How did sex pop up? (Introduction)

by David Turell @, Thursday, September 17, 2009, 15:10 (5337 days ago)

Evolution started with organisms simply splitting to reproduce. The following article raises some interesting points and some facts about sex determination. It isn't all x's and y's:-http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/09/090916133515.htm

How did sex pop up?

by xeno6696 @, Sonoran Desert, Friday, September 18, 2009, 03:34 (5337 days ago) @ David Turell

Evolution started with organisms simply splitting to reproduce. The following article raises some interesting points and some facts about sex determination. It isn't all x's and y's:
> 
> http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/09/090916133515.htm-You do bring up an interesting point, and in my case, it would be my turn to play the gadfly. -50% of all male embryos die in the womb, and a paper back from last year sometime also stated that male offspring are more likely to be stillborn than female. -If we were the product of design, why would we not see something a little more efficient? You stated that you think God cares about us maybe 50% of the time? You really think its even that much? If you're going to design the human race, why reach for "half-assed?" This goes into what George was saying earlier, about life seeming far to chaotic and disorganized for it to be designed. Albeit I can also swing back the other way on that one and say "we can build complex chaos from simple rules too."

--
\"Why is it, Master, that ascetics fight with ascetics?\"

\"It is, brahmin, because of attachment to views, adherence to views, fixation on views, addiction to views, obsession with views, holding firmly to views that ascetics fight with ascetics.\"

How did sex pop up?

by George Jelliss ⌂ @, Crewe, Saturday, September 19, 2009, 18:15 (5335 days ago) @ xeno6696

dhw in the "Revise this" thread (September 18, 2009, 15:07) wrote: "David has, for instance, asked the provocative question: How Did Sex Pop Up? Bearing in mind that it takes two to tango, and that if those two are to reproduce they will normally have to be male and female, the idea of simultaneous chance mutations puts a mighty strain on one's credulity." -I thought we had settled this agaes ago. However, here is a lucid account given by someone caling themselves "Sprite" on the RD Forum:-Sexual reproduction evolved before the separate sexes evolved. The first sexual organisms would have produced first just one type of sex cell and later there evolved the two types - eggs and sperm.
These would have been produced by the same body.
In time, some bodies specialized in producing either one or the other sex cell.
Then the body evolved to best serve its particular sex cell so males and female would have diverged to some degree within the same species.-Sex cells were first expelled into the sea.
Animals first on land would also have returned to water to spawn.
Some different ways evolved to transfer sperm more directly to females eg via a spermatophore or via a 'cloacal kiss' where the two openings briefly meet and sperm is transfered.-Once you have internal fertilization, intromittent organs in the male would have evolved to deposit sperm nearer to the eggs for a reproductive advantage over the sperm of other males.
Various intromittent organs and various internal female structures evolved across species.-Sprite also gives the following links. We've seen the first before.-http://pharyngula.org/index/weblog/comments/penis_evolution/-http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intromittent_organ-http://pharyngula.org/index/weblog/comments/evolution_of_the_mammalian_vagina/-http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/8250609.stm-The last relates to the sex-determination issue of the South African athlete in the news currently.

--
GPJ

How did sex pop up?

by dhw, Sunday, September 20, 2009, 20:15 (5334 days ago) @ George Jelliss

George has answered David's question: "How Did Sex Pop Up?" by quoting what he calls a "lucid account" by "Sprite" on the Dawkins forum. The problem we are grappling with is the likelihood of chance mutations creating these sexual mechanisms, particularly when they need to be simultaneous. "Sprite" seems to think that by repeatedly using the word "evolve" he explains everything. I am therefore reproducing the article (asexually of course) below, but have taken the liberty of substituting "pop up" for "evolve" wherever possible.
 
