DOCSLIB.ORG

About Bioessays in General Parts of the Manuscript

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
About Bioessays in General Parts of the Manuscript Manuscript Guidelines to aid efficiency of peer review, and citation of your paper About BioEssays BioEssays is a reviews and features journal for a readership in cell and molecular biology, genetics, physiology and related disciplines. Its functions are: (1) to present recent developments in language and figures that are engaging and intelligible to readers from a broad spectrum of disciplines within biology and biomedical science, and (2) to extend the discussion of ideas in biology, emphasizing transdisciplinarity where appropriate. In general Papers must be in essay-style with clear, broadly understandable narrative (story) and language, forward- looking perspectives, remarks on open questions, hypotheses or speculations on the answers to such gaps in knowledge, and a clear statement of new insights that are being brought to the field. Parts of the manuscript • Title (limit: 17 words): Describe the topic simply and engagingly (e.g. original title: “Two E3 ubiquitin ligases, SCF-Skp2 and DDB1-Cul4, target human Cdt1 for proteolysis”; revised title: “Stopping re- replication of DNA in the cell cycle: two novel E3 ubiquitin ligases”). State the main point of the paper in the title, using good keywords. • Subtitle: In no more than 20 words, describe the main insight that is presented in the manuscript. • Summary (limit: 150 words; no citations allowed): o Certain rubrics do not have summaries: please check our rubric guide first. o Place your most important and new concepts or insights first in the summary, not in the middle. o Do not begin with an old and well-known fact, e.g. “The sequencing of the human genome has produced huge quantities of data…”. o End the summary with a forward-looking perspective, if possible. o IMPORTANT: The article summary is the only piece that potential reviewers read before accepting or declining the invitation to review! The summary should be extremely well written and structured, clearly presenting the main new insight of the manuscript early, and in an appealing way. • Introduction (limit: 1,000 words): Some rubrics do not have a section headed “Introduction”: please check our rubric guide first. Give a concise introduction suitable for a broad audience and not an exhaustive list of highly field-specific information and abbreviations. Those should instead be extracted and condensed into one or more tables or information boxes (see tips below). Tips for constructing tables and information boxes o For long sections of text (more than 1/3 page), please shorten to improve chances of it being read. For highly structured information (e.g. gene names and regulators, proteins and ligands etc.) summarise in tabular format. Boxes/tables should be referenced from the text where appropriate. o If vital for immediate understanding of the article, such an information box or table can be placed immediately after the introduction. Bear in mind the limit of 6 figures/tables/boxes per article, and reserve enough of these for the things you really want readers to understand. BioEssays instructions for authors as at 03.08.2017 • Main text: Papers for BioEssays should develop their thesis as a scientific "story" with reflection and vision. Text should be broken up into sections with short, statement-like subheadings. Each section should end with a brief summary (1 or 2 sentences) of the main points/conclusions drawn (particularly new insights!). • Conclusions (limit: 300 words): Some rubrics do not have a section headed “Conclusions”: please check our rubric guide first. Condense the main points of the article, and present implications, consequences for new understanding and future perspectives. Head this section “Conclusions” or “Conclusions and prospects”. • Supporting Information: Supporting Information can be a useful way to include important but ancillary information with the online version of an article. Examples of Supporting Information include additional tables, data sets, figures, movie files, audio clips, 3D structures, and other related nonessential multimedia files. Supporting Information should be cited within the article text, and a descriptive legend should be included. It is published as supplied by the author, and a proof is not made available prior to publication; for these reasons, authors should provide any Supporting Information in the desired final format. For further information on recommended file types and requirements for submission, please visit: http://authorservices.wiley.com/bauthor/suppinfo.asp English