After 4 years, I doubt my comment will be seen, but I have a thought on multicellular life. I suspect that on the way to a multicellular organism like a sponge, life went through advanced biofilm communities. The single celled but multi species films even have lateral gene transfer. Could the different tissue types have originally been different species contributing a unique function to the biofilm community? I’m a total layperson, but the concept of how multicellular life began is fascinating to me. Its origins are buried deep in the past. The first time we see multicellular fossils, they had already gone through a lot of evolution. I love this topic.
Cool idea. Although complex mutually beneficial relationships between organisms exist, I don't think this is likely to explain the origin of multicellular life. Remember that all the cells of a multicellular organism have the same genome and come from the same zygote, right? So more likely a zygote that formed by fertilization had a mutation that caused daughter cells to stick together, and contained molecules (cytoplasmic determinants) that would cause parts of the resulting blastocyst to differentiate to have a specific function. If the blastocyst survives better, it would be selected for, and these multicellular organisms would then continue to evolve.
@@martink592 my impression is that we have a “chicken and egg” situation with your scenario. Zygote, fertilization, and blastocyst are all things evolved by multicellular life. It is likely that the first multicellular organisms reproduced by budding, not sexual reproduction. A blastocyst does seem feasible because that is where the different layers of either a 2-layer or 3-layer organism first differentiate. I believe sponges only have two different kinds of cell types (inner and outer). I’m a layperson, so I hope I get the three different layers correct: endoderm, mesoderm, and ectoderm? What was the first creature to develop the middle (meso) layer? How did it give the animal an evolutionary advantage? Also, did plants become multicellular in a different pathway from animals? It seems likely.
Choanoflagellates have no nuclear receptors while sponge cells have two (RXR and HNF4). Choanoflagellates may look similar to collar cells but the genome has evolved. Therefore, I think sponges are much evolved than a simple aggregation of choanoflagellates. Thanks for the slides that helped to understand.
Currently it's debated whether choanoflagellates, ctenophores, or placozoa are the first animals to exhibit multicellularity. Not to mention, there are probably other candidates we don't know about. Capsaspora are also unicellular organisms that exhibit animal-like features.
0:19 I was watching an iBiology video the other day (by a Professor of biology), and she said that they *don't* know how it happened. And that it happened 600-1,000M years ago.
Do you mean embryonic development from the fertilised egg? Chemical gradients control a lot of it; cells produce chemicals/hormones, and sense the chemicals secreted by other cells and regulate gene expression, metabolic pathways, protein synthesis, etc so that they develop specialisation in relation to other cells.
But if entropy is the move of all energy and matter to a lower state of complexity why would life even want to develop? Or the universe for that matter. I read that entropy can move in waves up and down but always moves down in the end. Like those reversible chemical reactions that switch colors back and forth. Maybe that explains it. But still. Why would something so simple as atoms and molecules want to come together to be more complex. I wish we had an answer
@@ProfessorDaveExplains The conservation of energy states that no energy shall be created or destroyed. What im asking is why would something at rest and a low energy state develop into something that is complex and at a high energy state. Isn't that the opposite of the flow of entropy? Everything is supposed to spread out evenly in the universe until there is nothing except radiation flying around in empty space.
@@ProfessorDaveExplains Also I appricieate the reply back. I wasn't able to explain what i was thinking about and now that i look at what I said it looks crazy xD. Im not a science denier I assure you. I was just asking if we know exactly how the basic basic building blocks stitched themselves together? or if maybe there was some extra terrestrial intervention?
"Complexity" has nothing to do with a "energy states". When atoms and molecules assemble into larger structures this releases energy. Thermodynamics states that the entropy of the universe will increase for every spontaneous process, and the formation of localized order dissipates free energy, increasing the entropy of the universe. Check out my classical physics tutorials to better understand entropy and other concepts in thermodynamics, and check out my two-part response to James Tour to hear more about what we know regarding abiogenesis.
Dear Nam, I might say learn English Grammar. I did a three year course in Acupuncture. Any foreign students applying without a good grasp of English, were advised to take an English course first. This has included some Chinese persons. Before anyone complains: this is not a racist comment! I want equality for all. Keep Safe. (By the way, I initially spelt grammar wrong, lol.)
