5 ms·

'Obelisks', a new class of life living inside humans

109 points by Ziggy_Zaggy 2y ago

Ziggy_Zaggy 2y ago
"...new life forms are called Obelisks..."
jmpman 2y ago
Midi-chlorians?
thrill 2y ago
Give yourself a fighting chance - eat more yoghurt.
- vixen99 2y ago
  Yes. https://microbiologyandnature.com/PUBLISHED_ARTICLES/Coulibaly_et_al_2024.pdf https://microbiologyandnature.com/PUBLISHED_ARTICLES/Couliba...
- konart 2y ago
  Any fermented milk product will do, really. Or something like sauerkraut.
amanzi 2y ago
I had no idea the Boy Genius Report website was still around!
pama 2y ago
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2024.01.20.576352v1 https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2024.01.20.576352v1
travisgriggs 2y ago
Obelisks eh? I wish this article had more on the dimensions of these little critters. Was hoping to read that they’re of 1:4:9 proportions, and thus the given name was a sort of hat tip… Cue Zarathustra
yawnxyz 2y ago
This was a good thread on Obelisks: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42547489 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42547489
- dang 2y ago
  Thanks! Macroexpanded: 'Obelisks': New class of life has been found in human digestive system - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42547489 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42547489 - Dec 2024 (134 comments) 'Obelisks': New Class of Life Has Been Found in the Human Digestive Sys - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42498562 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42498562 - Dec 2024 (1 comment) New 'Obelisks' Class of Life Has Been Found in the Human Digestive System - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39205052 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39205052 - Jan 2024 (1 comment) 'Obelisks': New Class of Life Has Been Found in the Human Digestive System - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39191349 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39191349 - Jan 2024 (3 comments) New Class of Life Has Been Found in the Human Digestive System - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39174881 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39174881 - Jan 2024 (2 comments)
fuzzfactor 2y ago
A never-before-seen class? Seems like experts would need to consider any "inheritance" issues that might have been unexpected . . .
kens 2y ago
Although the title says "just discovered", obelisks were discovered a year ago. Obelisks are RNA elements inside bacteria inside humans. Here are some links for more information: The publication in Cell: https://www.cell.com/cell/abstract/S0092-8674(24)01091-2 https://www.cell.com/cell/abstract/S0092-8674(24)01091-2 The preprint: https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2024.01.20.576352v1 https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2024.01.20.576352v1 An article about obelisks in Science: https://www.science.org/content/article/it-s-insane-new-viruslike-entities-found-human-gut-microbes https://www.science.org/content/article/it-s-insane-new-viru... An article in Derek Lowe's popular "In the Pipeline": https://www.science.org/content/blog-post/what-s-obelisk-anyway https://www.science.org/content/blog-post/what-s-obelisk-any...
- dang 2y ago
  Ok, we've taken out the 'just discovered' bit from the title above. Thanks!
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
ninalanyon 2y ago
The article makes it sound as though this is something only humans have. Which struck me as very odd. But the paper in Cell says: "• Found globally in diverse niches, obelisks also occur in human stool and oral microbiomes" https://www.cell.com/cell/abstract/S0092-8674(24)01091-2 https://www.cell.com/cell/abstract/S0092-8674(24)01091-2 Much more reasonable.
- adrian_b 2y ago
  Free preprint: https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2024.01.20.576352v1 https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2024.01.20.576352v1
- ahazred8ta 2y ago
  They resemble a single stranded circular RNA plasmid, stuck together into a hairpin shape. Plant viroids are 250-450 bases long, while obelisks seem to be in the 1000-1200 range. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circular_RNA https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circular_RNA -- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hepatitis_D https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hepatitis_D
enkid 2y ago
If viruses usually aren't considered alive, why would obelisk? I'm also curious how we know these are independent structures versus a by product of our own or our resident bacteria's cellular function. The mRNA seems unrelated to our own, but perhaps there's an unknown process that either generates new extracellular mRNA to create these protiens referenced in the article. Alternatively, could these be mRNA strands that escaped the cellular destruction process?
- adrian_b 2y ago
  I do not agree with considering viruses as not alive. A viral particle outside its host can be considered dead, in the sense that it is inert and it does not have any metabolism, but it is not definitively dead, as it will become alive again when entering a host. Alive in the sense that inside their host cells viruses observe the command "Crescite et multiplicamini" from the bible (grow and multiply), in the same way like any other living beings, even if they have to take control of various components of the host cell in order to do that. I do not see any essential difference between a viral particle and a dormant seed or a bacterial or fungal spore or an encysted protozoan. All such resistant forms of living beings have the purpose of remaining intact in environments where they cannot found the food or water or air that they need for a normal life. Viruses have the least demands from their environment, while the others may have greater requirements, e.g. the presence of small amounts of free oxygen and water in their environment, in order to not die permanently, but that is more like an imperfection in their current design, not an intrinsically necessary attribute. Viruses cannot live without their hosts, but that is true for any obligate parasite. Humans can also not live independently, at least for now, but only together with many other living beings able to synthesize the substances that we cannot. Therefore it is hard to draw a line between alive and non alive based on the amount of dependencies on other living beings. It certainly is more useful to include viruses in what is covered by the word "alive", because they are subjected to the same kind of evolution like the cellular living beings. Moreover in the same way like many kinds of cellular living beings have appeared by hybridization between cellular living beings with distinct genetic heritage, there are also plenty of cases where new species of cellular living beings have appeared by hybridization with viruses, i.e. by incorporating permanently in their genome some genetic material from a viral ancestor. This includes even humans (and all other vertebrates). Therefore, if you draw a graph of the genetic relationships between cellular living beings, it is inextricably intermingled with the corresponding graph for viruses. So I think that the most convenient way is to consider that the living beings are divided into cellular living beings and viruses. Regardless of the word choice, biology must study both cellular living beings and viruses, anyway, because none of them can be understood in isolation from the others.
vdjskshi 2y ago
[dead]
thebeardisred 2y ago
Does anyone else find it odd that we're getting virus news from the former android news aggregator "Boy Genius Report"?