Sexual reproduction popped up before the separate sexes popped up. The first sexual organisms [no indication as to how they popped up] would have produced first just one type of sex cell and later there popped up the two types - eggs and sperm.These would have been produced by the same body.
In time, some bodies specialized in producing either one or the other sex cell.
Then the body evolved to best serve its particular sex cell so males and females would have diverged to some degree within the same species.
Sex cells were first expelled into the sea.
Animals first on land would also have returned to water to spawn.
Some different ways popped up to transfer sperm more directly to females eg via a spermatophore or via a 'cloacal kiss' where the two openings briefly meet and sperm is transfered.
Once you have internal fertilization, intromittent organs in the male would have popped up to deposit sperm nearer to the eggs for a reproductive advantage over the sperm of other males.
Various intromittent organs and various internal female structures popped up across species.-In short, the "lucid" answer to the question: "How Did Sex Pop Up?" seems to be that the first bits popped up, and as time went by various new twiddly bits popped up as well.-The other websites don't offer explanations either. At least the "Pharyngula" one is honest in its vagina monologue: "There is a great deal to be done...We also are a long ways from figuring out...The important thing, though, is that there are these questions waiting to be answered..." There are indeed.-(A note to Matt: first, congratulations on your internship, which is brilliant news. Second, thank you for your stimulating posts under "Two sides" and ID. I'm struggling to keep up at the moment, but I'll get there eventually.)

How did sex pop up?

by George Jelliss ⌂ @, Crewe, Monday, September 21, 2009, 23:01 (5333 days ago) @ dhw

"popped up" = appeared suddenly like a jack-in-a-box-"evolved" = appeared gradually over a long time period

--
GPJ

How did sex pop up?

by David Turell @, Tuesday, September 22, 2009, 14:05 (5332 days ago) @ George Jelliss

"popped up" = appeared suddenly like a jack-in-a-box
> 
> "evolved" = appeared gradually over a long time period-We can give very good reasons for the usefulness of two sexes, more diversity in the results of reproduction, undoubtedly producing more complexity over time, and more advanced organisms. Binary fission gives the same old same old. See, I can write Darwinism. But back away from the glib just-so explanations which explain nothing.- We have no idea how DNA split into male and female chromosomes. We can talk about hermaphrodites, we can understand sperm spilled into water over eggs, etc, but at some point intromission develops. The male develops a projecting sex organ and the female provides an opening or an invagination. Here again is the same problem I have mentioned before. Two different organisms with differing sexual DNA are developing different body parts that have to fit each other and work together. Is this accomplished by simultaneous beneficial mutations in both sexes or is epigenetics at work? Is pre-planning at work?-That is why I used the term 'popped up', like the rabbit out of the hat, out of nowhere. Of course it 'evolved' over some time, but just simply saying that, does not raise the questions I have raised. If you wish, bluntly, simply accept evolution, and don't ask why or how. It is easier than puzzling over it.

How did sex pop up?

by dhw, Tuesday, September 22, 2009, 17:19 (5332 days ago) @ George Jelliss

George: "popped up" = appeared suddenly like a jack-in-the-box
 "evolved" = appeared gradually over a long time period.-Unless my wife and I are much mistaken, it takes two individual organisms to tango, and if their sexual organs don't dance together, there ain't gonna be a next generation.
 
"Sorry darling, it'll have to be the old-fashioned way ... my/your eggs/sperm/organs/structures are still gradually appearing."

How did sex pop up?

by George Jelliss ⌂ @, Crewe, Tuesday, September 22, 2009, 20:19 (5332 days ago) @ dhw

Now you are just being silly.-What about Mr and Mrs Slug? Aren't they hermaphrodites?

--
GPJ

How did sex pop up?

by David Turell @, Wednesday, September 23, 2009, 01:14 (5332 days ago) @ George Jelliss

Now you are just being silly.
> 
> What about Mr and Mrs Slug? Aren't they hermaphrodites?-I know they are h's. I said there were stages of sex development. And I was being a little cute. But I have a real point: how do two lines of organisms accommodate when they must? I've discussed mother and child with enlarging head (different DNA). What of some of the cooperative actions I presented in Nature's IQ? With chance mutation and natural selection,I seriously wonder how it works.

