Thursday, June 21, 2018

Once upon a time On Human Evolution


Thursday, October 28, 2010

2:06 PM

Once upon a time there were many nations, some if not most, were democracies, others were communists and others socialist nation states.

Others were just pure dictatorships tending to be one or the other of the above social systems.



To be continued.

 


The end of United States of America and all its Allies as unique Democratic Nation States and leaders of this World.


Year 2047, October 21-27: last War World Third.


Plot


Human history.

The Human Race evolved few hundreds thousands years ago and ended in  the year After Christ was born, year One (1) of the first Century and ending on 2047, October 21-27 with the human civilization-technological adventures.

…with a world holocaust.

Dinosaurs were the first large animals that ended in a holocaust of which there were no vestige left of how and why they died.  It was Climate Change that killed them all at once …but humans, the so-call Homo sapiens sapient, destroyed themselves with their inventions and discoveries: the NUCLEAR BOMB.

Hope this prelude would be good enough for you to comprehend what humans did.  

Human evolution.

Animals on Plannet Earth, earthly animals.

Animals and food: Animal needs: Variety of animal with its center part, as others and humans.

Myths, Religions, System of Governments and Human behaviors, Human needs, Human Psychology.

Work on this, just to present animal movement on Plannet Earth.


  1. Protocol
  2. Underworld
  3. Assyrian
  4. Agricultural societies
  5. Feudal societies
  6. Monarchs
  7. Kings
  8. Empires
  9. Deities
  10. Gods
  11. Gods
  12. Roman society
  13. Dictatorship
  14. Colonizer
  15. Conquerors
  16. Communists
  17. Socialists
  18. Free world
  19. Deaths and myths
  20. Latino
  21. Spaniards
  22. Anglos
  23. Saxon
  24. Celts
  25. Legends
  26. Dialogue
  27. Nonsensical
  28. Religious
  29. Ethic
  30. Things
  31. Reason
  32. Death
  33. Sex
  34. Infinite
  35. Athens

Who are us

1. Protocol
Human needs are or have been engraved in their Dioxide Ribonucleic Acids so-call DNA.  Their basic needs and things have been created by the natural environment of Planet Earth before it turned into a Plannet (it is substance polluted by reasonable animals with some form of intelligence acquired via self-teaching or learning).Humans are basically based on myths: they tend to adore kings and Princess, Gods and gods as well as lies and the search for the TRUTH and create a "TRUTH" based on their needs…many don't, they follow knowledge.


Reasoning evolved in Humans since it turned from its basic root: Hominids (great apes) into Homo.
Like this: Hominoidea mutated into two (2) different groups: Hominidae and Hylobatidae did not create any subfamily and then tribes.  The one of Hominidae had further mutants, they were: the subfamily of Homininae and a different one, the subfamily of Ponginae.

Thought around millions of years those family had further mutations: the Homininae, it mutated and gave rise to two (tribes), the Hominini tribe and the Gorillini tribe.  Natural selection, created by the environment, since the first prokaryotes, via mutations created out of the Hominini two genus: The Homo genus and the Pan genus.  Notice that the family branch of the Hominidae, the Ponginae, did not develop via natural selection on mutations, into a tribe, it went into the pongo genus …a tribe is a group of homogeneous type of animals that associate amongst themselves in order to storage and/or share food, protection and shelter.  Those Hominoidea that mutated onto Hominidae to Homininae then to Hominini and finally into Homo, by logic had to be much more abundance in population than any other group that went from Homininae into Gorillini tribe that ended into the Gorilla which were much abundant than the Hominoidea superfamily via natural selection, and still existed at the same time, this is, those that mutated and were better fittest for survival thanks to the recombination of their Dioxide Ribonucleic Acids (DNA), the Hominidae.  The least fitted became the Hylobatidae family ending in four (?) genera of genus that could not survive the environment on the time.  Notice that those that better fitted to the environment, had a larger brain size than any of their antecedent Hominoidea …brain activity developed which in turn created much brain neurons in the brain cavity due to the chosen environment, those of which their brain mutated (by accident), were capable to live in the changing environment at a better position than those that did not.  So, survival of the fittest gave advantages for the ones with more neurons to adapt and reproduce, so to control resources on their advantageous needs and use, and controlling the ones with least brain neuron: differing in survival of the fittest.