language: We accept both UK and US English, but a manuscript must be written in one or other of the two, not a mixture. The quality of English can strongly influence the success of peer review. If appropriate in your case, have a native English speaker look over the whole manuscript before submission. Word and reference limits • Reference lists should not exceed 120, 50 or 10 entries, depending on rubric. • Word limits (see rubric guide) are for body text (main text) only: abstract, acknowledgements, figure legends and reference list do not count. Figures/photographs/tables • Imaginative use of illustrations and tables is welcome. Please see our rubric list for the total number permitted. • To ensure good print quality, your figures should be submitted in TIF or PPT format with a resolution of 800 dpi, or as close to this resolution as possible. In the case of diagrams with lettering, (e.g. figures created in Adobe Illustrator) EPS, PPT or DOC (Word file) format should be submitted. • Colour Figures must be submitted in RGB colorspace. Do not submit as CMYK. • Unacceptable figure formats are: PDF, GIF, PSD, CRD, PCT, XLS, BMP, 123 (or other Lotus formats). • Lines and lettering must be large and dense enough to remain legible after the figure is reduced. Please submit final-size figures - either one-column (8.25 cm) or two-column (17 cm) size. Text in figures must not be smaller than 6-point. Avoid strongly coloured/dark backgrounds. • Figure parts should be labelled in bold lower case letters e.g. a b c; in the legend, please use a) b) c) • Figures/tables should be referred to in sequence, using “Fig. 1a”, or “Figs 1, 2” or “Table 1” etc. BioEssays instructions for authors as at 03.08.2017 Citations and reference list • Citation of published literature must be indicated in square brackets as superscripts after any punctuation; e.g. “These studies showed that… [12-15]” • Do not use composite references but rather use one number per cited reference; i.e. do not use [1] a)…. b) …. c) in the reference list but rather display this as 3 separate references [1], [2], [3] • The names of all authors should be given, starting with the initials of first names followed by the surname (“et al.” should not be used). The penultimate and last names should be separated by a comma (not by “and”). • Journal titles should be abbreviated in accordance with the ISI standards abbreviations for Journals. See: http://images.isiknowledge.com/WOK45/help/WOS/A_abrvjt.html. Abbreviated journal names should be italicized and should be directly followed by the year of publication (in bold), comma, volume number (in italics), comma, first page, period. • Here is an example: o A. L. Borikova, C. F. Dibble, N. Sciaky, C. M. Welch, A. N. Abbell, S. Bencharit, G. L. Johnson, J. Biol. Chem. 2010, 285, 11760. • Book citations: o Books without editor: ▪ E. Wingender, Gene Regulation in Eukaryotes, Wiley-VCH, Weinheim, Germany 1993, p. 215 o Books with editor: ▪ T. D. Tullius, in Comprehensive Supramolecular Chemistry, Vol. 5 (Eds: J. L. Atwood, J. E. D. Davies, D. D. MacNicol, F. Vögtle, K.S. Suslick), Pergamon, Oxford, UK 1996, pp. 317-343. ENDNOTE for managing and formatting your reference list: We use the same style as Advanced Materials. Inclusion and citation of unpublished work: This should be kept to a minimum (no more than two such citations are permissible). Your own unpublished observations, including results submitted for publication, should be cited as such in text only, and not in reference list. Personal communications, - i.e. unpublished observations of other scientists - should only be included with written permission from the source. Nomenclature and style: For biochemical nomenclature, refer to the No.1 issue of the Journal of Biological Chemistry. EC numbers should accompany citation of all enzymes. SI units should be used throughout in preparation of manuscripts. Genetics nomenclature should follow that used by the Journal Genetics. Gene and species names should be in italic type. Proteins should be in roman type. Keywords: Please provide up to 7 keywords/terms that you feel optimally describe the topic(s) of your paper. Abbreviations: Very common abbreviations such as DNA, RNA, PCR do not need explaining. However, BioEssays’ readership is very broad, so field-specific abbreviations such as SNP (Single Nucleotide Polymorphism) or GPCR (G protein-coupled receptor) should be included in an abbreviations section. Gene names need not be included, as the full names are often no more informative than the abbreviations. In cases where an abbreviation is used only once or twice in short succession, it need not be included. BioEssays