@@suelane3628 For a Bachelor of Science degree in the US you have to take English classes anyway, even if you are a native English speaker. In an actual college/university you have to take many mandatory classes that are not in the subject you are getting a degree in also. It traces way back to ancient times and the Trivium and Quadrivium and the concept that a "liberal arts" degree should be a well rounded education. Then a Masters degree (after the full time 4 year bachelors) or Doctorate (after the very long Masters program) you take only your specific degree subject.
Hot Button issue is one way of putting it. However, buttons likely progressed to zips, and from there all manner of clasps and temporary fixings...et cetera. With luck, that might give some sectors of society something tangible to proverbially chew on. Though, that said, the evidence likely points to way of looking at things is lost on them...despite the overwhelming weight of historical evidence. Now I'm hot under the collar. As such, must release that said button and let off steam...productively.
Dear Professor, One should start by identifying the First Organism to suddenly appear on Earth with No simple precursor 3.8 billion years ago. The Stromatolites. You use the word "imagine," which implies an Assumption, not a Fact. Do You consider 3.8 billion years enough time for the DNA Cell to have evolved here on Earth?? And how do You imagine that the Stromatolites came to be here on Earth??
I don't understand your question. Are you suggesting that somehow it has taken 3.8 billion years for a 'DNA' cell to evolve? A basic modern metabolism including protein synthesis and DNA would have already been in existence 3.8bya. This is based on molecular dating involving ribosomal RNA which suggests all life on Earth evolved from a common ancestor which existed 3.8bya. (LUCA.) There is no evidence that modern protein synthesis (based on DNA) evolved more than once. Granted this gives less time to evolve a basic metabolism, but we understand more now as to how it may have occurred. Stromatolites are composed of mineral excretions from colonies of Cyanobacteria, and so wouldn't have formed until the evolution of Cyanobacteria which are Eubacteria.
@@suelane3628 No sue, stating that 3.8 billion years is not enough time for the Complex DNA Cell to have evolved. The Stromatolite was the very first organism to suddenly appear on Earth with No simple precursor. How did it come about or arrive on Earth??
@@whoneverknow9588 Hi, I have never come across the concept that Stromatolites are the first living organisms. Not to mention how to define an organism, since one bacterial cell is a living organism. As far as I am aware, Stromatolites appear in the fossil record 3.5 bya around the same time as Cyanobacteria. Yes, they are easily fossilized, which always helps. But there are earlier signs of life even up to 4.2bya. not long after the Earth cooled enough. Maybe it is not surprizing that the projected earliest life forms are thermophiles such as Sulpholobus, Actinogens and Methanogens. These are chemotrophs which would have preceded photosynthesizers such a Cyanobacteria. Our Last Universal Common Ancestor (LUCA) is believed to have existed around 3.7 bya, quite possibly before cells (Eubacterial/Archaebacterial) evolved, but after the advent of DNA which is universal to all life. (Depending on whether viruses are classed as living.)
After 4 years, I doubt my comment will be seen, but I have a thought on multicellular life.
I suspect that on the way to a multicellular organism like a sponge, life went through advanced biofilm communities. The single celled but multi species films even have lateral gene transfer. Could the different tissue types have originally been different species contributing a unique function to the biofilm community?
I’m a total layperson, but the concept of how multicellular life began is fascinating to me. Its origins are buried deep in the past. The first time we see multicellular fossils, they had already gone through a lot of evolution. I love this topic.
I see your comment.
Cool idea. Although complex mutually beneficial relationships between organisms exist, I don't think this is likely to explain the origin of multicellular life. Remember that all the cells of a multicellular organism have the same genome and come from the same zygote, right? So more likely a zygote that formed by fertilization had a mutation that caused daughter cells to stick together, and contained molecules (cytoplasmic determinants) that would cause parts of the resulting blastocyst to differentiate to have a specific function. If the blastocyst survives better, it would be selected for, and these multicellular organisms would then continue to evolve.
