8 ms·

This was really exciting until I read the bit where it says it just steals ATP from the host. Thought it could be a whole new way of life but looks more like a

This was really exciting until I read the bit where it says it just steals ATP from the host. Thought it could be a whole new way of life but looks more like a clever parasite hack.

SamBam 7y ago
I kind of agree. It also makes this statement a little confusing: > However, he believes "it's inevitable" that scientists will find more animals like Henneguya among those that have adapted to living in places with almost no oxygen, such as some parts of the ocean floor. The parasite can live because it's stealing ATP that's being made by an oxygen-burning organism it's attached to. How would you do that with no oxygen-burning organisms around?
- arkades 7y ago
  The ocean floor has "almost no oxygen," not "no oxygen." There remain oxygen-burning creatures adapted to living beneath in hypoxic conditions.
  - TheSpiceIsLife 7y ago
    I dunno if hypoxic is the right term here as it’s usually taken to mean oxygen deprivation / insufficiency, which isn’t what’s happening here, as evidenced by organisms being adapted to the conditions.
    - akiselev 7y ago
      The oxygen concentration is actually quite a bit higher in most hadal zones (> 150 µmol/kg [1]) than oxygen minimum zones that exist in the middle layers (< 45 µmol/kg [2]). It's definitely not a hypoxic environment relative to the rest of the ocean. [1] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5829614/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5829614/ [2] https://web.stanford.edu/group/MicheliLab/pdf/oceanographicandbiologicaleffectsofshoaling.pdf https://web.stanford.edu/group/MicheliLab/pdf/oceanographica...
      - eloff 7y ago
        Where does the oxygen at the bottom of the ocean come from I wonder?
- tempestn 7y ago
  I guess it could be like, in oxygen-poor places, animals are more likely to evolve to need less oxygen. Some (all that we know of so far) will do this by adapting to extract oxygen more efficiently and to use less energy, and others might do it like this parasite, by finding ways to extract energy directly from a host.
  - SamBam 7y ago
    It seems that it would still be surprising that such a parasitical organism could exist in such an environment. Presumably, if an organism is breathing in a near-zero oxygen environment, they are probably just getting the oxygen they need. If there's enough oxygen to support a parasite stealing from the first, there was enough oxygen to support the parasite getting its own oxygen. It seems to me much more likely that we'll find these parasites where there is plenty of oxygen: These organisms didn't evolve as a way of dealing with having no oxygen. They evolved because they adapted so that they did need to bother with mitochondria, because there was a plentiful supply of ATP they could steal. Since they didn't need to burn oxygen, they could do without. And the environment they are in has so much oxygen that the host organism doesn't suffer.
LessDmesg 7y ago
There are whole different ways of life. For example, before the abundance of oxygen on Earth, the first bacteria lived on sulphur-based biochemistry. It was slow and inefficient, but better than being poisoned by that oxygen plague! Remember that it's an extremely destructive oxidizing agent (even in us it causes aging etc). It actually took millions of years for living organisms to start breathing oxygen (which was the real new and exciting breakthrough of the time).
- nobleach 7y ago
  And this is why I argue when some refer to places like Saturn or Jupiter as "hostile toward life" or "Impossible living conditions". They are certainly hostile to they types of organisms with which we're familiar. But as we often find, nature has a way of surprising us.
hinkley 7y ago
> parasite Well now I don’t want to look.
mcguire 7y ago
I saw the punch line coming when I read that it was a parasite. That being said, it's an extreme form of parasitism.
jjeaff 7y ago
I guess it depends on how you look at it. Many scientists say that viruses aren't alive because they can't reproduce. But they actually do reproduce by parasitizing a host.
- bluejellybean 7y ago
  A virus isn't considered life because they do not follow all of the characteristics of life. This lists consists of: order - meaning systems of cells response to the environment - can sense, integrate senses, and response reproduction - can create offspring growth and development - do the cells grow and mature regulation - there are mechanisms in place for heat control, thirst, etc homeostasis - are able to maintain environmental equilibrium/steady state energy processing - have the ability to convert sun to energy or process something chemically todo so. If you go through this list, it's quite clear why a virus doesn't make the criteria for life. There is no order, they do not respond to the environment, there is no cell growth or development, they do not have mechanisms for heat, thirst, etc, and they do not maintain an environmental steady state.
  - meragrin_ 7y ago
    If there is no order, response to environment, or growth/development, how can they reproduce? Assuming reproduction is a characteristic they possess, why is that different from the others they do not possess? Reproduction relies on host cells so it could be said they possess the other characteristics because they rely on the host cells for those as well.
    - heavenlyblue 7y ago
      Fire can also reproduce given a reasonable environment - would you call fire alive?
      - throwaway15392 7y ago
        Personally I do So then that just means everything is alive Which I also agree with Energy is life. Life is energy. Subscribe for more very unorthodox HN comments
samstave 7y ago
>...looks more like a clever parasite hack We call this "the federal reserve model" IRL
brabel 7y ago
It says only that this may be what they are doing, not that it is for sure... a little late they speculate other alternative as well: _Roger says animals can actually use an oxygen-free process to produce energy from sugar, but it's far less efficient. He suspects this may be what Henneguya is doing_
- mirimir 7y ago
  Yes, it does say that. It's called glycolysis, and isn't at all exotic. All animals rely on glycolysis when energy requirements outpace oxygen availability. This little sucker obviously adapted to an environment with little available oxygen and lots of ATP. So the resource gain from losing superfluous stuff outweighed the need for aerobic metabolism.