How did sex pop up?

by George Jelliss ⌂ @, Crewe, Wednesday, September 23, 2009, 12:58 (5331 days ago) @ David Turell

DT writes: "But I have a real point: how do two lines of organisms accommodate when they must? I've discussed mother and child with enlarging head (different DNA)."-I don't know why you find any difficulty with this. Obviously if there is a trend towards babies being born with larger brains and heads this will cause difficulties for the mothers who cannot cope with this, resulting in death of the mother or inability to bear further children. Mothers who can cope will survive and continue their line. On the other hand there is a limit to the size of babies heads, those that are too large will not survive the birth. So these evolutionary trends will be brought into balance by natural selection. I'm not a biologist so my explanation may be rather crudely expressed, but Darwinian evolution seems perfectly adequate to explain the case.-I've responded to your other comment in the Natures IQ thread.

--
GPJ

How did sex pop up?

by dhw, Wednesday, September 23, 2009, 22:37 (5331 days ago) @ George Jelliss

George: Now you are just being silly.-My apologies. Since I had you laughing at the idea of a universal intelligence, I thought I'd try again with the idea of sexual partners waiting for their gradually developing eggs and sperm. I will now spell out the problem in all seriousness.-I'll begin with the bottom line: alongside the difficulty I have in accepting chance as the creator of life comes the difficulty I have in accepting chance as the originator of new faculties and organs. Sex is an obvious example. Like yourself I am not a biologist, and so I am genuinely in need of guidance because there are things I simply do not understand. Since you don't seem to share my scepticism, perhaps you can at least explain to me what is wrong with the following line of argument: -1) At one time there was no such thing as sexual reproduction.
2) Sexual reproduction requires two sets of organs/structures.
3) Mutations can only take place within individual organisms ... e.g. eggs and sperm cannot come into existence unless they have individual organisms to originate in.
4) If the two sets of organs/structures are not in working order, there will be no reproduction, e.g. there has to be a functioning penis AND a functioning vagina.
5) Mutations leading to whatever form of sexual reproduction, no matter how rudimentary, must therefore have taken place simultaneously in two sets of individual organisms and must have worked right from the start in order to survive. -I'm not questioning that these things happened. I'm questioning the likelihood of random mutations producing such complex mechanisms, with the added complication that each change required a corresponding and simultaneous change within the sexual partner. To say they "evolved" is just a cop-out.

How did sex pop up?

by George Jelliss ⌂ @, Crewe, Wednesday, September 23, 2009, 23:28 (5331 days ago) @ dhw

I thought the explanation given by "Sprite" was adequate.-1) At one time there was no such thing as sexual reproduction.
True but there was reproduction.-2) Sexual reproduction requires two sets of organs/structures. 
But they can be in the same organism. 
And they don't have to be very different.-The following goes into detail, but is a bit technical:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_of_sexual_reproduction-This site ends with the intriguing idea that males are parasites!
http://www.evolutionary-philosophy.net/sex.html

--
GPJ

How did sex pop up?

by dhw, Friday, September 25, 2009, 16:40 (5329 days ago) @ George Jelliss

George has kindly provided some more website material to explain the evolution of sexual reproduction, and has given us some comments from the RD net on Dawkins' claim that evolution is "the creator of life". I'm combining these, since life and reproduction go hand in hand (no doubt we can all think of a more appropriate anatomical image).-I really appreciate these references, George, although the Wikipedia one had me struggling, and my dictionary evolved a new set of dog-ears.-These sites are an education in themselves. Maybe one day scientists will know which of the various theories is the right one. I can only go back to the point that has been made over and over again in these posts: none of us are denying that sexual reproduction evolved. The two articles remain admirably, scientifically neutral, as they should be. But on this forum we are going that one, unscientific step further, to look for the degree of probability that might tip the balance towards design or chance. Under Viral Eukaryogenesis, we have verbs like, "took over", "transferred", "transitioned". We read that similarities between the pox-like virus, as the lysogenic virus, and eukaryotic nuclei include "a double stranded DNA genome, a linear chromosome with short telomeric repeats, a complex membrane bound capsid, the ability to produce capped mRNA, and the ability to export the capped mRNA across the viral membrane into the cytoplasm." And this is just a part of one component of the process of sexual reproduction. Even a part of the part is "complex". Is it simple enough for D-I-Y?-The comments from the Dawkins site were admirably restrained, though no-one has quite cottoned onto the fact that Dawkins specifically stated that it was Darwinian evolution that created life. But good for JPLipsitz, and also for Quine, who acknowledges that removing the prop of necessity "does not negate Theism, it just has less to stand on." I think that is a fair comment. Jos Gibbons asks how far back we should go: "Evolution began once self-replicators existed, and abiogenesis extends at least that far back, but one would probably insist on defining it as going further [...] since the existence of self-replicators needs explanation, too." I would say that every step, every change, needs explanation, and the greater the complexity, the more difficult it is to believe in the ability of unconscious organisms to change their own mechanisms (I'm allowed to use that word now, George, thanks to Wikipedia!). This, of course, is the core of our discussion.-I'd be interested to hear David's response to Steve Zara's comment on the RNA World model.