Brute wild strength was substituted by increasingly brain ability into slowly acquired reasoning via DNA recombination; this adapted Hominini descendants of the Homo tribes to grow in larger population with larger brain size, and therefore large tribes in reference to its members resulting in better protection against environmental hazards and natural phenomena, turning the Hominini Homo weaker but smarter than The Pan genus and still the Gorilla and the Pongo genus.  This is, survival of the fittest at work.  So, their brains developed slightly different, it varied due to adaptation: Known Homo brain seen from underneath. 


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pongidae


 different frontal pole in Homo than in Pan, Gorilla and Pongo; their olfactory track: in Homo’s shortened while the length of the olfactory track of the Pan, Gorilla and Pongo were a little larger, which could be deducted by seen the shape of their faces, it shortened less.  This created different head structure in different tribes.  It is not known if these tribes mixed, this is, if they interbreed; but if we compare actual skulls from the Mongol of Asia against skulls of Western people (actual human heads) will notice the following: differs in the roundness of the face when view in its natural alive shape.



 Distinction to hominins[edit source]


Pongids
Humans[notes 1]
Mode of locomotion
Location of foramen magnum
Back of the skull
Under the skull
Average brain capacity
400 cc
1700 cc
Skull (viewed from top)
pear-shaped
ovoid
Widest part of skull viewed from behind
Parietal region
Base of the skull(near the auditory region)
Palate
Rectangular
Parabolic
Body Growth
Fast
Slow
Curved
Straight



The Mongol people skull’s is widest from the parietal region than the Western skull that is wider at its base (near the auditory region).  This differentiation is much clear between Pongids and Humans skulls as noticed above “Distinction to hominins”.  Meaning this: Homininae and Ponginae were not yet different species but a variety one from the other on the steps of evolution toward acquiring different set of DNA strands via natural selection in process due to different environment through millions of years.  As the environment changed, so did their brain bio.  Those Hominidae Homininae kept differing from the Hominidae Ponginae until converting into different genus of the same species and further into different variety: the Australopithecine that include the Australopithecus and Paranthropus genera as well as the Kenyanthropus, Ardipithecus and Praeanthropus (related species) very close relative of the Hominini.

Australopithecines:  







Homo ("humans")
Temporal range: Piacenzian-Present, 2.865–0 Ma
O
S
D
C
P
T
J
K
N

e

Kingdom:
Phylum:
Class:
Order:
Suborder:
Infraorder:
Family:
Subfamily:
Tribe:
Genus:
Homo

Linnaeus, 1758


other species or subspecies suggested


    Synonyms[hide]
    • Africanthropus Dreyer, 1935
    • Atlanthropus Arambourg, 1954
    • Cyphanthropus Pycraft, 1928
    • Pithecanthropus Dubois, 1894
    • Protanthropus Haeckel, 1895
    • Sinanthropus Black, 1927
    • Tchadanthropus Coppens, 1965
    • Telanthropus Broom & Anderson 1949



e






















From <https://d.docs.live.net/ec8ee9b1503b6ac6/MyWorkspace%20Editing%20Room-MyEspacioDeTrabajo%20Cuarto%20de%20Edición/Animals%20on%20Plannet%20Earth%5e.docx>

Origin of Life:






New research shows that the close linkage between the physical properties of amino acids, the genetic code, and protein folding was likely the key factor in the evolution from building blocks to organisms in Earth's primordial soup. Credit: Gerald Prins

In the beginning, there were simple chemicals. And they produced amino acids that eventually became the proteins necessary to create single cells. And the single cells became plants and animals. Recent research is revealing how the primordial soup created the amino acid building blocks, and there is widespread scientific consensus on the evolution from the first cell into plants and animals. But it's still a mystery how the building blocks were first assembled into the proteins that formed the machinery of all cells. Now, two long-time University of North Carolina scientists - Richard Wolfenden, PhD, and Charles Carter, PhD - have shed new light on the transition from building blocks into life some 4 billion years ago.

"Our work shows that the close linkage between the physical properties of amino acids, the genetic code, and protein folding was likely essential from the beginning, long before large, sophisticated molecules arrived on the scene," said Carter, professor of biochemistry and biophysics at the UNC School of Medicine. "This close interaction was likely the key factor in the evolution from building blocks to organisms."

Their findings, published in companion papers in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, fly in the face of the problematic "RNA world" theory, which posits that RNA - the molecule that today plays roles in coding, regulating, and expressing genes - elevated itself from the primordial soup of amino acids and cosmic chemicals to give rise first to short proteins called peptides and then to single-celled organisms.

Wolfenden and Carter argue that RNA did not work alone; in fact, it was no more likely that RNA catalyzed peptide formation than it was for peptides to catalyze RNA formation.