109 points by Ziggy_Zaggy 2y ago

Ziggy_Zaggy 2y ago

"...new life forms are called Obelisks..."

jmpman 2y ago

Midi-chlorians?

thrill 2y ago

Give yourself a fighting chance - eat more yoghurt.

vixen99 2y ago
Yes. https://microbiologyandnature.com/PUBLISHED_ARTICLES/Coulibaly_et_al_2024.pdf https://microbiologyandnature.com/PUBLISHED_ARTICLES/Couliba...
konart 2y ago
Any fermented milk product will do, really. Or something like sauerkraut.

amanzi 2y ago

I had no idea the Boy Genius Report website was still around!

pama 2y ago

https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2024.01.20.576352v1 https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2024.01.20.576352v1

travisgriggs 2y ago

Obelisks eh? I wish this article had more on the dimensions of these little critters. Was hoping to read that they’re of 1:4:9 proportions, and thus the given name was a sort of hat tip… Cue Zarathustra

yawnxyz 2y ago

This was a good thread on Obelisks: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42547489 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42547489

dang 2y ago
Thanks! Macroexpanded: 'Obelisks': New class of life has been found in human digestive system - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42547489 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42547489 - Dec 2024 (134 comments) 'Obelisks': New Class of Life Has Been Found in the Human Digestive Sys - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42498562 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42498562 - Dec 2024 (1 comment) New 'Obelisks' Class of Life Has Been Found in the Human Digestive System - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39205052 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39205052 - Jan 2024 (1 comment) 'Obelisks': New Class of Life Has Been Found in the Human Digestive System - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39191349 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39191349 - Jan 2024 (3 comments) New Class of Life Has Been Found in the Human Digestive System - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39174881 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39174881 - Jan 2024 (2 comments)

fuzzfactor 2y ago

A never-before-seen class? Seems like experts would need to consider any "inheritance" issues that might have been unexpected . . .

