How To Know Your Iron By Poo

At the cellular level, we do not have much difference with a spider or a fly: the case of Wnt

A prediction of the theory of evolution is the most basic and fundamental aspects of living beings should be well preserved, though very different animals compare with each other (these features should appear very early in the course of evolution.) On the other hand, the more "macro" and general (eg system level and physiology), may eventually be quite different from animals living in different (and everyone should have adapted to different conditions, being selected generation after generation, natural selection).
This is a prediction of the theory, and makes sense, but needs to be verified experimentally (as any scientific theory). The good news is that it has been tested systematically for decades, consider a particular case:

compare to a fruit fly (Drosophila melanogaster ) with you, dear reader / a (Homo sapiens ):

• You are a chordate, part of the class of mammals. On the other hand, the fly is an arthropod, which belongs to the class of insects.
• You have a skeleton as such (subphylum of vertebrates). On the other hand, we do not have it fly, but has an enviable armor.
• You have a closed circulatory system with a heart tetraventricular complex and real blood (no need to cut your finger to check). On the other hand, the fly has an open circulatory system, where the "blood directly bathes the tissues. But this "blood" is actually called "hemolymph" and not for anything red.
• You have a respiratory system with 2 powerful lungs, in charge of distributing the oxygen through tissues via the blood. On the other hand, flies do not have a respiratory system as such, rather have a series of "pipes" that run through your body, called tracheae, through which air enters from the outside by diffusion, giving oxygen to tissues without a liquid transporting.

If we continue with the comparison at this level, we find differences appalling and think that insects are aliens, totally alien to our nature. But let's split hairs:

• You are a metazoan eukaryotic cell (with a true nucleus), the fly too!
• Your cells use a way to communicate things from the outside in, called Wnt (pronounced "wint"), flies too!, But not 100% identical version.

This image shows the main "transduction" of cells:

The Wnt pathway is indicated by the arrow. We'll get into the detail of the cell biology of the case (not important for the development of the idea.) Just understand that "Wnt" is a key that comes to lock, which is located in the cell membrane. Once that occurred
interaction triggers a series of steps (one after another) within the cell. What is intended to reach the nucleus and regulate the expression of some genes.
If we compare this route specified between humans and flies, we found a similar creepy! are the same proteins in the same provision, with only slight differences (so called "peer review"). In addition, several homologues of each protein in each animal on its own (different versions), but to simplify our model, we think it is only one for each step of this series.
In humans, the foreign key is called "Wnt1" flies, known as " wingless (wg ), which is a gene" polarity segments ", whose job is to generate patterns in the embryo , as shown in the image below:

cells expressing wingless in this scheme are black circles. This gene is active in places where a group of genes, known as genes "Rule of the couple" are not expressed specifically even-skipped (eve ) and fushi tarazu (ftz ). This creates a pattern of segments and subdivisions of these, called parasegment, each with an anterior and posterior compartment.
neighboring cells wingless cells express a gene called engrailed ( in ). This is active, unlike wingless, where genes "pair rule" are active. Thus, engrailed is present on the trailing edge of each segment, or in the anterior compartment of each parasegment (in another try to understand trial weapon as a fly).
In short, cells wingless and engrailed cells conversing with each other during this part of the development on an ongoing basis to generate this pattern parasegmentario the fly embryo.
In humans, one of the homologues of wingless called "Wnt1" which is a proto-oncogene (genes that promote growth and cell division, but if something is wrong with them, can trigger uncontrolled growth, causing cancer). This protein is very similar to wingless and both are exactly the same route within the cell, only participants have different names. Wnt1
also has an important role in the development of all vertebrates. Therefore, in addition to corroborating the prediction of the conservation of pathways at the cellular level, we speculate that the Wnt pathway is very old and already possessed the animal that gave rise to both arthropods and chordates. That explains why in today spiders, crabs, ants, flies, elephants, giraffes, dogs, cats and humans, we use basically the same tool for different applications.