The finding adds a new layer to the story of how life evolved billions of years ago.

Its name was LUCA

The scientific community recognizes that 3.6 billion years ago there existed the last universal common ancestor, or LUCA, of all living things presently on Earth. It was likely a single-cell organism. It had a few hundred genes. It already had complete blueprints for DNA replication, protein synthesis, and RNA transcription. It had all the basic components - such as lipids - that modern organisms have. From LUCA forward, it's relatively easy to see how life as we know it evolved.

Before 3.6 billion years, however, there is no hard evidence about how LUCA arose from a boiling caldron of chemicals that formed on Earth after the creation of the planet about 4.6 billion years ago. Those chemicals reacted to form amino acids, which remain the building blocks of proteins in our own cells today.

"We know a lot about LUCA and we are beginning to learn about the chemistry that produced building blocks like amino acids, but between the two there is a desert of knowledge," Carter said. "We haven't even known how to explore it."

The UNC research represents an outpost in that desert.

"Dr. Wolfenden established physical properties of the twenty amino acids, and we have found a link between those properties and the genetic code," Carter said. "That link suggests to us that there was a second, earlier code that made possible the peptide-RNA interactions necessary to launch a selection process that we can envision creating the first life on Earth."

Thus, Carter said, RNA did not have to invent itself from the primordial soup. Instead, even before there were cells, it seems more likely that there were interactions between amino acids and nucleotides that led to the co-creation of proteins and RNA.

Complexity from simplicity

Proteins must fold in specific ways to function properly. The first PNAS paper, led by Wolfenden, shows that both the polarities of the twenty amino acids (how they distribute between water and oil) and their sizes help explain the complex process of protein folding - when a chain of connected amino acids arranges itself to form a particular 3-dimensional structure that has a specific biological function.

"Our experiments show how the polarities of amino acids change consistently across a wide range of temperatures in ways that would not disrupt the basic relationships between genetic coding and protein folding," said Wolfenden, Alumni Distinguished Professor of Biochemistry and Biophysics. This was important to establish because when life was first forming on Earth, temperatures were hot, probably much hotter than they are now or when the first plants and animals were established.

A series of biochemical experiments with amino acids conducted in Wolfenden's lab showed that two properties - the sizes as well as the polarities of amino acids - were necessary and sufficient to explain how the amino acids behaved in folded proteins and that these relationships also held at the higher temperatures of Earth 4 billion years ago.

The second PNAS paper, led by Carter, delves into how enzymes called aminoacyl-tRNA synthetases recognized transfer ribonucleic acid, or tRNA. Those enzymes translate the genetic code.

"Think of tRNA as an adapter," Carter said. "One end of the adapter carries a particular amino acid; the other end reads the genetic blueprint for that amino acid in messenger RNA. Each synthetase matches one of the twenty amino acids with its own adapter so that the genetic blueprint in messenger RNA faithfully makes the correct protein every time."

Carter's analysis shows that the two different ends of the L-shaped tRNA molecule contained independent codes or rules that specify which amino acid to select. The end of tRNA that carried the amino acid sorted amino acids specifically according to size.

The other end of the L-shaped tRNA molecule is called the tRNA anticodon. It reads codons, which are sequences of three RNA nucleotides in genetic messages that select amino acids according to polarity.

Wolfenden and Carter's findings imply that the relationships between tRNA and the physical properties of the amino acids - their sizes and polarities - were crucial during the Earth's primordial era. In light of Carter's previous work with very small active cores of tRNA synthetases called Urzymes, it now seems likely that selection by size preceded selection according to polarity. This ordered selection meant that the earliest proteins did not necessarily fold into unique shapes, and that their unique structures evolved later.

Carter said, "Translating the genetic code is the nexus connecting pre-biotic chemistry to biology."

He and Wolfenden believe that the intermediate stage of genetic coding can help resolve two paradoxes: how complexity arose from simplicity, and how life divided the labor between two very different kinds of polymers: proteins and nucleic acids.

"The fact that genetic coding developed in two successive stages - the first of which was relatively simple - may be one reason why life was able to emerge while the earth was still quite young," Wolfenden noted.

An earlier code, which enabled the earliest coded peptides to bind RNA, may have furnished a decisive selective advantage. And this primitive system could then undergo a natural selection process, thereby launching a new and more biological form of evolution.

"The collaboration between RNA and peptides was likely necessary for the spontaneous emergence of complexity," Carter added. "In our view, it was a peptide-RNA world, not an RNA-only world." 




No comments: