HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: johnk@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu (John J Kuszewski)
Subject: Re: Was There Once an RNA World of Life?
Organization: Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 1992 18:52:34 GMT

Loren I. Petrich writes:
>
>	This does not look like the result of spotaneous generation,
>unless one allows for extreme improbabilities, so it is presumed that
>there has been a lot of evolution behind it, evolution that may have
>left some vestiges, in the fashion of the numerous vestigial features
>generated by later evolution (I wonder if anyone has compiled a
>reasonably comprehensive list).

Interesting request.  How many molecular fossils can you name?  Here's
a start:

rRNA performs catalytic functions in ribosomes (several papers in Science
in the last few weeks)

tRNA CCA adding enzyme is the first telomerase (Nancy Maizels and Alan Weiner
in PNAS a few years ago)

self-splicing introns and the role of snRNAs in other intron splicing

NTPs as energy-storage media

other nucleoside-based cofactors (NAD, CoA, etc.)

mRNA

>
>	A system where there are two kinds of nucleic acids and where
>RNA was the original molecule, with DNA a specialization for long-term
>information storage. This is from several reasons, one being that it
>is RNA in transfer and ribosomal nucleic acids, when DNA could do just
>as well 
>

No, DNA couldn't do just as well.  The extra hydroxyl group is often used
in structural Hbonds or catalysis.

One point that several others have missed in their arguments about bubbles
on the seashore:  Membranes don't do any good without reasonably selective
holes in them.  Thus, membranes and membrane channels have to have evolved 
at the same time.  In fact, all high-energy synthesis reactions (in 
mitochondria, eubacteria, chloroplasts, etc.) work by setting up a pH
gradient across a membrane--another obvious molecular fossil.
Membranes' intimate involvement in so many synthetic paths, as well as
the obvious kinetic problems causes by having your genome and enzymes
dissolved throughout an entire pond, indicates that the evolved very 
early.  Any comments on this?  Anyone have any idea how to make a 
membrane channel out of RNA?


-- 
John Kuszewski
johnk@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu
I'm not an idiot, but I play one on USENET
Xref: sparky sci.bio:2952 bionet.molbio.evolution:311 talk.origins:9653
From: weemba@sagi.wistar.upenn.edu (Matthew P Wiener)
Newsgroups: sci.bio,bionet.molbio.evolution,talk.origins
Subject: Re: Was There Once an RNA World of Life?
Date: 18 Aug 92 16:04:07 GMT
Reply-To: weemba@sagi.wistar.upenn.edu (Matthew P Wiener)
Followup-To: talk.origins
Organization: The Wistar Institute of Anatomy and Biology
In-reply-to: lip@s1.gov (Loren I. Petrich)

In article <1992Aug17.132342.29191@s1.gov>, lip@s1 (Loren I. Petrich) writes:
>	   it is much more difficult to make nucleotides, though it can
>be done by rather contrived experiments. I have seen serious
>speculation that RNA was a "takeover" from another self-replicating
>molecule that was probably simpler.

Cairns-Smith's GENETIC TAKEOVER, involving clays as the precursor, is
well-known.  I've also come across Joyce, Schwartz, Miller, Orgel "The
case for an ancestral genetic system involving simple analogues of the
nucleotides" PNAS 84, p4398 (Jul 1987).  They argue the case that
acyclic analogues to the usual nucleosides were the original genetic
material (or at least pre-RNA).  Any others?
-- 
-Matthew P Wiener (weemba@sagi.wistar.upenn.edu)
Newsgroups: sci.bio
From: hsaiah@ul9000.unil.ch
Subject: URGENT!!!  EPA medium formula ?
Organization: University of Lausanne CH (Switzerland)
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1992 16:01:21 GMT

Hello I have a small problem, big for me. Is anyone could help me?
I need URGENTLY the composition of a medium for ecotoxicological test on
      ^^^^^^^^^^^
crustacean.  I lost the formula and I have actually experiments running with
this medium. The book were I could find the formula does'nt exist in
Switzerland.
 I wonder if someone could just look to the original book where is
describe the formula for the  moderately hard synthetic freshwater EPA medium:
                              `^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
 (EPA= Environmental Protection Agency)

what I need:
NaHCO3......??  mg/l
MgSO4......??   mg/l
CaCl2.......?? mg/l
KCl..........?? mg/l                (ph = 7,6 +- 02,  Hardness 80-100mg/l CaCO3)

The book is:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Title:         Methods for measuring the acute toxicity of effluents to
                 freshwater and marine organisms / edited by William H. Peltier
                 and Cornelius I. Weber. 3rd ed. Cincinnati, Ohio :
                 Environmental Monitoring and Support Laboratory, Office of
                 Research and Development, U.S. Environmental Protection
                 Agency, 1985.
Description:   xv, 216 p. : ill., forms ; 28 cm.

Doc Numbers:   Govt Doc No.:  EP 1.23/5:600/4-85-013
               Report No.:    EPA/600/4-85/013

Notes:         "March 1985."
               "EPA/600/4-85/013."
               Includes bibliographies.

Subjects:      Water quality bioassay -- United States.
               Water -- Pollution -- United States -- Measurement.

Other entries: Weber, Cornelius I.
               Peltier, William.
               Environmental Monitoring and Support Laboratory, Cincinnati,
                 Ohio.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
thanks in advance for your help. Mail directly to me the answer please. 
					bye,        Henni

:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Henni SAIAH , Lausanne University, Switzerland  :
Email:    Hsaiah@ulys.unil.ch	(internet)      :
	  Hsaiah@clsuni51.bitnet  (Bitnet)      :
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
From: josh@cqs.washington.edu (Josh Hayes)
Newsgroups: sci.bio
Subject: Re: sexual selection
Keywords: peacock tails
Date: 19 Aug 92 23:41:31 GMT
Article-I.D.: mowgli.josh.714267691
Organization: University of Washington

kate@cogsci.ed.ac.uk (Kate Jeffery) writes:

>Well, so, why don't *all* male birds have long brightly coloured
>health?


Because the trait must REALLY be related to male health state. If
it's some arbitrary cue, like a blue spot on the chin, it's too easy
for second-rate males to cheat. The trait cannot go to fixation unless
there is a correlation between the advertisement and the property
advertised.

>Afetr reading Dawkins' book I started wondering whether sexual
>selection might account for another puzzling ornament - breasts! I
>know they are not entirely without function but other primates seem to
>manage perfectly well with very small ones. Anyone know why humans
>females are thought to posssess them in such relative abundance?...

Ummm....I recall that Desmond Morris suggested in "The Naked Ape" that
breasts were "intended" to arouse male humans sexually because they
resemble the buttocks....I suppose it's as good an explanation as
any, but I wonder why it requires explanation at all; I'm quite
suspicious of what Lewontin and Gould called "the adaptationist
programme" in their famous "Spandrels of San Marco" paper. But that's
a different thread.

>Kate Jeffery

Josh Hayes

--
Josh Hayes, Quantitative Sciences HR-20 U of Washington
josh@mowgli.cqs.washington.edu             206 685-2793
Exclaimer: Hey!           Plan: Birth School Work Death
Newsgroups: sci.bio,bionet.molbio.evolution,talk.origins
From: danwell@IASTATE.EDU (Daniel A Ashlock)
Subject: Re: Was There Once an RNA World of Life?
Reply-To: danwell@IASTATE.EDU (Daniel A Ashlock)
Organization: Iowa State University
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1992 15:37:03 GMT

In article <1992Aug18.124417.7726@alw.nih.gov>, des@helix.nih.gov (David E.
Scheim) writes:
> I've heard some theories that RNA/DNA type molecules were the first forms
> of life.  It seems more intuitive to me, however, that life began as
> bubbles on the beach, evolving into primitive cells with membranes whose
> division into new cells was initially propelled by simple osmotic forces.
> One could speculate that genetic material evolved later, allowing for more
> complex characteristics to develop and be stably maintained in the cell
> line.
> 
> The seminal work of C. Don Cone during the 1960s and 1970s in fact has
> demonstrated how considerations of membrane voltage and ionic composition
> are critical to understanding mitosis, and that in fact you can make adult
> neural cells divide by manipulating the ionic environment to induce cell
> depolarization (and also block cell division using a similar technique).
> 
> It seems to me that biology has become overly infatuated by the recent
> discovery of genetics, trying to explain everything from the origin of life
> to cancer in these terms.  I would appreciate any comments as to what
> current knowledge indicates as to whether the "bubble on the beach"
> hypothesis for the origin of life may have been possible.  --David Scheim.

   As I recall the bubble on the beach hypothisis suffers from an inconvienient
observation, to wit that the beach was undergoing intense bombardment by
planitesimals and hence was not a calm enough environment.  The deep sea vents
have more shielding.  The guy in experimenting Sweeden with the idea that oil is
of non-biological origin claims to have found life five kilometers down in the
crust and is pushing a "life originated and still is mostly miles down" idea.

Dan
Danwell@IASTATE.EDU
 
Newsgroups: sci.bio
From: stassen@alc.com (Chris Stassen)
Subject: Re: COMPUTERS AND SEX DIFFERENCES
Organization: The Lion's Den, San Jose
Distribution: ba
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1992 19:17:20 GMT

In article <13AUG199211291621@portal.lasc.lockheed.com>
	le01167@portal.lasc.lockheed.com (Ron Nadel (x2025)) writes:
[Regarding a question on using neural nets to determine gender from pictures]
> Wasn't this on the PBS 4- or 5-part series on the history of the computer?

I'm pretty sure it's from the 5-part series "The Machine that Changed
the World."  It's a pretty good show.

One of the S.F. Bay Area PBS stations will be playing the 3rd through
5th parts of this series together (including the mentioned segment) a
week from this coming Monday (8/24).
--
Chris Stassen 			 408-943-0630 			stassen@alc.com
Newsgroups: sci.bio
From: heni@bio128.uni-bielefeld.de (Henning)
Subject: Telomers length - a characteristic for cell's age?
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 92 13:06:41 GMT
Organization: Universitaet Bielefeld
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL4

As far as I am concerned, after each mitosis the telomers lose a small piece of their filament. Does this mean, that the length of the telomers determine the life expectancy of a cell (which could be measurable and then predictable)?

Henning.

--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Henning Rattenholl			Abt. 4 - Biol. Kybernetik             | 
| Universitaet Bielefeld		Postbox  10 01 31                     |
| Fakultaet f. Biologie			D(W)-4800 Bielefeld 1                 |
| E-mail: heni@bio128.uni-bielefeld.de                                        |
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: sci.bio,sci.skeptic,soc.men,soc.women
From: jysuh@copper.ucs.indiana.edu (Jung Yul Suh)
Subject: Re: Biological Sex Differences? ("Women only" excusable ?)
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1992 04:39:49 GMT

In <BswLzz.Jt4@news.cso.uiuc.edu> hpzg0650@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Hale P Zengingonul) writes:

>Suh Jung Yul <jysuh@moose.cs.indiana.edu> writes:


>>References: <78rmr+c.sheaffer@netcom.com> <cmgyoB4w164w@cellar.org> <_13ma9-.sheaffer@netcom.com> <1992Aug11.225224.13677@s1.gov>
>>Date: Wed, 12 Aug 1992 19:48:18 -0500

>>  

>  Sorry, but you're wrong here. I know many feminists who reject the above
> and who try to achieve the "equality". 
>						Pinar

If they are so many of them, they must be very silent when some feminsts
for "women only allowed" are trumpeting their ideas. Are you intimidated
by these militant ones or something ? Do you feel guilty about taking
another feminists ? If so, your excuse is still lame.
Anyway, what their silent behavior results in is to be dragged around by 
extremist, because we only see and hear vocal ones.
I am spekptical of your claim.
It would be helpful if you can provide well-known feminists who supports
that idea. I do not mean the equality in the general sense, but 
specific statements that "women only" should be discouraged as well as
"men only".

Finally, is it safe to assume that we both unequivocally reject "women 
only allowed" unlike Loren Petrell ?

Jung Suh
Newsgroups: sci.bio
From: prange@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (henry prange)
Subject: Grasshoppers needed
Organization: Indiana University
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1992 14:30:41 GMT

My graduate students and I are working on various aspects of respiration
and temperature regulation of grasshoppers. We are having trouble finding
enough and would appreciate help from anyone who lives where they may be
more abundant or knows of commercial sources.

We particularly would like to have Schistocerca americana, S. nitens,
Romalea microptera, Taeniopoda eques, etc. In short, we would be glad
to have any big 'hoppers. 

I would also be interested in a source for large carabid beetles or
tiger beetles.

I am willing to pay for modest collection and shipping costs.

Thanks much,

Henry Prange
Med. Sci. Prog.
Indiana University
Bloomington, IN 47405
From: colby@bu-bio.bu.edu (Chris Colby)
Newsgroups: sci.bio
Subject: Re: sexual selection
Keywords: peacock tails
Date: 22 Aug 92 15:11:30 GMT
Organization: animal -- coelomate -- deuterostome

In article <josh.714267691@mowgli> josh@cqs.washington.edu (Josh Hayes) writes:
>kate@cogsci.ed.ac.uk (Kate Jeffery) writes:

>>Well, so, why don't *all* male birds have long brightly coloured
>>health?