How did sex pop up? How did sperm get in?

by David Turell @, Friday, July 19, 2019, 02:12 (1746 days ago) @ dhw

The big problem is the female immune system and being allowed to advance:

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2019/07/190718145352.htm

"Why does it take 200 million sperm to fertilize a single egg?

One reason is that sperm, when they arrive in the uterus, face a bombardment by the immune system. Perhaps, says molecular anthropologist Pascal Gagneux, many are needed so that some will survive. On the other hand, there may be a benefit to culling so many sperm.

***


"Gagneux's lab at the University of California, San Diego, has discovered the makings of a "secret handshake" between sperm and the cells lining the uterus. Uterine cells, they report in the Journal of Biological Chemistry, express a receptor that recognizes a glycan molecule on the surface of sperm cells. It's possible that this interaction may adjust the female's immune response and help sperm make it through the leukocytic reaction

***

"The leukocytic reaction is not well understood. What we do know, Gagneux explained, is that "after crossing the cervix, millions of sperm -- a U.S. population worth of sperm -- that arrive in the uterus are faced by a barrage of macrophages and neutrophils."

"This attack by the innate immune system kills a majority of the sperm cells in semen, winnowing hundreds of millions of sperm down to just a few hundred that enter the fallopian tubes. The defensive response may be beneficial in preventing polyspermy, when an egg is fertilized by more than one sperm and cannot develop.

***

"..the team observed sialic acid binding receptors called siglecs on endometrial cells. In solution, these endometrial receptors can bind to whole sperm. According to Gagneux, the binding interaction may help the sperm run this gantlet -- for example, by dampening the immune response. Alternatively, it may be a way for uterine cells to weed out faulty sperm.

"In the immune system, this receptor class helps cells to recognize sialic acid molecules as "self," and in that context they can either turn up or down inflammation.

"'It's somewhat embarrassing how little we can say about what this [interaction] means," he said. The first step in understanding its physiological significance will be to look for direct interaction between sperm and intact uterine tissue -- this paper looked at only sperm interacting with purified proteins.

"In some ways, Gagneux added, it's humbling to be working in such a poorly understood area. Reproduction, he said, "is a very, very delicate tug-of-war at many levels. The fact that there is (also) this immune game going on is completely fascinating.'"

Comment: This study demonstrates the difficulty in imagining anything else but evolution by design. Animals must have a strong immune system to survive infections. That same immune system has to allow sperm an entry to the uterus. The sperm is like a foreign invader. This could not be developed in a stepwise way. It had to be developed in one step for sexual reproduction to work and sexual reproduction continue throughout the animals that subsequently evolved.

How did sex pop up? it involves the ability to fuse cells

by David Turell @, Wednesday, February 16, 2022, 18:59 (802 days ago) @ David Turell

Proper early controls found in Archaea:

https://www.quantamagazine.org/ancient-cells-had-sex-fusion-proteins-long-before-sex-ev...

"We animals merge a sperm and an egg; mushrooms sprout from the underground collision of fungal threads; pollen sends tubes racing through floral tissues to join ovules, creating fruit and seeds where they meet.