instructions for authors as at 03.08.2017 Copyright and permissions Submission of an article to BioEssays will be taken to imply that the article, or a highly similar version, has not been published elsewhere, has not been submitted for publication elsewhere and will not be submitted until its acceptability has been decided. • The authors list of a paper must contain only individuals who have contributed to its writing. • Permissions to use copyright material (including modifications or adaptations of figures) must be obtained from the original author and publisher. Many journals give permission online but where that is not the case you may use the permission request form found on our website: http://onlinelibrarystatic.wiley.com/central/prf/USsprf.pdf • In order to give Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • [3 TD$DIFF]Interdisciplinary Team Science in Cell Biology
    TICB 1268 No. of Pages 3 Scientific Life Cell biology, beginning largely as micro- detailed physical–chemical mechanisms Interdisciplinary[3_TD$IF] scopic observations, followed[1_TD$IF]the molec- [7]. The data required for these models ular biology revolution, which viewed are now in sight. New gene editing meth- Team Science in genes, cells, and the machinery that ods are providing endogenous expression underlies their activities as molecular sys- of tagged and mutant cells [8], and new Cell Biology tems that could be fully characterized and live-cell imaging methods are promising Rick Horwitz1,* understood using methods of genetics biochemistry in living cells, measuring con- and biochemistry. Viewing the cell as a centrations, dynamics, equilibria, and complex, dynamic molecular composite organization [9]. Similarly, super-resolution The cell is complex. With its multi- brought insights from chemistry and phys- microscopy and cryoEM tomography, tude of components, spatial– ics to bear on biological problems. Just as which allow structure determination and [6_TD$IF] temporal character, and gene the molecular genetic era was codified by organization in situ [3,4], imaging mass expression diversity, it is challeng- the publication of Watson's book, Molec- spectrometry [10], and single-cell and ing to comprehend the cell as an ular Biology of the Gene [1], two decades spatially-resolved genomic approaches integrated system and to develop later[8_TD$IF]the Molecular Biology of the Cell by [11–13], among other image-based tech- models that predict its behaviors. I Alberts, et al. [2] served a similar purpose nologies, all point to a new golden era of suggest an approach to address for cell biology.
    [Show full text]
  • Genomic Divergence and Brain Evolution: How Regulatory DNA Influences Development of the Cerebral Cortex
    Prospects & Overviews Review essays Genomic divergence and brain evolution: How regulatory DNA influences development of the cerebral cortex Debra L. Silver1)2)3)4) The cerebral cortex controls our most distinguishing higher Introduction cognitive functions. Human-specific gene expression dif- ferences are abundant in the cerebral cortex, yet we have A large six-layered neocortex is a unique feature of only begun to understand how these variations impact brain mammalian brains. This specialized outer covering of the brain controls our higher cognitive functions including function. This review discusses the current evidence linking abstract thought and language, which together help uniquely non-coding regulatory DNA changes, including enhancers, define us as humans. Our distinguishing cognitive capacities with neocortical evolution. Functional interrogation using are specified within discrete cortical areas and are driven by animal models reveals converging roles for our genome in dynamic communication between neurons of the neocortex key aspects of cortical development including progenitor and other brain regions, as well as glial cell populations (including oligodendrocytes, microglia, and astrocytes). cell cycle and neuronal signaling. New technologies, Neurons are initially generated during human embryonic includingiPS cells and organoids, offerpotential alternatives and early fetal development, where they migrate to appropri- to modeling evolutionary modifications in a relevant species ate regions and begin establishing functional connections context. Several diseases rooted in the cerebral cortex during fetal and postnatal stages (Fig. 1). Disruptions to uniquely manifest in humans compared to other primates, cerebral cortex function arising during either development or thus highlighting the importance of understanding human adulthood, can result in neurodevelopmental and neurode- generative disorders.