@@martink592 my impression is that we have a “chicken and egg” situation with your scenario. Zygote, fertilization, and blastocyst are all things evolved by multicellular life. It is likely that the first multicellular organisms reproduced by budding, not sexual reproduction. A blastocyst does seem feasible because that is where the different layers of either a 2-layer or 3-layer organism first differentiate. I believe sponges only have two different kinds of cell types (inner and outer).
I’m a layperson, so I hope I get the three different layers correct: endoderm, mesoderm, and ectoderm? What was the first creature to develop the middle (meso) layer? How did it give the animal an evolutionary advantage?
Also, did plants become multicellular in a different pathway from animals? It seems likely.
Awesome educational videos!
Hello Prof. Dave, why are there only uni- and multi-cellular organisms, but no bi- or tri-cellular organisms?
Choanoflagellates have no nuclear receptors while sponge cells have two (RXR and HNF4). Choanoflagellates may look similar to collar cells but the genome has evolved. Therefore, I think sponges are much evolved than a simple aggregation of choanoflagellates. Thanks for the slides that helped to understand.
probably some choanoflagellated became more complex first before turning into sponges
@@carlosandleon Hello, if you can find any unicellular choanoflagellates that code for nuclear receptors I will give credit to your suggestion.
@@electrum310 I can't, they're extinct
@@electrum310 they're stuck in sponges now
Currently it's debated whether choanoflagellates, ctenophores, or placozoa are the first animals to exhibit multicellularity. Not to mention, there are probably other candidates we don't know about. Capsaspora are also unicellular organisms that exhibit animal-like features.
Good teacher-!
my dad's name is hassan
Well, Evolution and the Theory of Evolution are only "hot topics" and disputed in the US, at least in terms of the western world...
This is fascinating! I never thought about the connection between cell differentiation in time and space! 😊
0:19 I was watching an iBiology video the other day (by a Professor of biology), and she said that they *don't* know how it happened. And that it happened 600-1,000M years ago.
Yeah we don't know precisely how. We do know roughly when, and the choanoflagellate thing is an extremely viable hypothesis.
Thank you for useful explanation
That was the most information I've ever gotten in an 8 minute video
prof Dave you are the best 💖 ever 😄
200,000 years in this scale seem so little. Like we came in a blip and went *what the hell*
And human "civilization" (the establishment of sedentary agricultural society) has only existed for about 10,000 years.
200k years is billions of generations on that scale.
Fyi imo, Michael Levin has some intriguing morphogenesis research results
2:40 what happened 600mya?
3:30 symbiotic relation,mitochondria & cell
Ed Thoreum in algae and plants, a chloroplast joins too
How is the development of complex organisms controlled?
Do you mean embryonic development from the fertilised egg? Chemical gradients control a lot of it; cells produce chemicals/hormones, and sense the chemicals secreted by other cells and regulate gene expression, metabolic pathways, protein synthesis, etc so that they develop specialisation in relation to other cells.
But if entropy is the move of all energy and matter to a lower state of complexity why would life even want to develop? Or the universe for that matter. I read that entropy can move in waves up and down but always moves down in the end. Like those reversible chemical reactions that switch colors back and forth. Maybe that explains it. But still. Why would something so simple as atoms and molecules want to come together to be more complex. I wish we had an answer
What you are saying is not accurate. If you wish to understand entropy, please visit my classical physics tutorials.
I have no idea what you're referring to, and neither do you.
@@ProfessorDaveExplains The conservation of energy states that no energy shall be created or destroyed. What im asking is why would something at rest and a low energy state develop into something that is complex and at a high energy state. Isn't that the opposite of the flow of entropy? Everything is supposed to spread out evenly in the universe until there is nothing except radiation flying around in empty space.
@@ProfessorDaveExplains Also I appricieate the reply back. I wasn't able to explain what i was thinking about and now that i look at what I said it looks crazy xD. Im not a science denier I assure you. I was just asking if we know exactly how the basic basic building blocks stitched themselves together? or if maybe there was some extra terrestrial intervention?
