LUCA
For a biologist to address the details of the OoL, he/she typically approaches it using only natural chemical processes that could create a form of life (there are many definitions of what life is, but for now let’s just require it to be cells with metabolism that can utilize substrates to create and utilize energy, can reproduce and can evolve). This is called abiogenesis. It would mean that life arose from non-living matter. The details I am interested in are unrelated to whether (or not) it arose naturally or with divine intervention. So let’s just for the purpose of conversation, assume that it does not matter. We KNOW that it did happen, so now let’s move forward to details and discussion.
I’m searching for scientific evidence to support a clearer picture for the transition of the first life to what we have today. For that purpose, it doesn’t matter if God did it, or lightning struck a soup of organic compounds, or hydrothermal hot vents on the bottom of the ocean spit it out. So to my question:
- Was it a single cell of life, one time only, that then reproduced billions of times to evolve into all of the forms of life we see today? If so, it could have mutated along the way such that altered DNA and/or RNA created either new genes> transcribed into mRNA> and thus new proteins, or just different controls/epigenetics on the genes already there. Or was it…
- Hundreds/thousands/millions of life forms, each of which could evolve its own way, in its own unique environment, to enjoy selection and reproduction advantages and thus evolution?
The complexities have been hashed and rehashed forever by both the lay believers and biological evolutionists, astrophysicists, philosophers, mathematicians, archeologists, and anthropologists alike. To have life, there must be membranes to isolate and protect the cell, electron transport schemes to provide energy, heritable material for progeny, and cellular machinery capable of enzymatic catalysis of the processes that create, correct and replicate all of this. That is a hugely complex schematic that had to exist no matter what the original life (or lives) was. Nevertheless, it did exist at the beginning, no matter who or what was responsible for it. Is it necessary that something that complex begins millions of times, or is only once sufficient?
If it was one cell (and only one time), could that one cell account for the diversity of all plant, animal, archaeal, bacterial and fungal life we have today? Are there genomic data to support or refute that possibility? Many researchers point to the origins as pointing to a single cell at the bottom of the ‘tree of life’, but they rarely spell out whether there might have been multiple beginnings, each with its own possibilities for evolution. They refer to a last universal common ancestor (LUCA) but stop short of saying there was only one LUCA. Was there a LUCA for the 3 domains of life, or possibly even multiple LUCAs e.g. for each clade/genus/species of each domain?
To narrow the question and force us to focus on the two possibilities, I have intentionally left out other important requirements, such as the elements of our periodic table and their evolutions since the H and He of the Big-Bang 13.8 Bya, as well as the unique circumstances our planet finds itself in regarding gravity, atmosphere, water and proximity to our star. These are details for a different discussion, one about the probabilities of it all happening at all. I’ve also ignored the possibility that our life was seeded from another planet, since the same question would apply to that source. My question begins with the stipulation that it WAS set in motion by one of two ways without regard to which was the proximate originating author: natural or God.