    [Show full text]
  • MOLECULAR CLOCKS Definition Introduction
    MOLECULAR CLOCKS 583 Kishino, H., Thorne, J. L., and Bruno, W. J., 2001. Performance of Thorne, J. L., Kishino, H., and Painter, I. S., 1998. Estimating the a divergence time estimation method under a probabilistic model rate of evolution of the rate of molecular evolution. Molecular of rate evolution. Molecular Biology and Evolution, 18,352–361. Biology and Evolution, 15, 1647–1657. Kodandaramaiah, U., 2011. Tectonic calibrations in molecular dat- Warnock, R. C. M., Yang, Z., Donoghue, P. C. J., 2012. Exploring ing. Current Zoology, 57,116–124. uncertainty in the calibration of the molecular clock. Biology Marshall, C. R., 1997. Confidence intervals on stratigraphic ranges Letters, 8, 156–159. with nonrandom distributions of fossil horizons. Paleobiology, Wilkinson, R. D., Steiper, M. E., Soligo, C., Martin, R. D., Yang, Z., 23, 165–173. and Tavaré, S., 2011. Dating primate divergences through an Müller, J., and Reisz, R. R., 2005. Four well-constrained calibration integrated analysis of palaeontological and molecular data. Sys- points from the vertebrate fossil record for molecular clock esti- tematic Biology, 60,16–31. mates. Bioessays, 27, 1069–1075. Yang, Z., and Rannala, B., 2006. Bayesian estimation of species Parham, J. F., Donoghue, P. C. J., Bell, C. J., et al., 2012. Best practices divergence times under a molecular clock using multiple fossil for justifying fossil calibrations. Systematic Biology, 61,346–359. calibrations with soft bounds. Molecular Biology and Evolution, Peters, S. E., 2005. Geologic constraints on the macroevolutionary 23, 212–226. history of marine animals. Proceedings of the National Academy Zuckerkandl, E., and Pauling, L., 1962. Molecular disease, evolution of Sciences, 102, 12326–12331.
    [Show full text]
  • Biology & Biochemistry
    Top Peer Reviewed Journals – Biology & Biochemistry Presented to Iowa State University Presented by Thomson Reuters Biology & Biochemistry The subject discipline for Biology & Biochemistry is made of 14 narrow subject categories from the Web of Science. The 14 categories that make up Biology & Biochemistry are: 1. Anatomy & Morphology 8. Cytology & Histology 2. Biochemical Research Methods 9. Endocrinology & Metabolism 3. Biochemistry & Molecular Biology 10. Evolutionary Biology 4. Biology 11. Medicine, Miscellaneous 5. Biology, Miscellaneous 12. Microscopy 6. Biophysics 13. Parasitology 7. Biotechnology & Applied Microbiology 14. Physiology The chart below provides an ordered view of the top peer reviewed journals within the 1st quartile for Biology & Biochemistry based on Impact Factors (IF), three year averages and their quartile ranking. Journal 2009 IF 2010 IF 2011 IF Average IF ANNUAL REVIEW OF BIOCHEMISTRY 29.87 29.74 34.31 31.31 PHYSIOLOGICAL REVIEWS 37.72 28.41 26.86 31.00 NATURE BIOTECHNOLOGY 29.49 31.09 23.26 27.95 CANCER CELL 25.28 26.92 26.56 26.25 ENDOCRINE REVIEWS 19.76 22.46 19.92 20.71 NATURE METHODS 16.87 20.72 19.27 18.95 ANNUAL REVIEW OF BIOPHYSICS AND 18.95 18.95 BIOMOLECULAR STRUCTURE ANNUAL REVIEW OF PHYSIOLOGY 18.17 16.1 20.82 18.36 Annual Review of Biophysics 19.3 17.52 13.57 16.80 Nature Chemical Biology 16.05 15.8 14.69 15.51 NATURE STRUCTURAL & MOLECULAR 12.27 13.68 12.71 12.89 BIOLOGY PLOS BIOLOGY 12.91 12.47 11.45 12.28 TRENDS IN BIOCHEMICAL SCIENCES 11.57 10.36 10.84 10.92 QUARTERLY REVIEWS OF BIOPHYSICS
    [Show full text]
  • Conceptual Breakthroughs in Developmental Biology
    Swarthmore College Works Biology Faculty Works Biology 9-1-1998 Conceptual Breakthroughs In Developmental Biology Scott F. Gilbert Swarthmore College, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://works.swarthmore.edu/fac-biology Part of the Biology Commons Let us know how access to these works benefits ouy Recommended Citation Scott F. Gilbert. (1998). "Conceptual Breakthroughs In Developmental Biology". Journal Of Biosciences. Volume 23, Issue 3. 169-176. DOI: 10.1007/BF02720017 https://works.swarthmore.edu/fac-biology/189 This work is brought to you for free by Swarthmore College Libraries' Works. It has been accepted for inclusion in Biology Faculty Works by an authorized administrator of Works. For more information, please contact [email protected]. SCOTT F GILBERT Department of Biology, Martin Laboratories of Biology, Swarthmore College, Swarthmore, PA 19081, USA (Fax, +610-328-8663; Email, [email protected]) I 1. Developmental biologists can indeed explain Introduction development Revising a textbook is a fascinating exercise that allows Fifteen years ago, embryology was what could be char- one to see quite starkly the changes that have occurred acterized as the only field of science that celebrated its in one's discipline through the subsequent editions. As questions more than its answers. We had the greatest I revise a textbook that was originally published in 1985, problems one could imagine: How does the brain develop? I can see the numerous advances that have transformed How do the eyes form? How does our back develop the discipline of developmental biology. But even more differently than our front? How are the arteries and veins important and much rarer than the advances are the true connected to the heart? But we had very few answers.