This was really exciting until I read the bit where it says it just steals ATP from the host. Thought it could be a whole new way of life but looks more like a clever parasite hack.

SamBam 7y ago

I kind of agree. It also makes this statement a little confusing: > However, he believes "it's inevitable" that scientists will find more animals like Henneguya among those that have adapted to living in places with almost no oxygen, such as some parts of the ocean floor. The parasite can live because it's stealing ATP that's being made by an oxygen-burning organism it's attached to. How would you do that with no oxygen-burning organisms around?

arkades 7y ago
The ocean floor has "almost no oxygen," not "no oxygen." There remain oxygen-burning creatures adapted to living beneath in hypoxic conditions.
- TheSpiceIsLife 7y ago
  I dunno if hypoxic is the right term here as it’s usually taken to mean oxygen deprivation / insufficiency, which isn’t what’s happening here, as evidenced by organisms being adapted to the conditions.
  - akiselev 7y ago
    The oxygen concentration is actually quite a bit higher in most hadal zones (> 150 µmol/kg [1]) than oxygen minimum zones that exist in the middle layers (< 45 µmol/kg [2]). It's definitely not a hypoxic environment relative to the rest of the ocean. [1] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5829614/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5829614/ [2] https://web.stanford.edu/group/MicheliLab/pdf/oceanographicandbiologicaleffectsofshoaling.pdf https://web.stanford.edu/group/MicheliLab/pdf/oceanographica...
    - eloff 7y ago
      Where does the oxygen at the bottom of the ocean come from I wonder?
tempestn 7y ago
I guess it could be like, in oxygen-poor places, animals are more likely to evolve to need less oxygen. Some (all that we know of so far) will do this by adapting to extract oxygen more efficiently and to use less energy, and others might do it like this parasite, by finding ways to extract energy directly from a host.
- SamBam 7y ago
  It seems that it would still be surprising that such a parasitical organism could exist in such an environment. Presumably, if an organism is breathing in a near-zero oxygen environment, they are probably just getting the oxygen they need. If there's enough oxygen to support a parasite stealing from the first, there was enough oxygen to support the parasite getting its own oxygen. It seems to me much more likely that we'll find these parasites where there is plenty of oxygen: These organisms didn't evolve as a way of dealing with having no oxygen. They evolved because they adapted so that they did need to bother with mitochondria, because there was a plentiful supply of ATP they could steal. Since they didn't need to burn oxygen, they could do without. And the environment they are in has so much oxygen that the host organism doesn't suffer.

LessDmesg 7y ago

There are whole different ways of life. For example, before the abundance of oxygen on Earth, the first bacteria lived on sulphur-based biochemistry. It was slow and inefficient, but better than being poisoned by that oxygen plague! Remember that it's an extremely destructive oxidizing agent (even in us it causes aging etc). It actually took millions of years for living organisms to start breathing oxygen (which was the real new and exciting breakthrough of the time).

nobleach 7y ago
And this is why I argue when some refer to places like Saturn or Jupiter as "hostile toward life" or "Impossible living conditions". They are certainly hostile to they types of organisms with which we're familiar. But as we often find, nature has a way of surprising us.

hinkley 7y ago

> parasite Well now I don’t want to look.

mcguire 7y ago

I saw the punch line coming when I read that it was a parasite. That being said, it's an extreme form of parasitism.

jjeaff 7y ago

I guess it depends on how you look at it. Many scientists say that viruses aren't alive because they can't reproduce. But they actually do reproduce by parasitizing a host.

bluejellybean 7y ago
A virus isn't considered life because they do not follow all of the characteristics of life. This lists consists of: order - meaning systems of cells response to the environment - can sense, integrate senses, and response reproduction - can create offspring growth and development - do the cells grow and mature regulation - there are mechanisms in place for heat control, thirst, etc homeostasis - are able to maintain environmental equilibrium/steady state energy processing - have the ability to convert sun to energy or process something chemically todo so. If you go through this list, it's quite clear why a virus doesn't make the criteria for life. There is no order, they do not respond to the environment, there is no cell growth or development, they do not have mechanisms for heat, thirst, etc, and they do not maintain an environmental steady state.
- meragrin_ 7y ago
  If there is no order, response to environment, or growth/development, how can they reproduce? Assuming reproduction is a characteristic they possess, why is that different from the others they do not possess? Reproduction relies on host cells so it could be said they possess the other characteristics because they rely on the host cells for those as well.
  - heavenlyblue 7y ago
    Fire can also reproduce given a reasonable environment - would you call fire alive?
    - throwaway15392 7y ago
      Personally I do So then that just means everything is alive Which I also agree with Energy is life. Life is energy. Subscribe for more very unorthodox HN comments

samstave 7y ago

>...looks more like a clever parasite hack We call this "the federal reserve model" IRL

brabel 7y ago

It says only that this may be what they are doing, not that it is for sure... a little late they speculate other alternative as well: _Roger says animals can actually use an oxygen-free process to produce energy from sugar, but it's far less efficient. He suspects this may be what Henneguya is doing_

mirimir 7y ago
Yes, it does say that. It's called glycolysis, and isn't at all exotic. All animals rely on glycolysis when energy requirements outpace oxygen availability. This little sucker obviously adapted to an environment with little available oxygen and lots of ATP. So the resource gain from losing superfluous stuff outweighed the need for aerobic metabolism.