Skip to main content

Am I a child or an adult ?

    When we were in school, we had to study both English prose and poetry. I found the poetry part quite boring, as I could not really understand any of it. Some people, I guess, get so engrossed in making things rhyme that they lose track of what the heck they were trying to say. That was my opinion of most poetry. The only guy I kind of liked at the time was Ogden Nash. But wait a minute, a quick search in google reveals that "am I a child or an adult" was actually written by Margaret Lawrence. OK, forget everything I said about Ogden Nash. BTW, Margaret Lawrence apparently wrote that poem when she started an illicit affair with her teacher at the age of 14. Some people have all the fun in the world. Forget about that too, because this post is all about science, thats right, fooled you didnt I ? Or maybe I harmed my own blog by twisting my own arguments, hmmm needs some thinking...

   Anyways, the actual content of the post is not so much the poem, but the confusion that arises when you are at the cusp of two different things. Most importantly when there is a continuum between two different things such as childhood and adulthood. Until now, I am sure most of you have this concept that there are two kinds of organisms (actually three kinds), one is a prokaryote and the other is a eukaryote (third one being archea). You might recall that the two have quite distinct cell morphology, with eukaryotes having membrane bound organelles, which bacteria completely lack. And also the ribosomal RNA is different in the two. Not to mention the complex signaling that has evolved in eukaryotes as compared to bacteria. Now,  I will first challenge the second opinion. What I did was plot the variation in length of 16s rRNA from all 180,000 or so organisms in RDB (Ribosomal DataBase). I filtered all 16S  rRNA's less than 1200 as this is the cutoff the RDB suggests is a good criteria to filter out spurious hits. So, I was left with around 130,000 rRNAs isloated from multiple organisms (including multiple strains and clinical isolates). The distribution is given below.

 I cant be bothered to make it nice etc, but the X-axis is the length of rRNA and the y-axis the frequency of observing the said rRNA length. The average length in bacteria is around 1500 nucleotides (E.coli 16S rRNA length). The value for eukaryotes is around 1900, which gives the eukaryotes an 18S rRNA.Two things jump out at me. One, the very long tail that almost goes as far as 2600 nt.  Now, if you believe the long tail is real, then it means that some bacteria have very long rRNAs, even longer than eukaryotes. So, we see a continuum in rRNA length. Even if you dont think it is real, look at the shape of the curve. I perceive a left skew. Now, most of these rRNAs are found by using universal primers at the ends of rRNAs. Due to rRNA transcription, the beginning needs to be somewhat similar in all organisms. But what about the end ? For example, what if the real distribution is a normal distribution, but we are artificially cutting it at the right end ? We would get shorter-than-they-really-are rRNAs, explaining the skewed distribution. In other words, even if you remove the long tail as spurious, there is still some doubt left on the continuity of the rRNA length between prokaryotes and eukaryotes. I need to align them and see what happens. That is left for another project.

   Now, coming back to the original points, prokrayotes do not have membrane bound organelles, right ? Dead wrong. It seems there is an entire class of bacteria, the Planctomycetes which have membrane bound nucleus, complete with all the pores and protrusions. Read about it here (http://www.nature.com/scitable/topicpage/beyond-prokaryotes-and-eukaryotes-planctomycetes-and-cell-14158971). So, another shibboleth of discontinuity of bacteria and eukaryotes demolished. What is left ? The complex signaling you say ? Bacteria dont have protein kinases, is that what I hear ? Ta-ta-da, Dead wrong again. Here's the plot giving average genome sizes (red color) and the number of protein kinases (green color) in each class:



You see the big shiny green bar around Planctomycetia ? You cant miss it, its one of the biggest. So, there you go, all three shibboleths of discontinuity of prokaryotes and eukaroytes blown away. Its like what Leaky told Jane Goodall :
 "Now we must redefine ‘tool,’ redefine ‘man’ or accept chimpanzees as humans."
    So, either we must redefine er...Planctomycetia (?) redefine prokaryotes, or accept that Planctomycetia are eukaryotes. BTW, in case you dunderheads have not figured it out, the "am I a child or an adult" allegorically points to the confusion that Planctomycetia have about whether they are prokrayotes or eukaryotes. And it is my way of telling you people, that just like there is no clear demarcation between the two stages, so is it with the (pro/eu)karyotes. Just kidding, I know you got that long time ago...

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Butter, Oil and Zephyr

    Well, have been doing a lot of a MD simulations lately. My current favourite is implicit solvent simulations. The entire explicit solvent thing always seemed too brute force to me. Its not elegant, and nor is it computationally feasible for larger systems. Implicit solvent simulations suffer from their own problems, but I would consider their future much brighter. This is simply sue to the larger time scales that you can access using these simulations even on a normal desktop system. Larger time scales means better averages and thermodynamic properties are always averages, so better match with experiment.    Speaking of Implicit solvent simulations, Gromacs does a good job, as well as any other currently. I especially like the OBC model for calculating Born radii which I am glad to say, I copied to MUST_READ folder when it first came out. It might still be lying there, that is another thing, but at least I can appreciate when a good...

An early essay on co-translational folding

   One of the earliest essays I wrote on the co-translational folding concept. This was for a course on protein folding that Prof Balaram takes at IISc. I am reproducing it in full, with missing punctuation marks added. At one point, I say that I have not been able to find out why it is assumed that refolding is a good substitute for in vivo protein folding. I did know even then, but I chose not to talk about it. I did so, since I cannot talk about the topic without calling everyone involved an idiot. Also, I have omitted the references as I cannot bring myself to format them properly. Rest assured that nothing I said in the essay is without literature support. Co-translational folding Introduction    Protein folding is one of the major unsolved problems of molecular biology. The problem is as follows : given that a gene encodes a unique structure (which performs a unique function), how does this information conversion take place ? it is assumed (barrin...

I am a Reverend now!!!

  I have been an atheist for most of my life. I have never truly believed that God exists or such thing. More recently, I have started looking down upon people that do believe in God. Not a hatred kind of looking down upon them, but rather a pitiful look down or maybe even a cuter look down upon. Like when you see a child earnestly insisting that Santa Claus exists. You pity the child's ignorance and you find it cute, but secretly you also get a bit tense knowing that his/her ignorance cannot last very long. And, you wonder if that earnest child could really handle the news when it hits them hard.   So, in summary all I am saying is, people who believe in a God are stupid. They should grow up and really think hard about what they mean when they say they believe in God. Half of them will mutter and sputter and fail to come up with what they really believe. Most would say something asinine like "I am sure there is something out there" or "There will be chaos if n...