    [Show full text]
  • Microbiota Interactions: a Need for New Types of Studies
    CAUSE TO REFLECT Thoughts & Opinion www.bioessays-journal.com Advancing Our Functional Understanding of Host–Microbiota Interactions: A Need for New Types of Studies Jinru He, Janina Lange, Georgios Marinos, Jay Bathia, Danielle Harris, Ryszard Soluch, Vaibhvi Vaibhvi, Peter Deines, M. Amine Hassani, Kim-Sara Wagner, Roman Zapien-Campos, Cornelia Jaspers, and Felix Sommer* 1. Introduction all associated archaea, bacteria, fungi, and viruses. These associ- ations greatly affect the health and life history of the host, which Multicellular life evolved in the presence of microorganisms and led to a new understanding of “self” and establishment of the formed complex associations with their microbiota, the sum of “metaorganism” concept.[1] The Collaborative Research Centre (CRC) 1182 aims at elucidating the evolution and function of metaorganisms. Its annual conference, the Young Investigator J. He, J. Lange, J. Bathia, D. Harris, V. Vaibhvi, Dr. P. Deines Zoological Institute Research Day (YIRD), serves as a platform for scientists of vari- University of Kiel ous disciplines to share novel findings on host–microbiota inter- Kiel 24118, Germany actions, thereby providing a comprehensive overview of recent G. Marinos developments and new directions in metaorganism research. Institute of Experimental Medicine Even though we have gained tremendous insights into the com- University of Kiel position and dynamics of host-associated microbial communi- Kiel 24105, Germany ties and their correlations with host health and disease, it also R. Soluch Institute for General Microbiology became evident that moving from correlative toward functional University of Kiel studies is needed to examine the underlying mechanisms of in- Kiel 24118, Germany teractions within the metaorganism.
    [Show full text]
  • Macroevolution of Complex Cytoskeletal Systems in Euglenids Brian S
    Review articles Macroevolution of complex cytoskeletal systems in euglenids Brian S. Leander,* Heather J. Esson, and Susana A. Breglia Summary and are capable of photosynthesis. The origin of plastids in Euglenids comprise a group of single-celled eukaryotes eukaryotes involved phagotrophic cells that engulfed and with diverse modes of nutrition, including phagotrophy and photosynthesis. The level of morphological diversity retained cyanobacterial prey, a process called ‘‘primary’’ present in this group provides an excellent system for endosymbiosis. The subsequent evolutionary history of demonstrating evolutionary transformations in morpho- photosynthesis in eukaryotes is exceedingly convoluted and logical characters. This diversity also provides compel- involved at least three independent endosymbiotic events ling evidence for major events in eukaryote evolution, between phagotrophic eukaryotes and eukaryotic prey cells such as the punctuated effects of secondary endo- that already contained primary plastids (e.g. green algae and symbiosis and mutations in underlying developmental (2,3) mechanisms. In this essay, we synthesize evidence for red algae). Once photosynthesis was established in a the origin, adaptive significance and diversification of the previously phagotrophic cell, the evolutionary pressures on euglenid cytoskeleton, especially pellicle ultrastructure, the cytoskeletal systems involved in locomotion and feeding pellicle surface patterns, pellicle strip number and the changed. This gave rise to fundamental modifications
    [Show full text]
  • Culture Coevolution and the Nature of Human Sociality − Gene
    Downloaded from rstb.royalsocietypublishing.org on February 14, 2011 Gene−culture coevolution and the nature of human sociality Herbert Gintis Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B 2011 366, 878-888 doi: 10.1098/rstb.2010.0310 References This article cites 64 articles, 15 of which can be accessed free http://rstb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/366/1566/878.full.html#ref-list-1 Article cited in: http://rstb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/366/1566/878.full.html#related-urls Rapid response Respond to this article http://rstb.royalsocietypublishing.org/letters/submit/royptb;366/1566/878 Subject collections Articles on similar topics can be found in the following collections behaviour (1807 articles) cognition (452 articles) ecology (2145 articles) evolution (2433 articles) Receive free email alerts when new articles cite this article - sign up in the box at the top Email alerting service right-hand corner of the article