Free Golf Tournament Flyer Template

Mercury, a shot of cranks and charlatans

artisitc Representation
Messenger probe orbiting Mercury. Credit: NASA / JHU /
Carnegie Institute of Washington.

was launched on August 3, 2004, but before reaching their destination took a few detours for Earth and Venus. Finally, last March 18 and after a journey of 7,900 million km entered the orbit of its planet of study: Mercury . We speak, of course, the probe Messenger (Mercury Surface, Space Environment, Geochemistry and Ranging), named in honor of Mercurio , the messenger of the gods according to Roman mythology.

Despite its relative proximity, we have visited Mercury only once. It was through the Mariner X during the years 1974 and 1975, being at that time the only images we had the closest planet to our star.

Messenger probe will begin testing its scientific instruments today, March 23, but not until April 4 when it starts to get its first scientific data that will focus on performing a detailed map of the planet's surface, also studying both magnetic field and its stingy atmosphere. To make this work, Messenger is equipped with a dual imaging system (IDM), laser altimeter (MLA) spectrometer atmosphere and surface composition (MASCS) and magnetometer (MAG), among others.

A curious fact of this planet is that the duration of your day (115 Earth days) is longer than its year (87 Earth days). Formerly it was thought that synchronous rotation is always showing the same face to our star, but then found that it was not.

But the fact that strikes me the attention of this planet is the anomalous perihelion advance, and that their movement is not explained by classical mechanics of Newton. In fact, to explain this situation was a scientist named Le Verrier in 1843 that suggested the existence of a planet from the Sun than Mercury, a planet called Vulcan . Everything in science is explained sooner or later, and was a certain Albert Einstein the explanation given to him in 1915 through General Theory of Relativity using known variables and, of course, ruling the planet Vulcano.

not take another 35 years until another Mercury re-examine mission. In 2014 is scheduled to release BepiColombo, a probe will also target the smallest of the planets in our Solar System. Scientists say that the in-depth study of Mercury will yield critical data for understanding the formation of rocky planets in our solar system, which, though more or less clear how they are created, there are still gaps, and perhaps the answers are there in Mercury.

-

Interested? Also follow me on Twitter .

Stuck Tampon Bath Relax

The "Cactus" hiker, probably the ancestor of worms and arthropods brief analysis of the video

I leave a story taken from a blog friend that I visit a lot:

A new discovery in the world of paleontology, a "cactus" errant who had ten pairs of jointed legs. Measuring 6 inches long. Dwelt in the depths of the Asian seas more than 520 million years and may be the oldest ancestor (discovered so far) of the current spiders.
This strange creature called Diani cactiformis and is considered the first known missing link between worms and arthropods.
The D. cactiformis inhabiting the seabed in what is now the province of Yunnan, the Himalayas and southwest of China.

"Its importance is that arthropods are a group of invertebrate animals is most successful and very nice to have discovered the animal may be the most primitive of this group with jointed legs "

recognizes responsible for research, Jianni Liu, Northwest University, Xian , China.
This discovery, published on the cover of the prestigious journal Nature, provides evidence that arthropods evolved from the ancestors of the worms, whose fossil records date back to the Cambrian period.
Its fossil was discovered in 2006 during an excavation in China's Yunnan province. Then, after analyzing it and look under the microscope, the researcher,

"I realized that was not just a funny animal, but it was a very important discovery"

According to scientists, Diani could move at great speed and leap with great agility, but these superb physical condition also did not prevent extinct.
The team believes, even some of the appendages of these animals evolved into predatory joints were more survivability to the arthropods.

Source: http://www.xatakaciencia.com/paleontologia/el-cactus-que-caminaba

Apparently the way to the jointed legs originated from flexible legs. How in the current Onychophora, which is a phylum of animals rather odd, I leave a picture:

Looks great-grandfather one hundred feet do not you think?

If you want to review the Nature article, please send me an email and we will gladly send them

Theater Bedroom Theme

Geoética. Credits JFM / AGID

seems that those responsible for the journal Journal of Cosmology (JoC) know the meaning of some words that have not hesitated for a moment to use to refer to people, arguments, we have criticized the supposed discovery of fossils aliens by Richard Hoover. literally been told that "only a few crackpots and charlatans have denounced the study." Well, according to the Royal English Academy of Language, defined as "dazed, out of his senses or trial" and " much talk and no substance ", respectively. And I, gentlemen related to JoC , do not identify with either of those adjectives.

