"Stephen E. Jones" writes
in message <200008130617.OAA11324@urban.iinet.net.au>:
<snip>
> But I wonder how true that assumption is? Even if it was granted
> (arguendo) that the earliest bacteria consumed "prebiotic elements" (i.e.
> raw amino or nucleic acids or their chemical building blocks), what
> evidence is there that *modern day* bacteria consume such "prebiotic
> elements" today? Most bacteria today consume the products of existing
> biological activity.
>
> There are some highly specialised bacteria which consume some inorganic
> products, but none, AFAIK, that consume raw amino or nucleic acids.
You're apparently not aware that the putrefactive bacteria break
down amino and nucleic acids. In the large instine, for example,
these bacteria convert amino acids into toxic amines or ptomaines
by decarboxylation (lysine -> cadaverine, arginine -> agmatine,
tyroseine -> tyramine, orithine -> putrescine, histidine ->
histamine.) The same or similar bacteria make short work of
the veritable mountains of proteins left over when we "pass on".
Putrefactive bacteria are found anywhere decaying plant or
animal matter is found.
<snip>
> > Where can you go on Earth today
> > to escape life and still have the conditions for life? No where,
> > it would seem.
>
> That might be true in nature but it is not necessarily true in a controlled
> artificial setting, like a laboratory.
Nature seems pretty much out of the question as a fruitful laboratory
for abiogenetic expirements.
However, an artificial setting is a different story, yes. And,
strangely enough, that's where abiogenesis research is taking
place today :)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Aug 14 2000 - 15:11:52 EDT