or click here To subscribe to Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B go to: http://rstb.royalsocietypublishing.org/subscriptions This journal is © 2011 The Royal Society Downloaded from rstb.royalsocietypublishing.org on February 14, 2011 Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B (2011) 366, 878–888 doi:10.1098/rstb.2010.0310 Review Gene–culture coevolution and the nature of human sociality Herbert Gintis1,2,* 1Santa Fe Institute, 1399 Hyde Park Road, Santa Fe, NM 87501, USA 2Central European University, Nador u. 9, 1051 Budapest, Hungary Human characteristics are the product of gene–culture coevolution, which is an evolutionary dynamic involving the interaction of genes and culture over long time periods. Gene–culture coevolution is a special case of niche construction.
    [Show full text]
  • The Origin of Animal Body Plans: a View from Fossil Evidence and the Regulatory Genome Douglas H
    © 2020. Published by The Company of Biologists Ltd | Development (2020) 147, dev182899. doi:10.1242/dev.182899 REVIEW The origin of animal body plans: a view from fossil evidence and the regulatory genome Douglas H. Erwin1,2,* ABSTRACT constraints on the interpretation of genomic and developmental The origins and the early evolution of multicellular animals required data. In this Review, I argue that genomic and developmental the exploitation of holozoan genomic regulatory elements and the studies suggest that the most plausible scenario for regulatory acquisition of new regulatory tools. Comparative studies of evolution is that highly conserved genes were initially associated metazoans and their relatives now allow reconstruction of the with cell-type specification and only later became co-opted (see evolution of the metazoan regulatory genome, but the deep Glossary, Box 1) for spatial patterning functions. conservation of many genes has led to varied hypotheses about Networks of regulatory interactions control gene expression and the morphology of early animals and the extent of developmental co- are essential for the formation and organization of cell types and option. In this Review, I assess the emerging view that the early patterning during animal development (Levine and Tjian, 2003) diversification of animals involved small organisms with diverse cell (Fig. 2). Gene regulatory networks (GRNs) (see Glossary, Box 1) types, but largely lacking complex developmental patterning, which determine cell fates by controlling spatial expression
    [Show full text]
  • The Heavy Metal-Regulatory Transcription Factor MTF-1
    Review articles Putting its fingers on stressful situations: the heavy metal-regulatory transcription factor MTF-1 P. Lichtlen** and W. Schaffner* Summary and the liver. They have the ability to bind heavy metals such It has been suggested that metallothioneins, discovered as zinc, cadmium, copper, nickel and cobalt (reviewed in about 45 years ago, play a central role in heavy metal metabolism and detoxification, and in the management of Ref. 7). Metallothioneins are involved in homeostatic regula- various forms of stress. The metal-regulatory transcrip- tion of zinc concentrations and also for the detoxification of tion factor-1 (MTF-1) was shown to be essential for basal non-essential heavy metals. As an example of the latter, and heavy metal-induced transcription of the stress- mammals store all cadmium taken up in food in a form tightly responsive metallothionein-I and metallothionein-II. Re- bound to metallothioneins, where it remains with a half-life of cently it has become obvious that MTF-1 has further roles (8) in the transcriptional regulation of genes induced by approximately 15 years in humans. The expression of the various stressors and might even contribute to some major metallothionein genes (MT-I and MT-II ) is induced at the aspects of malignant cell growth. Furthermore, MTF-1 is level of transcription by heavy metal load.(9) As shown by an essential gene, as mice null-mutant for MTF-1 die in Palmiter and colleagues, the promoter region of these metal- utero due to liver degeneration. We describe here the lothionein genes contain so-called metal responsive elements state of knowledge on the complex activation of MTF-1, and propose a model with MTF-1 as an interconnected (MREs) that can confer metal-inducibility to any reporter gene (10,11) cellular stress-sensor protein involved in heavy metal when placed in a promoter position or at a remote metabolism, hepatocyte differentiation and detoxifica- enhancer position.(12) Several laboratories, including ours, tion of toxic agents.
