria with the ability to take on and recombine the DNA of other organisms, which muddies the tree and makes it appear as if it is a single tree of life - but this is pretty controversial, and I’ve never seen a decent explanation of why we only see one tree of life in our world today. Similarly, it’s really odd that a prokaryote engulfing another prokaryote and forming a symbiotic relationship with it only happened the once. We actually don’t know this to be the case, but it’s how the origin of eukaryotes is usually talked about. If there were mitochondria-like bacteria capable of being engulfed and used in a symbiotic relationship with their predators, then it seems really odd that this would have only happened the once.
@bosstowndynamics5488
8 ай бұрын
IMHO it's nowhere near as surprising when you consider evolutionary pressure - the probability of multiple abiogenesis events happening close enough together, and for the first time no less, is much lower, and once any form of robust life is established it will easily outcompete any nascent organisms that would have formed subsequently (they might not even get the chance because their substrates become attractive food *long* before they get to the point of spontaneous life formation). Endosymbiosis is a bit more surprising but even then eukaryotes and prokaryotes are both occupying space in the world and it's possible that novel endosymbionts wind up with a transient disadvantage against both groups in their respective niches because it would be less specialised in every domain (mitochondria have been evolving alongside eukaryotes to be exceptionally efficient and performant ATP synthesizers, a whole ass prokaryote still with all the now redundant machinery for living independently isn't going to power up an endosymbiont anywhere near as much, and it's also going to be kind of a liability against prokaryotes when it's not able to actually help the host).
@rab3ar
8 ай бұрын
This one goes out to all you carriots 🙏
@fespa
8 ай бұрын
You are forgiven. Just like in science: publish a retraction and move on. Thanks for the hard work.
@daaara
8 ай бұрын
Is your set in a corner of your basement? A tool shed? Mysterious glimpses into the life of Rohin Francis
@WannabeMarysue
8 ай бұрын
POWERHO
@TerriTie
8 ай бұрын
I thought your second channel was the newly discovered life lol 😂
@RyanRyzzo
8 ай бұрын
I am you carrot! 😊
@thedorsinator
8 ай бұрын
The idea that a bacterium ate another one randomly and just bam it became an organelle is so absolutely asinine. It’s never happened again, just the one time. Over “billions of years” that happy accident which is driven by the so called genius of evolution never decided to reassert itself, and yet that one bacterium survived and multiplied. And the way this theory is absolutely dogmatically defended as though it were fact is the definition of fundamentalism.
@matthewbadger8685
8 ай бұрын
Hardly surprising
@dandeluca
8 ай бұрын
really loving the second channel!
@thePronto
8 ай бұрын
Alternate theory: this happens all the time, but just in places that we are unaware of, for whatever reason. When I first heard the trite expression: "If a tree falls in the forest and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound?", my response was "FFS...". But, in this case, maybe it adds some value...
@marshmellow33
8 ай бұрын
Firstly. don't call me a carriot. I resent the implication and its NOT true. Secondly, i read both (all?) of Nick Lanes books last year- Vital Question and Transformer and they were both incredible! Even as a software guy just interested in biology they were accessible yet rigorous yet riveting reads.
@plato8183
8 ай бұрын
Cant believe you finally found me
@joeyhinds6216
8 ай бұрын
Someone should really read up on the evolution of algae
@TheJensPeeters
8 ай бұрын
I mean there were at least two endosymbiosis events, plastids as well, or is the distinction, that that happened in eukaryotes so it doesn't count ?
@wbfaulk
8 ай бұрын
What do you mean, _"YOU_ carriots"?!? (2:53)
@jacobpolzin8976
8 ай бұрын
Second time? There've been several times endosymbiosis occurred, I think your forgetting about plants who alone had a few separate endoymbiotic events that formed choroplasts and other plastids.
@mp6710
8 ай бұрын
This is a glimpse on the past of all of you carriots 😂
@EffigyOfficial
8 ай бұрын
How have I never heard about this before???
@pattheplanter
8 ай бұрын
Because it is probably an error, never to be repeated. Just one specimen that looked like something interesting because of the angle it was observed. The same researchers reported in 2016 that they had found a free-living spiral bacterium in the same location that looked just like the "endosymbiont". They detailed how the mistake could have been made in a 2020 paper that didn't actually admit that they were wrong and implied gently that "Parakaryon" could be real. "Deep-Sea Bacteria Harboring Bacterial Endosymbionts in a Cytoplasm?: 3D Electron Microscopy by Serial Ultrathin Sectioning of Freeze-Substituted Specimen"
@korakys
7 ай бұрын
Balance the audio mate. I don't even care that the video is vertical, just balance the audio.
@BigFatCock0
8 ай бұрын
It is clickbait because you're making it seem like this is 2024 news. Still would've clicked the video if you stated the entire truth. Maybe that's just me.
@LUCTIANITO
8 ай бұрын
Had to came back to the video cause I forgot to up like it
@therabbithat
8 ай бұрын
WOAH
@lumi2030
8 ай бұрын
2:54 why do the captions say "you carriots"? This is r/boneappletea type of shit lol
@_untaab4289
8 ай бұрын
I was 9 so I didn't hear about it
@syedmaaz1033
8 ай бұрын
Can u share the Research paper
@abydosianchulac2
8 ай бұрын
Huh, it wasn't clickbait.
@dougaltolan3017
8 ай бұрын
Yeah, but can vegans eat it?
@differentone_p
8 ай бұрын
PLEASE DO MONO SOUND NEXT TIME IT'S DISGUSTING TO HEAR BRO MY EARS ARE LICKING OUT😩
@fonroo0000
8 ай бұрын
yea absolutely no lol, unpost this ffs
@LeanAndMean44
8 ай бұрын
I don’t think you should add “not clickbait”. It doesn’t seem like clickbait coming from your channel but it sounds like clickbait when you say it’s not.
@therabbithat
8 ай бұрын
When he said it wasmt it made me realise that the title was exciting
@LeanAndMean44
8 ай бұрын
@@therabbithat the title is exciting. Clickbait is excitement. But it’s also true. And I don’t think that’s necessary to say on his channels. It just seems like reverse psychology to say it’s not clickbait.
@ritac9769
8 ай бұрын
And also it's clickbait because it's completely wrong
Пікірлер: 136