>Because the trait must REALLY be related to male health state. 

Then later:

>I'm quite
>suspicious of what Lewontin and Gould called "the adaptationist
>programme" in their famous "Spandrels of San Marco" paper. But that's
>a different thread.

Interesting juxtaposition, Josh 8-)

>If
>it's some arbitrary cue, like a blue spot on the chin, it's too easy
>for second-rate males to cheat. 

But if the sexually attractive feature _is_ a blue spot, then males
with it aren't cheaters. Their sons will have the blue spot and
also be sexy. So the females would benefit from mating with them
even if other components of fitness (e.g. survival) suffered
because they will produce "sexy" sons.

A male cat that gets run over when he is young because he is out
every night courting females would be much more evolutionarily 
successful than a cautious male who lived a long time, but had 
much less mating success.
 
>The trait cannot go to fixation unless
>there is a correlation between the advertisement and the property
>advertised.

Sure it can, the fitness boost due to sexual attractiveness can
overshadow the fitness loss with regards to survival. There's a
paper by Lande that models the population genetics of this, I
believe. I'll look it up later (I can't right now or I would.)

>Josh Hayes, Quantitative Sciences HR-20 U of Washington

Chris Colby 	---	 email: colby@bu-bio.bu.edu	---
"'My boy,' he said, 'you are descended from a long line of determined,
resourceful, microscopic tadpoles--champions every one.'"
 	--Kurt Vonnegut from "Galapagos"

Xref: sparky sci.bio:2913 sci.med:15695 soc.women:15169
From: cfeem@ux1.cts.eiu.edu (Eleanor Midkiff)
Newsgroups: sci.bio,sci.med,soc.women
Subject: Re: Provocative DATA about sexes, brains, animals, intelligence
Summary: How would SAS differ?
Keywords: Right
Date: 12 Aug 92 20:24:49 GMT
Organization: Eastern Illinois University

In article <BsFM92.DLq@unx.sas.com> saswss@unx.sas.com (Warren Sarle) writes:
>
>In article <1992Jul23.010013.6334@news.columbia.edu>, stone@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Glenn Stone) writes:
>|> ...
>|> There was a recent study of IQ and brain size on a fairly small sample
>|> of white college students, using MRI.  The correlation coefficient of
>|> IQ on overall brain size was .51, which means brain size predicts 26%
>|> of the variance in IQ.  That is not a very strong correlation at all,
>|> but "brain size" and IQ are pretty coarse variables to be comparing.
>|> ...
>
>There was a note about this in _Science_, vol. 254, p. 1584, which is a
>prime example of how NOT to report statistical results in a useful way.
>The sample contained 40 fresh(wo)men, half with IQs >= 130 and half
><= 100. The IQ test was not specified. Brain measurements were adjusted
>for body size, but the note doesn't say how. There appear to be 16
>measurements of each brain, but how these were combined into a
>measure of brain size is not explained. The model from which the
>correlation of .51 was computed was not specified. The statistical
>significance of the relationship was not reported. Since the sample
>excludes people in the middle range of IQs, the correlation is
>inflated. The note says that extrapolating to the "general population"
>gives a correlation of .35, but whether this is a general population
>of white college freshmen or some other general population is not
>stated. The plot does not indicate units of measurement or amount
>of variability. There is a reference to an article in the Spring 1991
>issue of _Intelligence_ by Willerman (et al.?), but I haven't seen
>that.
>
>
>-- 
>
>Warren S. Sarle       SAS Institute Inc.   The opinions expressed here
>saswss@unx.sas.com    SAS Campus Drive     are mine and not necessarily
>(919) 677-8000        Cary, NC 27513       those of SAS Institute.

Just as a matter of question, how would SAS's opinion differ from yours?
I bet you got your job at SAS for having exactly those opinions.
(That's a compliment -- nice work.)