"Complexity" has nothing to do with a "energy states". When atoms and molecules assemble into larger structures this releases energy. Thermodynamics states that the entropy of the universe will increase for every spontaneous process, and the formation of localized order dissipates free energy, increasing the entropy of the universe. Check out my classical physics tutorials to better understand entropy and other concepts in thermodynamics, and check out my two-part response to James Tour to hear more about what we know regarding abiogenesis.
Well, damn. We know so much.
Mason G. And yet we know almost nothing
omnis cellula-e cellula
The teacher is so handsome 😄
I bet that you want to exchange some DNA with him 😄
Don't fall in love with the teacher 😂
My answer to this question is almost entirely, "because collagen is sticky"
Professor how do I master in biology
Dear Nam, I might say learn English Grammar. I did a three year course in Acupuncture. Any foreign students applying without a good grasp of English, were advised to take an English course first. This has included some Chinese persons. Before anyone complains: this is not a racist comment! I want equality for all. Keep Safe. (By the way, I initially spelt grammar wrong, lol.)
I forgot to wish you luck, but first of all keep safe!
Do you mean a "master degree"? To get that you have to get a 4 year bachelors degree first. I would ask a college/university.
@@suelane3628
For a Bachelor of Science degree in the US you have to take English classes anyway, even if you are a native English speaker.
In an actual college/university you have to take many mandatory classes that are not in the subject you are getting a degree in also. It traces way back to ancient times and the Trivium and Quadrivium and the concept that a "liberal arts" degree should be a well rounded education. Then a Masters degree (after the full time 4 year bachelors) or Doctorate (after the very long Masters program) you take only your specific degree subject.
Hot Button issue is one way of putting it. However, buttons likely progressed to zips, and from there all manner of clasps and temporary fixings...et cetera.
With luck, that might give some sectors of society something tangible to proverbially chew on. Though, that said, the evidence likely points to way of looking at things is lost on them...despite the overwhelming weight of historical evidence. Now I'm hot under the collar. As such, must release that said button and let off steam...productively.
Dear Professor,
One should start by identifying the First Organism to suddenly appear on Earth with No simple precursor 3.8 billion years ago.
The Stromatolites.
You use the word "imagine," which implies an Assumption, not a Fact. Do You consider 3.8 billion years enough time for the DNA Cell to have evolved here on Earth?? And how do You imagine that the Stromatolites came to be here on Earth??
I don't understand your question. Are you suggesting that somehow it has taken 3.8 billion years for a 'DNA' cell to evolve? A basic modern metabolism including protein synthesis and DNA would have already been in existence 3.8bya. This is based on molecular dating involving ribosomal RNA which suggests all life on Earth evolved from a common ancestor which existed 3.8bya. (LUCA.) There is no evidence that modern protein synthesis (based on DNA) evolved more than once. Granted this gives less time to evolve a basic metabolism, but we understand more now as to how it may have occurred. Stromatolites are composed of mineral excretions from colonies of Cyanobacteria, and so wouldn't have formed until the evolution of Cyanobacteria which are Eubacteria.
@@suelane3628
No sue, stating that 3.8 billion years is not enough time for the Complex DNA Cell to have evolved. The Stromatolite was the very first organism to suddenly appear on Earth with No simple precursor. How did it come about or arrive on Earth??
@@whoneverknow9588 Hi, I have never come across the concept that Stromatolites are the first living organisms. Not to mention how to define an organism, since one bacterial cell is a living organism. As far as I am aware, Stromatolites appear in the fossil record 3.5 bya around the same time as Cyanobacteria. Yes, they are easily fossilized, which always helps. But there are earlier signs of life even up to 4.2bya. not long after the Earth cooled enough. Maybe it is not surprizing that the projected earliest life forms are thermophiles such as Sulpholobus, Actinogens and Methanogens. These are chemotrophs which would have preceded photosynthesizers such a Cyanobacteria. Our Last Universal Common Ancestor (LUCA) is believed to have existed around 3.7 bya, quite possibly before cells (Eubacterial/Archaebacterial) evolved, but after the advent of DNA which is universal to all life. (Depending on whether viruses are classed as living.)
@@suelane3628
Stromatolites are a microscope organism which appeared around 3.8 billion years ago...
@@suelane3628
Sorry, microscopic organism....