JoC believe that we wanted to sell a story with a deceptive content, empty and pointless, which I think that those responsible for this publication have shown a total lack of sanity trying to hear a story that could taint of lies and talk serious investigations conducted by rigorous scientific, it would be feasible to apply the appositions that have been used against other scientists.

Such

Once the "Journals" are not at the forefront of scientific journals such as Science or Nature, but it is prestigious enough to take into account what is said in them and cover many sectors of science because there are about different topics: Journal of Biology, Journal of Neuroscience , Journal of Geology, etc. But I'll tell you what I thought nothing more to learn of the news. It was something like, "What does it look geology and astrobiology in a review of cosmology?". And I smelled weird.

Astrobiology and Geoética are two disciplines that make my day to day and, personally, what he has done JoC is an insult not only to biologists and geologists, but also to the wider scientific community, but has also been an affront to yes Journals that publish review following the appropriate controls to disseminate quality science.

If anyone is interested, I recommend the article lecutra " The 'alien' damn scientist" in the journal Public . In it, until the director the NASA Astrobiology Institute, Carl Pilcher, goes on to say that "the astrobiology community does not think Richard Hoover is a credible researcher."

say that lack of funds going to stop editing the magazine in the month of May. When you give to a project so there are two ways: through the front door or back door. JoC chose the latter with what I would describe as a suicide.

-

Interested? Also follow me on Twitter .

Does A Mamal Or Reptile Rerspirate More

A little rigor, please

GRA 95229 meteorite. Credits: Arizona Board of Regents

goes without saying that without being an expert or geology or biology, I consider myself a defender of the theory of lithopanspermia to the extent that meteorite falls could accelerate the emergence life by injecting massive amounts of heat and essential molecules, as outlined in the post I posted on the blog News Cosmo.

have recently been published several stories on the study of several meteorites from asteroids which say they have found life. Well well, me be clear: in my opinion, is false. Why? The reasons are several, but everything starts with a malpractice investigation in response to protocols or Geoética and Planetary Protection to analyze rocks from space.

As a precedent, in 1996, the NASA researcher David McKay published in the journal Science he found traces of life in a meteorite of Martian origin. But ultimately, technology dictated that the meteorite was contaminated with biological material from our planet, giving it what is known in Planetary Protection as a false positive.

After 15 years of this press release, last week, Richard Hoover, another NASA scientist, published an article in Journal of Cosmology magazine of dubious scientific rigor, which claims to have found remains fossils in various asteroidal meteorites. PZ Myers, a biologist at the University of Minnesota, has posted on his blog a clear opinion about this magazine, saying it "is a crude and ugly web site that seems to have been absorbed by a wormhole in the 1990 and publishes large amounts of noise without a substantial gap editorial restriction. It noted that the American space agency itself has been decoupled from Hoover study saying in a statement that "NASA can not support a scientific claim unless it has been reviewed by his colleagues and deeply examined by other qualified experts."

Jesús Martínez Frías, Center for Astrobiology (CSIC-INTA), told me that "it is noteworthy that (...) you choose a magazine that is not part of classical scientific circuit." Hoover probably knew in advance that do not publish in prestigious journals due to poor scientific rigor of the analysis. On the other hand, Carlos Briones, also Center for Astrobiology (CSIC-INTA) told me from the beginning because it sounded to obvious contamination. " In addition to Martínez Frías is another very important as "used as biomarkers minerals such as carbonates and magnetite, which in any case could be geomarcadores of biological activity, and it is very strange, as the author, that life grow on an asteroid because, besides not explain how, all models suggest that the most plausible meteorite-in could be life-would be the planet, for life also calls for developing a geologic vitality. "

Hoover's article could sensationalist tinge lithopanspermia theory, and both products shortly rigorous style magazines such as Journal of Cosmology can distort as much research recently published by Sandra Pizzarello et al. in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS) which shows a study by the GRA 95229 meteorite fallen in Antarctica that could plague our planet, large amounts of ammonia, may well accelerate the process of creating of life. What is the difference? the PNAS article itself has passed all controls referees to ensure rigorous review of research and also this if you follow the course of lithopanspermia.