"Yet fusing cells like this runs contrary to the normal cellular life cycle. Cells divide into two through mitosis to reproduce asexually, but otherwise they mostly guard against major disruptions of their integrity, which could snuff out their lineage.

***

"The molecular machinery that makes this part of sexual reproduction possible may have existed more than 2 billion years ago in the simple prokaryotic cells called archaea, perhaps as much as a billion years before eukaryotes and sex evolved. But the new findings also hint at an explanation for why this kind of cell fusion for sexual reproduction didn’t appear earlier in life’s history, when it seemingly could have.

"Throughout the family tree of eukaryotes, the same protein enables the cell membranes and nuclear membranes of gametes to fuse: HAP2. Because it is shared so universally among eukaryotes, “the common ancestor must have had the same mechanism,” said Michael Brandeis, a cell biologist at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem in Israel.

"But this last eukaryotic common ancestor may not have been the original bearer of the protein. HAP2 belongs to a superfamily of “fusexins,” which includes a class of proteins that some viruses use to fuse their viral envelopes with cell membranes.

"...their colleagues predicted what a hypothetical fusexin in archaea might look like, based on the structures and protein sequences of HAP2 in modern eukaryotes. Further work, including scans of genomic databases, led them to 96 archaeal genes that seemed likely to produce proteins with shapes strikingly similar to the predicted fusexin structure, with some tweaks here and there. The researchers called these archaeal genes fsxA.

***

"So Podbilewicz and his colleagues brought the whispered potential of those genes to life. They incorporated fsxA into cultured hamster kidney cells and enabled the expression of the genes. By modifying some of the cells to have fluorescent red nuclei and others to have fluorescent green nuclei, the team could check whether the cells were using the putative archaeal fusexins to fuse.

"And that’s precisely what they saw. In the cells producing the FsxA protein, the green and red nuclei mixed five times as often as nuclei in unaltered cells did, because the cells with the fsxA gene were merging as if they were pairs of gametes.

"The presence of functional fusexins in the archaea could mean that the molecular tools for sex predated the evolution of eukaryotes, the researchers suggest. Based on their evolutionary analysis of the genes, they think these archaeal fusexins are the most primitive form of the protein yet seen and are likely to be billions of years old.

"Paulo Gonzalez Hofstatter, an evolutionary biologist at the University of São Paulo in Brazil who was not involved with this research, thinks that the findings fill a gap in our knowledge of evolutionary history. “But in some way, it is also a bit predictable,” he said, “because basically the whole machinery for meiosis has an archaea origin.”

***

"How fusexins passed from archaea into eukaryotes is also far from obvious. For Hofstatter, the most likely explanation is direct (or “vertical”) inheritance from archaea into the lineage that became the host cell in the archaea-bacteria symbiosis underpinning all eukaryotic life. Essentially, eukaryotes may have been born this way, repurposing old tricks from their forebears.

***

"Cell fusion — made possible with repurposed ancestral fusexins — may have been instrumental in the transition to eukaryotes by allowing more coordinated, large-scale genetic exchange: sexual reproduction. Such a radical shift may have been more appropriate for maintaining the fledgling eukaryotic genome."

Comment: the ability to fuse cells had to start in Archaea, since they are our ancestors. Doesn't help us understand how sexual activity was created. answer is simple if one accepts that God created evolution by His design. Anticipating necessary new processes is a logical way to design evolution. Another example of anticipating the future.

How did sex pop up? a study of hermaphrodites

by David Turell @, Wednesday, June 15, 2022, 16:53 (683 days ago) @ David Turell

Organisms with hermaphroditic sex analyzed:

https://phys.org/news/2022-06-parasitic-worms-reveal-insights-evolution.html

:Animals or plants with separate sexes are widespread in nature, and result from independent transitions from their hermaphroditic ancestor. The actual mechanism involved in the transitions between asexual and sexual reproductive modes, in other words, how is sex originated, remains an important and unanswered question. Excluding insects, about one third of the animal species, such as earthworms, snails, and some teleosts, are hermaphroditic.