Eleanor Midkiff
(cfeem@eiu.edu)
Newsgroups: sci.bio,sci.skeptic,soc.men,soc.women
From: news@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu
Subject: Re: Biological Sex Differences? ("Women only" excusable ?)
Followup-To: <article Jysuh.71680789@copper>
Keywords: women only/men only
   Jung, these postings are opinions.  I feel that the tone you are taking is
   There are places where women and men need to feel "safe" in their own group.
                         Sincerely,
                    hschmidt@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu
Organization: The Ohio State University
Distribution: soc.women
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 1992 18:01:41 GMT

This article was probably generated by a buggy news reader.
From: hollombe@polymath.tti.com (The Polymath)
Newsgroups: sci.bio
Subject: Re: Provocative DATA about sexes, brains, animals, intelligence
Date: 13 Aug 92 03:10:57 GMT
Organization: The Cat Factory

In article <15988@pitt.UUCP> geb@dsl.pitt.edu (gordon e. banks) writes:
}In article <1992Aug4.185920.22233@bcrka451.bnr.ca> seanna@bnr.ca (Seanna Watson) writes:
}
}>Can you really get into college in the US with an IQ less than 100?  
}>I understood that, at least here in Canada, you need an IQ of about
}>110 just to finish high school.
}>
}Nonsense!  The average IQ is 100.  Are you saying the majority of
}people in Canada can't even finish high school?  I don't believe
}it!  I suspect anyone with an IQ of 85 who is willing to work at
}it can finish high school.

Easy, Gordon.  We're talking about the school system of a different
country with confusingly similar terminology.  What you say is certainly
true for the average run of US high schools.  I think Seanna is referring
to something more equivalent to our college prep schools.

The Polymath (aka: Jerry Hollombe, M.A., CDP, aka: hollombe@polymath.tti.com)
Head Robot Wrangler at Citicorp                   Turn the rascals out!
3100 Ocean Park Blvd.   (310) 450-9111, x2483     No incumbents in '92!
Santa Monica, CA  90405
Xref: sparky sci.bio:2915 sci.skeptic:14213 soc.men:14908 soc.women:15181
From: jysuh@moose.cs.indiana.edu (Suh Jung Yul)
Newsgroups: sci.bio,sci.skeptic,soc.men,soc.women
Subject: Re: Biological Sex Differences?
Date: 13 Aug 92 02:01:26 GMT
Organization: Computer Science, Indiana University


Date: Wed, 12 Aug 1992 19:48:18 -0500

>>Talk about betraying ignorance, Brian thinks (or else wants YOU to think)
>>that the idea underlying feminism is simply 'men and women being treated
>>equally' (and the latter interpretation is the more likely). If that
>>were the case, how to explain the demand for special treatment inherent
>>in feminist politics: Preference in hiring, Quotas, relaxed physical
>>requirements for jobs, preservation of certain 'women only' programs while
>>abolishing all 'men only' ones, etc. etc. I will not insult the readers'
>>intelligence any more by belaboring the obvious: this has been discussed
>>to death on "soc.men" and elsewhere.
Organization: Computer Science, Indiana University

     [deleted]

>	The most you have demonstrated is that there are some who push
                                                         ^^^^
>for measures that might be interpreted as overcompensation.
                   ^^^^^                   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
 Look at how much you try to blur the issue (some ... might .. over.. !:
 give me a break !)

>	In decades and centuries past, many women have suffered
>serious discrimination and lack of opportunities; just check your
>friendly neighborhood history book for examples :-)

>	For instance, many leading universities would not accept
>female students. As to insisting on all-female but no all-male
>programs, that seems politically dangerous to me. But I think that "no
>women allowed" may simply be an excuse to keep women from getting
>high-status jobs.
  
  If "men only allowed" sign is an alarming one, then why don't
  you fight "women only allowed" sign with equal vigor ? 
  That will elminate another
  sore excuse for it. Your lame argument that the women should have
  unfair advantage in legal protection does not sit well with your
  cary for equality. Maybe what  you all feminist really 
  want is some form of revenge
  such as having unfair advantage for 2-3 millenia over men to punish men
  for what their ancestor did for millenia.

  When it comes to fairness, feminists are always in double-standard.
  I have never seen any feminist who unequivocally reject "men only"
  as well as "women only", which make me conclude that women are
  interrested in underhanded method to achieve not "equality"
  but "superiority".

    In short, I think they are cheap and cowardly. 
    (I have not had a reason to think otherwise yet.)

Jung Suh
From: lip@s1.gov (Loren I. Petrich)
Newsgroups: sci.bio
Subject: Re: sexual selection
Keywords: peacock tails
Date: 19 Aug 92 01:52:01 GMT
Organization: LLNL

In article <pockling.714170952@sfu.ca> pockling@fraser.sfu.ca (richard pocklington) writes:
>One of the wierdest sexual selection hypotheses is that the male traits
>somehow reveal information about parasites, this is a complicated one and
>I won't get into it here.  

	The way that features such as brightly colored feathers would
do that is by advertising that their owner is in good health; a sick
bird would probably not be able to produce lots of shiny and bright
feathers.
Newsgroups: sci.bio