- :: Atom & Cosmos
- :: Body & Brain
- :: Earth
- :: Environment
- :: Genes & Cells
- :: Humans
- :: Life
- :: Matter & Energy
- :: Molecules
- :: Science & Society
- :: Other Topics
- :: Science News For Kids
Mice and cats don’t usually agree, but both animals have the same bright idea about night vision. Cats, rats, mice and other nocturnal mammals arrange DNA in some eye cells to form miniature lenses that help focus light, a new study shows.
Scientists at the Ludwig-Maximilians University Munich in Germany and colleagues discovered the unusual DNA arrangement while investigating the function of several genes in the rod cells of mouse eyes, says Boris Joffe, one of the authors of the new study, which appears in the April 17 Cell. Rod cells are light-gathering cells in the retina of the eye. They operate under low-light conditions, while cone cells perform the light-gathering duty when it is bright.
Usually active genes are located in the part of the DNA that is at the center of a cell’s nucleus. There, the genes have easy access to the cellular machinery that rewrites instructions encoded in the DNA into RNA. Inactive DNA is pushed to the periphery of the nucleus, where it is out of the way.
But rod cells in the mouse retina shove active genes to the outside of the nucleus, the researchers found. The center of the nucleus is instead occupied by densely-packed inactive DNA called heterochromatin. Mice put this type of DNA front and center in their rod cells.
“Everything that must be inside is outside, and everything that should be outside is inside,” Joffe says. “It was an absolutely heretic finding.”
Why the cells take on the unusual conformation was at first a mystery. “We checked one explanation after another and none of them worked, so we were forced to think of something completely unusual,” Joffe says.
The team decided to examine retinas from other species to see if mice are the only creatures with the unusual DNA conformation in rod cells. After examining a dozen different species of mammals, the researchers noticed a pattern. Nocturnal animals, including cats, rats, deer, opossum, rabbits and ferrets, had the inside-out arrangement in rod cells, but animals that are active during the day had the conventional DNA arrangement with heterochromatin to the outside of the nucleus.
But the researchers still did not know why a nocturnal lifestyle would be associated with the inverted DNA arrangement in the rod cells. The team consulted Jochen Guck, a biophysicist at the University of Cambridge in England, to find the answer.
“It was very obvious to me that the nuclei could only be lenses,” Guck says.
Placing dense heterochromatin in the center of the nucleus raises the refractivity index — the degree to which the material decreases the speed of light traveling through it. The photons travel faster through the loosely packed DNA containing active genes, called euchromatin, and slower through the dense heterochromatin. Slowing down the photons creates a lens to focus light in the center of the cell.
Rod cells form columns in the retina of nocturnal animals, so that many little lenses are stacked on top of each other. The DNA lenses form a chain that acts a bit like fiber-optic cables, Guck suggests. He performed a computer simulation that shows that light would be channeled along the columns of rod cells with the inverted configuration, but cells with the conventional DNA arrangement would scatter light instead.
This is the first time scientists have discovered DNA acting as a lens in photoreceptor cells, says Gregory Acland, a veterinary ophthalmologist at Cornell University. “It’s one of those things that once someone has pointed it out, you think, ‘oh, that’s interesting,’ ” he says. But arranging components of retina cells to reduce light scattering certainly isn’t new, Acland says. For instance, birds, lizards and fish use oil droplets in cone photoreceptor cells to funnel light, he says.
Photoreceptors do channel light, but until now that function was known to occur mostly in cone cells. This may be the first evidence for light-funneling in rods, says Trevor Lamb, a vision scientist at the Australian National University in Canberra. But nocturnal animals have so many rod cells, and so few photons hit the retina at night that it isn’t clear whether funneling light through the cells would actually improve night vision, he says.
Inverted nuclei may be a remnant from mammals’ ancestors, which were likely nocturnal animals. The inverted configuration of the nucleus may make it harder for the cell to transcribe DNA into RNA because the transcription machinery must be spread around to mom-and-pop shops located on the outskirts of the nucleus instead of concentrated in factories in the center, Joffe speculates. Species that are active in the daytime have jettisoned the inverted structure; for them, the light-focusing advantages don’t outweigh the disadvantage of inefficient transcription, he says.
“As soon as it is not necessary, good-bye inverted pattern,” Joffe says.