If there is a finding that offers compelling presence of fossils of microorganisms in meteorites, any scientific journal would be willing to publish the discovery, moreover, would mark a before and after in the History of Life. But unfortunately, we always find items lacking scientific soundness, fortunately, much of the scientific community is aware and does not hesitate to take action on the matter to refute all of these items that do nothing to tarnish the world than want to do good science.

-

Interested? Also follow me on Twitter .

Have You Ever Been Molested?

A strange cat

Credits: lolcats.com

Despite the title of this new post, I will not speak or cat with boots, or the Shrek's cat, Garfield or that, even strangers, the cat that I am presenting today is far, far more exotic than the previous. As some of you and you will have of course, I'll talk about the Schrodinger's cat , A hypothetical experiment that gave a lot of headaches. But why would a cat? I guess because Erwin Schrödinger liked these pets, and that this paradox is equally valid for a cat to the pulperro Sheldon Cooper.

Schrödinger's experiment is as follows: a cat locked in an opaque box, within which there is one and only one radioactive particle a 50% chance of breaking down, and if it does, a mechanism opens a bottle with a lethal gas cat dying instantly.

This "simple" experiment attempts to explain various concepts of quantum mechanics as the lethal gas bottle, and by extension the cat's life, depend on the probability of decay of an atom, obeying it directly to the laws of quantum mechanics, so therefore, the cat's life is subject to the principles of this branch of physics.

And what is the conclusion of this experiment? Well, while not making a measurement on the system, ie, while the case remains closed, for someone outside the box, the cat has exactly the same chance of being alive than dead, which effects Mechanic Quantum, the cat is alive and dead at the time.

Although it may seem strange to imagine a cat alive and dead at the same time, to move into the realm of subatomic particles are nothing crazy this type of assumptions are explained by the superposition , which provides a solution to what occurs when the subject simultaneously acquires two or more states or values, going to speak because of physical probabilities, all true at a time except when we make a measurement, since it would disrupt the system, in the case of the experiment, make a move would equivalent to opening the box to see if the cat is alive or not. Even Stephen Hawking himself said "every time I hear about that cat, I begin to get my gun."

This paradox has given rise to many interpretations theoretically valid but not provable on a practical level. For example, if a subatomic particle can sample two states, the particle will become part of two worlds: in each of them will have a different state, but that will not do as long as a measure of the system, because if we all return to our universe. If the cat is behaving like a subatomic particle in a universe would be dead and alive in the other, but to open the box, we disturb the system and returns to our universe, may be alive or dead. It is a way of saying "if the box is closed, not open can you ensure that the cat is inside?".

-

Interested? Also follow me on Twitter .

Easy Bobcat Birthday Cake Ideas

I noticed many errors and video, we will review them briefly:

Question 1 on bones of monkeys with wings: As I have explained, fossilization is a complex and highly unlikely, so there are no fossils of every animal that died. However, if we seek fossils of monkeys with wings or scales, we lose time, because that is ridiculous and reflects a total ignorance by the author on the evolution as a process and theory.

Question 2 on the first cell and bacterium that becomes a man: We also know that the problem of the origin of life is not part of the theory of evolution, this only addresses the changes in species as new species appear, not as he left it. Also, I think we all understand that bacteria never become a man, since our lineage diverged amount of time virtually impossible to imagine. Question

3 on the origin of all: do not know if you need to write this, but this question and this issue is not even biology, this is physics and the theory of evolution here is a navy beans in pan.

Question 4, on comets: ....................

Question 5 on the helium: mmm, this is chemical not believe ?.....

Question 6: On the origin of the organs: At last something we can discuss a biologist!, Well, the origin of complex organs such as eyes and brains, did not give random and erratic processes that formed this whole blow (that's ridiculous). Occurred by gradual steps. Can review the tests on the eyes there on the blog. Later we will do with the lungs.

Question 7 on the macro trends and the new complexity: Macro evolution is just a name that alludes to the origin of new species, this has been observed everywhere, such as the Darwin finches (later write on them.) On the "new" complexity and "new" organs, this is not real, the complexity present in living organisms is highly conserved, we all cells, all mammals have bones in the same provision, etc. I see nothing very new ...

Question 8 on the development of caterpillars into butterflies, caterpillars and butterflies are not different species, are the same, this is like asking how a baby develops in an adult?

Anyway, I think it is necessary to follow, I leave the following task!