    [Show full text]
  • Xenobiology: a New Form of Life As the Ultimate Biosafety Tool Markus Schmidt* Organisation for International Dialogue and Conflict Management, Kaiserstr
    Review article DOI 10.1002/bies.200900147 Xenobiology: A new form of life as the ultimate biosafety tool Markus Schmidt* Organisation for International Dialogue and Conflict Management, Kaiserstr. 50/6, 1070 Vienna, Austria Synthetic biologists try to engineer useful biological search for alternatives. They belong to apparently very systems that do not exist in nature. One of their goals different science fields and their quest for biochemical is to design an orthogonal chromosome different from diversity is driven by different motivations.(1–3) The science DNA and RNA, termed XNA for xeno nucleic acids. XNA exhibits a variety of structural chemical changes relative fields in question include four areas: origin of life, exobiology, to its natural counterparts. These changes make this systems chemistry, and synthetic biology (SB). The ancient novel information-storing biopolymer ‘‘invisible’’ to nat- Greeks, including Aristotle, believed in Generatio spontanea, ural biological systems. The lack of cognition to the the idea that life could suddenly come into being from non- natural world, however, is seen as an opportunity to living matter on an every day basis. Spontaneous generation implement a genetic firewall that impedes exchange of genetic information with the natural world, which means of life, however, was finally discarded by the scientific it could be the ultimate biosafety tool. Here I discuss, why experiments of Pasteur, whose empirical results showed that it is necessary to go ahead designing xenobiological modern organisms do not spontaneously arise in nature from systems like XNA and its XNA binding proteins; what non-living matter. On the sterile earth 4 billion years ago, the biosafety specifications should look like for this however, abiogenesis must have happened at least once, genetic enclave; which steps should be carried out to boot up the first XNA life form; and what it means for the eventually leading to the last universal common ancestor society at large.
    [Show full text]
  • Evolutionary History of Life
    Evolutionary history of life The evolutionary history of life on Earth traces the processes by which living and fossil organisms evolved, from the earliest emergence of life to the present. Earth formed about 4.5 billion years (Ga) ago and evidence suggests life emerged prior to 3.7 Ga.[1][2][3] (Although there is some evidence of life as early as 4.1 to 4.28 Ga, it remains controversial due to the possible non- biological formation of the purported fossils.[1][4][5][6][7]) The similarities among all known present-day species indicate that they have diverged through the process of evolution from a common ancestor.[8] Approximately 1 trillion species currently live on Earth[9] of which only 1.75–1.8 million have been named[10][11] and 1.6 million documented in a central database.[12] These currently living species represent less than one percent of all species that have ever lived on earth.[13][14] The earliest evidence of life comes from biogenic carbon signatures[2][3] and stromatolite fossils[15] discovered in 3.7 billion- Life timeline Ice Ages year-old metasedimentary rocks from western Greenland. In 2015, 0 — Primates Quater nary Flowers ←Earliest apes possible "remains of biotic life" were found in 4.1 billion-year-old P Birds h Mammals [16][17] – Plants Dinosaurs rocks in Western Australia. In March 2017, putative evidence of Karo o a n ← Andean Tetrapoda possibly the oldest forms of life on Earth was reported in the form of -50 0 — e Arthropods Molluscs r ←Cambrian explosion fossilized microorganisms discovered in hydrothermal
    [Show full text]