Found in: Body & Brain and Genes & Cells
- Solovei, I., M. Kreysing, et al. 2009. Nuclear architecture of rod photoreceptor cells adapts to vision in mammalian evolution. Cell 137(April 17):356-368.
- Sun may not be a 'Goldilocks' star
- Moon crash reveals crater held water
- Plastics ingredients could make a boy's play less masculine
- B vitamin outperforms another drug in keeping arteries clear
- Mummies reveal heart disease plagued ancient Egyptians


Was there an exotic DNA world somewhere in our past? Hehehe
The coolest 'photo-conduit' though is still Polar Bear Hair!
Does DNA Know Geometry ?
1.
Here's a nice topic to think about: try comparing your knowledge
of computer-generated graphics with how living organisms are created
from genetic information. Try comparing pixels with cells. After all,
how does DNA "draw" the shape of a human?
There are quite many ways to express shape.
Easiest, and most inefficient, would be to define each pixel (cell?)
with [x,y,z] coordinates. Kind of like in a bitmap. Raster graphics.
Of course this is a crappy method. DNA certainly doesn't work this way.
There are 3 billion genes in our genome and perhaps 100 trillion cells.
No way cells can be defined as [x,y,z].
Vector graphics, now, this is more efficient. Points, lines, curves, all
expressed by some sophisticated equations - definitely, this is a better
way for 3D modeling of a human. A fully programmed human
shape + software to run it would be "only": 20 million bytes = 160
million bits. Well, but that's only a shape, and what about the insides?
Well... but maybe, maybe this would be doable, with 3 billion genes.
Hard to judge. So... maybe this kind of information exists within DNA?
Funny, isn't it? After all, it would mean that DNA actually knows algebra.
Strange to think that DNA would use abstract concepts like 2+2.
As good scientists we shouldn't just reject the idea right away,
but it seems so unlikely...
It is done, however, in some way. How is it that we all have (well, most of us),
2 legs, 1 head, 10 fingers, 206 bones, how is it that wrists are thinner than
elbows - how is it done, with so many details which distinguish one species
from others? You see, if we knew exactly what mechanism is behind it,
perhaps it could revolutionize the way we do graphics? Perhaps we could
learn more about 3D modeling? Maybe about compression methods? Fractals?
Not to mention such details like regeneration of human hand or kidney, well..
#
http://www.physforum.com/index.php?showtop...15entry366993
#
2. Why DNA Knows Geometry ?
The Origin of Consciousness.
================
Descartes said: ‘I think , therefore I am’
Buddhist monk says ‘I think not, therefore I am’
==========================
Consciousness is real but nonphyslcal.
Consciousness is connected to physical reality .
================
There are many theories explaining the origin of consciousness.
Here some of them.
1)
God blew consciousness into man
whom he created from clay.
2)
20 billions years ago all matter (all elementary particles,
all quarks and their girlfriend antiquarks, all kinds of waves:
electromagnetic, gravitational, muons….) –
all was assembled in “singular point”.
Then there was a Big Bang .
Question: when was there consciousness?
a) Before explosion,
b) At the moment of explosion,
c) After the explosion.
It is more probable, that it existed after the explosion.
Then there is a question: what particles (or waves)
were carriers of consciousness?
Mesons, muons, leptons, bosons (W+, W- , Z) ,
quarks, …gluons field ….. ets …?
On this question the Big Bang theory does not give an answer.
But can it be that consciousness was formed as a result
of the interaction of all elementary particles, all waves, all fields?
Then, on the one hand, the reason for the origin of the Big Bang is clear:
everything was mixed, including consciousness, and when it is mixed
then it is possible to construct all and everything.
But on the other hand, it is not clear:
why farmer John can think simply, clearly and logically.
3) Ancient Indian Veda approve, that origination of consciousness
is connected with the existence of spiritual, conscious particles – purusha .
4) Modern physics affirms that the Quantum of light
is a privileged particle as in one cases,
it behave as a particle, and in other case, acts in a way which causes a wave.
How is a particle capable of creating a wave?
The behavior of Light quanta (dualism ) is explained simply.
A quantum of light has its own initial consciousness.
This consciousness is not rigid, but develops.
The development of consciousness goes
‘ from vague wish up to a clear thought ’.
#
Consciousness is connected to physical reality.
It is fact that consciousness is itself already dualistic.
This dualism stays on the basis of Quantum Physics.