kens 2y ago

Although the title says "just discovered", obelisks were discovered a year ago. Obelisks are RNA elements inside bacteria inside humans. Here are some links for more information: The publication in Cell: https://www.cell.com/cell/abstract/S0092-8674(24)01091-2 https://www.cell.com/cell/abstract/S0092-8674(24)01091-2 The preprint: https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2024.01.20.576352v1 https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2024.01.20.576352v1 An article about obelisks in Science: https://www.science.org/content/article/it-s-insane-new-viruslike-entities-found-human-gut-microbes https://www.science.org/content/article/it-s-insane-new-viru... An article in Derek Lowe's popular "In the Pipeline": https://www.science.org/content/blog-post/what-s-obelisk-anyway https://www.science.org/content/blog-post/what-s-obelisk-any...

dang 2y ago
Ok, we've taken out the 'just discovered' bit from the title above. Thanks!

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

ninalanyon 2y ago

The article makes it sound as though this is something only humans have. Which struck me as very odd. But the paper in Cell says: "• Found globally in diverse niches, obelisks also occur in human stool and oral microbiomes" https://www.cell.com/cell/abstract/S0092-8674(24)01091-2 https://www.cell.com/cell/abstract/S0092-8674(24)01091-2 Much more reasonable.

adrian_b 2y ago
Free preprint: https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2024.01.20.576352v1 https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2024.01.20.576352v1
ahazred8ta 2y ago
They resemble a single stranded circular RNA plasmid, stuck together into a hairpin shape. Plant viroids are 250-450 bases long, while obelisks seem to be in the 1000-1200 range. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circular_RNA https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circular_RNA -- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hepatitis_D https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hepatitis_D

enkid 2y ago

If viruses usually aren't considered alive, why would obelisk? I'm also curious how we know these are independent structures versus a by product of our own or our resident bacteria's cellular function. The mRNA seems unrelated to our own, but perhaps there's an unknown process that either generates new extracellular mRNA to create these protiens referenced in the article. Alternatively, could these be mRNA strands that escaped the cellular destruction process?

adrian_b 2y ago
I do not agree with considering viruses as not alive. A viral particle outside its host can be considered dead, in the sense that it is inert and it does not have any metabolism, but it is not definitively dead, as it will become alive again when entering a host. Alive in the sense that inside their host cells viruses observe the command "Crescite et multiplicamini" from the bible (grow and multiply), in the same way like any other living beings, even if they have to take control of various components of the host cell in order to do that. I do not see any essential difference between a viral particle and a dormant seed or a bacterial or fungal spore or an encysted protozoan. All such resistant forms of living beings have the purpose of remaining intact in environments where they cannot found the food or water or air that they need for a normal life. Viruses have the least demands from their environment, while the others may have greater requirements, e.g. the presence of small amounts of free oxygen and water in their environment, in order to not die permanently, but that is more like an imperfection in their current design, not an intrinsically necessary attribute. Viruses cannot live without their hosts, but that is true for any obligate parasite. Humans can also not live independently, at least for now, but only together with many other living beings able to synthesize the substances that we cannot. Therefore it is hard to draw a line between alive and non alive based on the amount of dependencies on other living beings. It certainly is more useful to include viruses in what is covered by the word "alive", because they are subjected to the same kind of evolution like the cellular living beings. Moreover in the same way like many kinds of cellular living beings have appeared by hybridization between cellular living beings with distinct genetic heritage, there are also plenty of cases where new species of cellular living beings have appeared by hybridization with viruses, i.e. by incorporating permanently in their genome some genetic material from a viral ancestor. This includes even humans (and all other vertebrates). Therefore, if you draw a graph of the genetic relationships between cellular living beings, it is inextricably intermingled with the corresponding graph for viruses. So I think that the most convenient way is to consider that the living beings are divided into cellular living beings and viruses. Regardless of the word choice, biology must study both cellular living beings and viruses, anyway, because none of them can be understood in isolation from the others.

vdjskshi 2y ago

[dead]

thebeardisred 2y ago

Does anyone else find it odd that we're getting virus news from the former android news aggregator "Boy Genius Report"?