> Our results suggest that microbial communities widely distributed in organic-poor abyssal sediment consist mainly of aerobes that retain their metabolic potential under extremely low-energy conditions for up to 101.5 Ma.
> Dominant bacterial groups included Actinobacteria, Bacteroidetes, Firmicutes, Alphaproteobacteria, Betaproteobacteria, Gammaproteobacteria, and Deltaproteobacteria (Fig. 3b, c) with a minor fraction of Chloroflexi (0– 2.6%).
It seems that it is the conditions that extends life since such a diverse community of aerobes was "reanimated".
My own (baseless) speculation: Maybe the population was originally much larger, and the surviving cells have been maintaining the energy to live by slowly cannibalizing each other over millions of years?
All that and life still has to evolve somewhere in the first place.
Billions of Bacteria's have billions of chances.
>and be compatible with the new environment
Water from 0-98C
Of course water by itself isn’t enough. You’ll also need the correct chemical makeup, pressure, light, temperature range, etc. And you’ll need enough energy and materials to reproduce enough that random mutations can bootstrap an ecosystem before your monoculture consumes all the food and starves itself to death.
Something like Underwater Volcanoes to Arctic sea, from Sulfuric Acid-water to something like Lake Natron?
>Billions of chances might not even get you out of the star system.
"might" is the perfect expression ;)
Might is a fine word, but eventually the odds are so unlikely you have to conclude its impossible or at least that independent abiogenesis is more likely. It’s also possible to take a step back and consider molecular panspermia or other theories.
No but can adapt, any discussion about it is just plain stupid, the chance is small but give the mass of chances over time it's not that small anymore, you know like intelligent life on another planets.
It can't adapt if it is killed off by the initial conditions.
> the chance is small but give the mass of chances over time it's not that small anymore
The likelihood of a lifeform surviving such a trip and seeding a new planet even once is, in my opinion, incredibly small.
But panspermia doesn't mean, "this happened one extremely lucky time because there were so many attempts over the eons the universe has been around." It means that this is the means by which life regularly spreads across the cosmos.
It's important to note that each of these numbers is teeny tiny and small. You need lots and lots and lots and a lot more lots of separate chances to reach something approaching certainty. Your units probably need to be life-bearing rocks/ice, not individual bacteria. Although more bacteria means it is likelier to survive the trip and thrive in the presence of enough resources, most of the filters on this trip (say smashing into a star) take out the whole rock, not just a few unlucky bacteria on that rock.
I'm much less skeptical of life spreading this way within a star system and of the molecules of life being formed in the cosmos and then seeding planets (i.e., molecular panspermia).
No but when it's frozen ;)
I.e. has the earth been around long enough?
RNA makes for an interesting candidate because of enzymatic activity. Similar molecules could enzymatically consume, build, and "compete" with one another.
To my knowledge, there are many computer simulations, but I don't know an exact figure for "how long would it take given X (some axiom of the state of the Earth). Here's a paper I found quickly. I promise I didn't choose that institute/university on purpose.
The panspermia hypothesis is also supported rather recently.
While there’s no real evidence for panspermia, it is a fun topic to read about. I recall one hypothesis is that DNA (or RNA) based life evolved shortly after the Big Bang (500,000 years?) when the universe was a balmy lumpy-gas bath of 0-100C. If this were true, it would follow that life is as pervasive as the cosmic background radiation and we should expect to find it in every crevice. Mind-bending.
That's pretty unbelievable, since at that time stars hadn't formed to create heavier elements, so the elements available were hydrogen, helium, and a little bit of lithium. DNA is mostly carbon and nitrogen.
Reading https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Methanopyrus, about a microbe that “can survive and reproduce at 122 °C”, that limit may be based on observation, rather than first principles. Regardless, I would take it with a grain of salt.
Worse, 50% of species. And the P-T extinction was the worst with an estimated 96% of all marine species and 70% of terrestrial vertebrates becoming extinct.
And here we are.
Scientist drives down a road (darkness, rain, a forest) and reachs a town (darkness and rain again, occasionally a streetlamp, high contrast, lights are blinding). Checks if paper is still in their pocket and accidently runs a redlight. Then: deep roar of the horn of a truck, t-boning the car a moment later. Blue lights flashing. Firefighters pulling the scientist from the car, the ambulance drives off. Coat is seen at the site of the accident. ICU, ECG beeping: the scientist is still unconscious or in a coma. End of intro.
> It is thought to have killed 50 million people, and yet scientists have brought it back to life … Working out how it arose and why it was so deadly could help experts to spot the next pandemic strain and to design appropriate drugs and vaccines in time, they say. But others have raised concerns that the dangers of resurrecting the virus are just too great. One biosecurity expert told Nature that the risk that the recreated strain might escape is so high, it is almost a certainty.
Grave digging: https://www.cdc.gov/flu/pandemic-resources/reconstruction-19...