Evolutionary Tree isn't a Tree.

[swestrup]

In a recent article in Astrobiology, they presented a recent finding that, at its base, the evolutionary tree has branches that join. It now seems that the eukaryotes (nucleated single-celled life) was created when two unrelated prokaryotes merged and became a single species.

This is not a terribly surprising result. There is evidence that our own mitochondria were once a separate species, that somehow merged with animal life long long ago. What's nifty is that they've actually managed to gain some data about such an early merger. I think I'm going to have to see if I can get my hands on the full article to read.

Comments

[auriam.livejournal.com]

..one might say that, in a sense, we're building a global creature, which will eventually (if we're careful, and we figure out the balance just right) encompass the entire biosphere. Really, once we start colonizing other planets (and thus 'reproducing' our own world), there isn't much in the way of defining Life As We Know It to be a single enormous creature.

Of course, we're not there yet; we're all in competition with one another, instead of working together to preserve a single cohesive whole, as cells do in our bodies.. however, I'm optimistic that as humanity's self-awareness progresses, we'll realize it's more adaptive to find a sustainable equilibrium (not to say that every species in the world will be included; a lot have already - unintentionally - been removed from the running), and preserve it, than to seek change at all costs.

After all, that's basically what happened with single-cells merging into colonies and into specialized multicellular organisms.. all the different parts work together to form a larger whole that has a greater survivability than the individuals would have had otherwise. The only difference is that before, it happened by chance and over a great period of time. If we're lucky, the next 'great merger' will be conscious, and very, very fast comparatively.

As a corollary.. perhaps it'd be best, as some have said, to try to refine, balance, and perfect our own planet's balance of life for greatest survivability (and desirability, if the two are mutually agreeable), before we start randomly colonizing and terraforming other planets (if that ever becomes practical..) - if we go off without figuring out how to keep things stable at home, first, we're more like a cancer, or a virus, than a self-sufficient organism, and we won't last nearly as long (or be nearly as happy, IMHO).

[swestrup]

I already replied to this in your journal:

http://www.livejournal.com/users/auriam/182108.html

but I thought I would mention it here for when I'm later rereading my old entries. (I seem to do that a lot).