Giant bacterium carries thousands of genomes - Why does it bother?

Nature News ^ | 8 May 2008 | Heidi Ledford

[neverdem]

micro ping

[yefragetuwrabrumuy]

Using a chain of deduction, we might assume that there is a reason for doing this. For example, I would be interested to know how this bacteria behaves in the presence of ionizing radiation.

One theory might be that it was more than usually resistant. But in turn, this raises a second question: just because it has lots of copies of its genome, can it use them?

That is, can it swap out a defective genome for a working one, or use a copy for error correction?

[VOA]

Giant bacterium carries thousands of genomes - Why does it bother?

Why I rarely read (fiction) novels.
Actual history/reality/science makes for much more incredible reading.

[bert]

The bacterium seems a lot like my dear departed mother who was a child of the depression and WWII and couldn’t bring herself to throw any thing away.

[GourmetDan]

"That is, can it swap out a defective genome for a working one, or use a copy for error correction?"

Good point.

This is consistent with a model that says that the cell controls genome expression and not the other way around.

Evidence that the chicken came first.

[null and void]

Angert suspects that Epulopiscium ’s extravagant collection of genomes may be a way for it to reap the benefits of size without the drawbacks of starvation. She hypothesizes that the genomes are arrayed just beneath Epulopiscium ’s cell membrane. This arrangement means that the cell could respond to nutrients and other environmental molecules without waiting for them to diffuse throughout the cell. “If you waited [were in the center of a cell and had to wait] for an environmental signal to get to you, relying solely on diffusion, it would take forever,” says Anger. “It would be really unreliable. This opens up that door of allowing the cell to get big and not allowing diffusion to limit its volume.”

For the science bashers, this is called a hypothesis, not a guess.

The big difference is that a hypothesis will be tested against observed facts. Scientists do not have the luxury of saying everything they read in some old book is unquestionable truth, they have to winkle out every fact from actually looking at reality.

Usually the first hypothesis is wrong. Each turn of the crank gathers more data, and allows more accurate hypothesis to evolve to fit the real world data.

[Dr. Bogus Pachysandra]

It’s the Michael Moore of bacterium.
“ For example, I would be interested to know how this bacteria behaves in the presence of cheeseburgers.

[muir_redwoods]

Here's a guess, not quite an hypothesis. The bacterium is testing out an unsuccessful mutation. It will prove to be no advantage, maybe. There might be some advantage in which case it will survive or even thrive.

Maybe

[GourmetDan]

"Scientists do not have the luxury of saying everything they read in some old book is unquestionable truth, they have to winkle out every fact from actually looking at reality. Usually the first hypothesis is wrong. Each turn of the crank gathers more data, and allows more accurate hypothesis to evolve to fit the real world data."

Translation: "We get to make it up as we go along and you don't. So Nyah."

[cardinal4]

This is consistent with a model that says that the cell controls genome expression and not the other way around.

I agree, the cell, with all of its machinery, golgi bodies, ribosomes, etc. can determine on its own what is needed for healthy protein and poly-peptide production. This, however, raises another question-if the bacteria can do self maintenance, how can we get our cells to do it?

[xjcsa]

Plants are notorious for being genomically promiscuous, picking up extra genomes then losing them again in a cycle that can occur repeatedly in a plant's evolutionary history.

Whores.

[neverdem]

Why I rarely read (fiction) novels.
Actual history/reality/science makes for much more incredible reading.

Exactly!

[null and void]

Good morning!

I warmed up the thread for you...

[RightWhale]

Epulopiscium, a gargantuan bacterium that lives in the intestines of unicornfish, contains up to 200,000 copies

Reason? Greed?

[Balding_Eagle]

For the science bashers, this is called a hypothesis, not a guess.

Science bashers are unable to comprehend even such a simple sentence.

[GourmetDan]

"Good morning! I warmed up the thread for you..."

Yeah, Christian-bashing is always acceptable...

[RichInOC]

“How do it know?”

[null and void]

Science bashers are unable to comprehend even such a simple sentence.

That's your hypothesis. Prove it.

[null and void]

BE? Never mind.