Black specks pertaining to any of these variations? I do think these are related to mycocystins. Mention of nodules. Seems to be ganglion type nodules on ends of nerve fibers in skin, for me anyway at this point in time.
aem.asm.org/content/vol70/issue11/images/large/zam0110449150005.jpegAny or all of these in one or the other combination could be source of what we have.
I will try to wade through the list and acquire pictures if possible, if that is okay?
Will check for black specks for sure.
Here is article and if you could read this one paragraph tell me what you think? I myself think that this was Engineered. Again the prokaryotes to eukaryotes connection that really did not happen in the past milleniums, but recently. From one-celled to multi-celled by way of cyanobacteria?
"The aim of this study was to completely sequence and characterize the gene cluster required for nodularin synthesis and its flanking regions in the toxic strain N. spumigena NSOR10. The previously identified N. spumigena NRPS and PKS genes were used as a basis for this work (26). Following this, the proteins encoded within the putative nodularin synthetase (nda) gene cluster were characterized by comparative analysis with other biosynthetic enzymes, including microcystin synthetase. [glow=red,2,300]By using these data along with results of previous labeling studies by Moore et al. (27) and Rinehart et al. (37), a nodularin biosynthetic pathway was proposed. The second aim of this study was to compare and contrast the structures of the nda and mcy gene clusters in order to suggest a mechanism of acquisition and evolution via the deletion or insertion of two NRPS modules. This may have occurred through a natural combinatorial engineering event. A complete understanding of how this event has occurred in evolutionary history can provide invaluable information for the future combinatorial biosynthesis of NRPS and PKS systems. In addition, knowledge of the evolution of these biosynthetic pathways in cyanobacteria will have important implications in understanding the ecological roles of microcystin and nodularin, as well as their association with cyanobacterial bloom formation. "[/glow]
aem.asm.org/cgi/content/full/70/11/6353Now bear with me here, we have a new exotic species every 8 months being introduced into the Great Lakes. This is the newest one. Mystids.
Mystids:
tinyurl.com/y6ydtz Could resemble collembola, if one does not know these.
Now the mycocystins and the recombination could be more of an answer;
"[glow=red,2,300]This may have occured through a natural combinatorial engineering event." [/glow] Or one created by combination in the lab?
In the above paragraph:
"Archaebacteria. The deep branching (>3.5 Giga (109) years ago, Gya) of
CYANOBACTERIA (Cy) and other Eubacteria (purple), the shallow branching (~1 Gya) of plants (Pl), animals (An) and fungi (Fu),
and the early origin of mitochondria (Mi), were based on interpretations of the geochemical and fossil record7,8. Some
deeply branching amitochondriate (Am) species were believed to have arisen before the origin of mitochondria44. Major
symbiotic events (black dots) were introduced to explain the origin of eukaryotic organelles42, but were not assumed to be
associated with large transfers of genes to the host nucleus. They were: Eu, joining of an archaebacterium host with a
eubacterium (presumably a SPIROCHAETE) to produce an amitochondriate eukaryote; Mi, joining of a eukaryote host with an
á-proteobacterium (Ap) symbiont, leading to the origin of mitochondria, and plastids (Ps), joining of a eukaryote host with a
cyanobacterium symbiont, forming the origin of plastids on the plant lineage and possibly on other lineages. b | The present
view, based on extensive genomic analysis. Eukaryotes are no longer considered to be close relatives of Archaebacteria, but
are genomic hybrids of Archaebacteria and Eubacteria, owing to the transfer of large numbers of genes from the symbiont
genome to the nucleus of the host (indicated by coloured arrows). Other new features, largely derived from molecular-clock
studies16,39 (BOX 1), include a relatively recent origin of Cyanobacteria (~2.6 Gya) and mitochondria (~1.8 Gya), an early origin
(~1.5 Gya) of plants, animals and fungi, and a close relationship between animals and fungi. Coloured dashed lines indicate
controversial aspects of the present view: the existence of a premitochondrial symbiotic event and of living amitochondriate
eukaryotes, ancestors of which never had mitochondria. c | The times of divergence of selected model organisms from
humans, based on molecular clocks. For the prokaryotes (red), because of different possible origins through symbiotic
events, divergence times depend on the gene of interest.
evo.bio.psu.edu/hedgeslab/Publications/PDF-files/140.pdfI do think organisms were created, as symbiots to link archeae to bacteria to multi-celled organisms, to bring about the evolutionary picture that many evolutionary biologists are attempting, The tree of life and the three animal kingdoms are what is proposed. However, there is controversy over whether there are 5 Kingdoms or 3.
When one-cell genes transpose into multicelled, a link in the chain is produced. Now, many say this happened millions of years ago. How then can new species all of sudden arise in the past 15 to 20 years? These have not always been there.
Even these creations (models), these linking chains of evolution, that have never existed are starting to show evidence that they where bio engineered through genetic manipulation. By so doing what makes some species extinct is programmed to happen, and is not truly natural at all.
This has been my theory from the beginning, and what has happened is Natural Laws of existing organisms have been altered to accommodate Evolutionary Laws. Releases of these altered organisms are considered natural when the genes have been altered. Those truly are not in the given natural state. It fits so tightly in with global warming, causing the species change, when they have been altered for quite some time now. Remember, evolution has not been proven, only by devious minds producing Evolutionary Biology which will eventually change all of true nature to an altered nature/synthetic, that which is still being called Natural when these have been created in the lab. Links are constantly being made from one-celled to multi-celled and this most likely occurred in cyanobacteria, a cross of plant algae and bacteria, then the next step from multi-celled to similar genes, proteins, molecules between plant, insect, worm, mouse, etc up to human, then sharing of proteins, quorem sensing, protein signalling between similar hormones, but it is the mitochrondria that seems to be the center of these changes. This gets deep but if the linneage can be seen clearly, one can see where this is going......and that is where nano comes in. There is nanobacteria, nanochem particles, nanometallic, nanocarbon, nanomolecular, nano up the giggy........
The next evolution will be, you guessed it, of electromagneticnanophysics, and could already be happening. Our nerves are mere electrical impulses, our muscles mechanical, movement by molecules, particles, mimicking etc.
Read Kurzweil, if you want a look into the future of evolution. And this is the only way that is seen, by many in the scientific field. What if they are wrong?
Okay, bye for now. Just posting here as continuation of studies and discussion at biology on line.
Skytroll