Therefore ‘ Quantum Theory of Consciousness’
can be understand only with connection to the
‘ Theory of Light Quanta’.
===============. .
Where does the information come from?
Once upon a time, 20 billions of years ago, all matter
(all elementary particles and all quarks and
their girlfriends- antiparticles and antiquarks,
all kinds of waves: electromagnetic, gravitational,
muons… gluons field ….. etc.) – were assembled in a “single point”.
It means that all information also was assembled in a "single point".
And then there was " big bang " and all information flew to bits
in different sides.
Suppose , that every bits of a "single point", every particle
of a "single point" is the owner of some information.
Then there are two possibilities:
a) every particle has the own information and after 20 billions years
they accidentally united and created everything including a man.
The aim of it is to observe all accidental possibilities.
b) in the beginning every particle has zero information .
Question :" How does zero information further arrive to a
very high informational level ? "
========.
If you go on way a) - so maybe yes, or maybe no,
you will pass through a forest of knowledge .
If you go on way b) - you will pass a forest of
theoretical knowledge along a straight road.
========.
Why I say so?
We know, there is no information transfer
without energy transfer. More correct : there is no quant
information transfer without quant energy transfer.
And the electron has the least electric charge.
It means it has some quant of the least information.
What can electron do with this information?
Let us look the Mendeleev / Moseley periodic table.
We can see at first, that electron does, it interacts with proton
and creates atom of hydrogen. This is simplest design,
which was created by electron.
And we can see how this information grows and reaches
high informational level. And the most complex design,
which was created by electron is the Man.
The Man is alive essence. Animals, birds, fish are alive essences.
And an atom? And atom is also alive design.
The free atom of hydrogen can live about 1000 seconds.
And someone a long time ago has already said, that if to give
suffices time to atom of hydrogen, he would turn into Man.
Maybe it is better not to search about "dark, virtual particles "
but to understand what the electron is,
because even now nobody knows what electron is.
=======================
Was I mistaken? No.
Because according to Pauli Exclusion Principle
only one single electron can be in the atom.
This electron reanimates the atom.
This electron manages the atom.
If the atom contains more than one electron
(for example - two), this atom represents " Siamese twins".
Save us, the Great God, of having such atoms, such children!
Each of us has an Electron, but we do not know it.
========.
Why does only electron have quant of information?
Maybe does proton also have quant of information?
No. Single proton has no quant of information.
Why?
Because information can be transfered only by
electromagnetic fields. And we don’t have a theory
about protono-magnetic fields.
#
In my opinion the Electron is quant of information.
==========.
Once upon a time, in the beginning, there was
one "single point " accidentally.
Then it has accidentally blown up:
Big Bang " has taken place accidentally. (?)
It was the reason of accidental ( ?) creation of some thousands
kinds of elementary particles and their girlfriends - antiparticles.
Then atom of hydrogen was formed accidentally. (?)
Then complex atom was formed accidentally. (?)
Then stars were formed accidentally. (?)
Then the Planet the Earth was formed accidentally. (?)
Then the fauna was formed accidentally. (?)
Then the animal kingdom was formed accidentally. (?)
Then the man was created accidentally. (?)
And this man can accidentally think logically. (?)
But of course, unfortunately, not always.
#
Someone wrote that the chances for the universe to expand,
for the atom to exist, for the earth to bear life and for humanity
to find place is as little as on to a number so big that it would
require 244 zeros to write it down.
==============.
Many years ago man has accustomed some wild
animals (wolf, horse, cat, bull , etc.)
and has made them domestic ones.
But the man understands badly the four-footed friends.
In 1897 J. J. Thomson discovered new particle - electron.
Gradually man has accustomed electron to work for him.
But the man does not understand what an electron is.
==============
By my peasant logic at first it is better to understand
the closest thing (for example an photon /electron) and
then to study the far away space and particles
(for example dark, quark, meson, boson. . . . etc particles).
============ . .
Best wishes.
Israel Sadovnik. / Socratus.
http://www.physforum.com/index.php?showtopic=2548
http://www.socratus.com
http://www.wbabin.net/comments/sadovnik.htm
========== . .
P.S.
Vitalism played a pivotal role in the history of chemistry and
biology, in the history of medical philosophy and psychology .
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vitalism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy_of_biology
============ . .
Please login or register to participate.