***

:The research group collected already published genome and transcriptome data of 41 nematode species and 13 flatworm species, the latter of which comprise mostly hermaphroditic species except for schistosomes (blood flukes). Among these, they identified sex chromosome composition of 17 nematode species in terms of "Nigon elements." These are ancestral chromosome units which are shared by all nematodes, and named after the nematode biologist Victor Nigon (in parallel to "Muller elements" of fruitfly, another genetic model species). With this comparison, the authors showed that the great diversity of nematode sex chromosomes is a result of different combinations of Nigon elements. By recurrent addition of different Nigon elements—which previously had been non-sex chromosomes—onto the ancestral sex chromosomes, different nematode species extended their sex-linked regions which later suppressed recombination during evolution.

***

:Another important finding comes from the comparison of the sexually reproducing blood flukes to related hermaphroditic species. The transition into the state of separate sexes in the parasite occurred relatively recently, around 70 million years ago. The authors showed that during this transition, the gonad genes of schistosomes became less "feminized." In other words, they overall showed a lower ovary expression level compared to their counterpart in the hermaphroditic related species. They also identified a candidate gene, mag-1, whose disruption in schistosomes causes enlarged testis. Mutations in this gene might have played a critical role for the transition into the separate sexes of schistosomes."

Comment: this study of hermaphrodites really adds little. They hve both sexes to begin with. Tht dows not explain how teh two sexes appearfed fron ognaisms that simply used binary fission. This is one of the biggest developmental gaps in which sex's origin is not known.

How did sex pop up? a study of sperm swimming

by David Turell @, Tuesday, October 11, 2022, 17:40 (565 days ago) @ David Turell

Against a mucus tide:

https://www.sciencenews.org/article/sperm-swimming-groups-effectiveness-fertility

"Bull sperm swim more effectively when in clusters, a new study shows, potentially offering insight into fertility in humans. In simulated reproductive tracts of animals like cattle and humans, the behavior increases the chances that groups of cooperative bovine sperm will outpace meandering loners as they race to fertilize a female egg cell, physicist Chih-kuan Tung and colleagues report September 22 in Frontiers in Cell and Developmental Biology.

***

"On their own, sperm tend to follow curved paths — which is a problem, because the shortest distance between two points is a straight line. But when sperm gather in groups of two or more, they swim along straighter routes. It’s behavior that a couple of the same researchers noted in a previous study where they tracked sperm swimming in stationary fluids (SN: 3/17/16). Although that might give sperm clusters an advantage, it would only help if they happen to be going the right direction. Other benefits of sperm clustering weren’t clear until the researchers developed an experimental setup that introduced flowing fluid into their experiments.

"In creatures like humans and cattle, sperm make their way to the ovum by swimming against a current of mucus that streams through the cervix and away from the uterus. It’s difficult to study what benefits clustering might confer while swimming upstream inside living beings. So Tung and colleagues created an analog in their lab: a shallow, narrow, 4-centimeter-long channel filled with a thick fluid that mimics natural mucus and flows at rates the researchers could control.

"Whether alone or in groups, sperm naturally tend to swim upstream. However, clusters of sperm in the experiment did a better job heading upstream into the mucus flow, while individual sperm were more likely to head off in other directions. Despite the speedier travels of some individual sperm, a poorer ability to point upstream hampered the progress of sperm loners compared with slower moving clusters.

"Clusters also stayed the course in the face of rapidly flowing mucus. When the researchers turned up the flow in their apparatus, many individual sperm were washed away. Sperm clusters were much less likely to get swept downstream.

"While sperm in the study were bovine, the advantages of clustering should also apply to human sperm, Tung says. Sperm of both species have similar dimensions. The swimmers typically compete to fertilize a single ovum. And unlike pigs or other animals where semen is deposited directly in the uterus, both human and bovine sperm start out in the vagina and travel through the cervix to get to the uterus."

Comment: this shows how complex sexual reproduction actually is. The sperm are programmed to swim upstream. The mucus is produced to flow in an outward direction to protect against invasive bacteria. Why did evolution choose such a complex way of reproduction? If natural evolution seeks simple solutions and adaptations, this is not one. A designer can create this easily.

How did sex pop up? a study of sperm structure

by David Turell @, Friday, June 16, 2023, 17:04 (317 days ago) @ David Turell

Looking at construction of sperm tails:

https://www.cell.com/cell/fulltext/S0092-8674(23)00576-7?dgcid=raven_jbs_aip_email#secs...

"Summary
Sperm motility is crucial to reproductive success in sexually reproducing organisms. Impaired sperm movement causes male infertility, which is increasing globally. Sperm are powered by a microtubule-based molecular machine—the axoneme—but it is unclear how axonemal microtubules are ornamented to support motility in diverse fertilization environments. Here, we present high-resolution structures of native axonemal doublet microtubules (DMTs) from sea urchin and bovine sperm, representing external and internal fertilizers. We identify >60 proteins decorating sperm DMTs; at least 15 are sperm associated and 16 are linked to infertility. By comparing DMTs across species and cell types, we define core microtubule inner proteins (MIPs) and analyze evolution of the tektin bundle. We identify conserved axonemal microtubule-associated proteins (MAPs) with unique tubulin-binding modes. Additionally, we identify a testis-specific serine/threonine kinase that links DMTs to outer dense fibers in mammalian sperm. Our study provides structural foundations for understanding sperm evolution, motility, and dysfunction at a molecular level." (my bold)

Comment: in the past we have noted no one knows why or how sex appeared. Its obvious purpose is to introduce the capacity for more variety in evolved forms. But note my bold. It required a vast amount of a newly designed mix of necessary molecules. This cannot occur stepwise; it is irreducibly complex and must come all at once to work effectively to propel sperm. Which tells us the conversion to sexual reproduction required a steep price of a great deal of necessary evolution. Why did the evolutionary process accept this? Easily understood if designed by God.

How did sex pop up? complexity of egg-sperm union

by David Turell @, Sunday, February 11, 2024, 16:19 (77 days ago) @ David Turell

Quite a complicated set of events:

https://www.sciencealert.com/simulations-reveal-what-happens-when-a-sperm-kisses-an-egg...

"The moment when a slithering sperm propels itself head-first into a gelatinous egg is one of sudden change. Within seconds to minutes, chemical changes in the egg's membrane and outer coat are enacted to block any more sperm from attaching to and entering the oocyte.

"A series of reactions also takes place as the sperm and egg recognize each other, chemically speaking, and then begin to merge their membranes together. But despite the significance of these delicate molecular events, their details haven't been fully resolved.

***

"'It was assumed that the combination of the two proteins [JUNO and IZUMO1] into a complex initiates the recognition and adhesion process between the germ cells, thereby enabling their fusion," explains Paulina Pacak, a bioinformatician at ETH Zurich and first author of the study.

"This interaction of JUNO – which is located on the outer membrane of the female egg cell – and IZUMO1, found on the male sperm cell surface, is the first known physical link between two newly fusing sex cells.

"However, efforts to develop small molecular inhibitors of the JUNO-IZUMO1 union, as a potential contraception, haven't amounted to much so researchers suspect there might be more to their molecular interactions than we know.

***

"Each simulation spanned just 200 nanoseconds each, but they showed that the JUNO-IZUMO1 complex is initially stabilized by a host of short-lived and weak non-covalent interactions between the protein molecules.

"These contacts lasted less than 50 nanoseconds each, and understanding what happens when they are interrupted, either by other molecules or mutations, could provide insights into contraceptives and infertility, the researchers suggest.

***

"Minutes after a sperm and egg unite, the fertilized egg releases a flood of charged zinc atoms which are thought to prevent other sperm from entering the egg by hardening its outer coat.

"The simulations showed that the presence of zinc ions bent IZUMO1 into a boomerang shape, so it could no longer firmly bind to JUNO. This suggests the egg's zinc release could also hinder the binding of approaching sperm."

Comment: each reaction by sperm and egg must be precisely correct for the union to occur. This is a good example of irreducibly complex. Another reason to realize the evolutionary step to sexual reproduction had to be designed.

RSS Feed of thread
powered by my little forum