Slashdot Mirror


Ancient Antarctic Bacteria Revived

Danny Rathjens writes "Frozen bacteria from Antarctica, estimated to be between five to eight million years old, were brought back to life simply by warming them up! NASA folks also participated since they think this can give them better clues on where to look for life on Mars."

64 comments

  1. Re:YAY by clausiam · · Score: 4, Informative
    oh GREAT! Lets just go and revive ancient bacteria that could be a deadly virus!

    Umm - how can a BACTERIA be a VIRUS since these are completely different organisms?

    /Claus

  2. Before opening, please see by Alrescha · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "The Andromeda Strain", by Michael Crichton, (c) 1969

    A.

    --
    ...bringing you cynical quips since 1998
    1. Re: Before opening, please see by Black+Parrot · · Score: 2, Funny


      Also, check the expiration date on the bottom of the can.

      --
      Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
    2. Re:Before opening, please see by jeni+generic · · Score: 1

      The human race is far too adaptive to be wiped out by viral or bacterial out break. Of course I can only talk out of my ass here, as I have no definitive proof exept for Europe surviving the Black Plauge; but every single disease that has surfaced (including AIDs >ptolemu writes "including AIDsA HREF=http://www.hhs.gov/news/press/1996pres/960926 .html) has revealed a community of people that were either resistant or immune. For example I carry the gene for sickle cell anemia and as a side effect I have a natural resistance to Malaria, neato. Yeah, there would be causualties if we brought back, recovered or revived some unfamiliar "bug" and it turned out a sizable group was non-adaptive, but this is science (and they have special suits and underground hideouts for the really important people) and we sacrifice everything for growth, especially if it could bring in some extra public funding.

      --


      -"Food is disgusting, it's what they make shit from."-
    3. Re:Before opening, please see by jeni+generic · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Sorry...still learning how to post in HTML...let me try this again within my current skill level. The human race is far too adaptive to be wiped out by viral or bacterial out break. Of course I can only talk out of my ass here, as I have no definitive proof except for Europe surviving the Black Plague; but every single disease that has surfaced (including AIDs http://www.hhs.gov/news/press/1996pres/960926.html ) has revealed a community of people that were either resistant or immune. For example I carry the gene for sickle cell anemia and as a side effect I have a natural resistance to Malaria, neato. Yeah, there would be casualties if we brought back, recovered or revived some unfamiliar "bug" and it turned out a sizable group was non-adaptive, but this is science (and they have special suits and underground hideouts for the really important people) and we sacrifice everything for growth, especially if it could bring in some extra public funding.

      --


      -"Food is disgusting, it's what they make shit from."-
  3. Seeds of Doom by jvmatthe · · Score: 0, Offtopic
    I've already seen this happen once. It wasn't pretty. Go read about it, already!. (Skip down to "story synopsis.)

    At least a couple of extras got turned into poorly made-up plant things and died horrible deaths. There were some goofy special effects and pithy lines from the Doctor. NASA better hope that's all that happens this time too.

  4. Some Dr. Frankenstein by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I guess the headline: Bacteria warmed up! had a lot less punch than "brought back to life."

  5. The geeky perspective... by jeeves99 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I have whole freezers full of mammalian, bacteria, and yeast cells that I can though out and revive with a usual 80% efficiency. Freezing cells for later use is VERY common in the research world. For longterm storage -160 is preferred and for short term -80 is acceptable. The fact that these survived bacteria so long at -27 is suprising. It makes me wonder what percentage actually survived.

    What is a bit more suprising about this is that the cells were not stored in any special solution. DMSO or glycerol based solutions are typically added to the cell media right before freezing because they prevent ice crystals from burtsting the cells. You ever fill a sealed glass container with water and then freeze it? The water will expand and crack the glass. Same principle here.

    These bacteria cells are hardy little suckers.

    1. Re:The geeky perspective... by 0x69 · · Score: 1

      Ummm...didn't it say that these were soil bacteria from Antarctica? Wouldn't they have had umpteen jillion bacterial generations of adopting to being frozen frequently (without any high-tech chemical preservatives, ultra-cool or temp-controlled freezers, etc.) before things got a bit colder and turned 'em into Rip Van Winkle's?

      --
      It's easy to make up & spread cool- and credible-sounding stuff. Finding & checking hard facts is hard work.
    2. Re:The geeky perspective... by jeeves99 · · Score: 1

      "These bacteria cells are hardy little suckers."

      I think I answered your criticism with my closing statement. Obviously immortalized mammalian cells would not have survived such treatment. These bacteria cells did.

    3. Re:The geeky perspective... by sd211 · · Score: 3, Informative

      When you freeze mammalian cells, you do not have to use DMSO, 100% FBS will do. Besides, mammalian cells have not adopted to being frozen. Bacteria often do, especially soil ones. In addition, some organisms sporulate and spores are very resistant to harsh treatment. It is not surprising to me that bacteria sutvived that long, although it is definetely unusual.

    4. Re:The geeky perspective... by jeeves99 · · Score: 1

      True, DMSO (etc) doesn't have to be used, but the yields can be a lot better if you do. As long as you get the cells out of the DMSO soon after thawing, there usually aren't any negative effects. I usually plate 1mL thawed mammalian fibroblast cells w/ DMSO + 10mL BCS (or FCS) in a 10cm plate and then do a medium change the next day. Easy as pie. Protocols are different per cell lines of course.

      But yeah, extremophiles are really nifty cell types. Do you know if these bacteria have been classified as extremophiles?

    5. Re:The geeky perspective... by ckaminski · · Score: 1

      so is there possibility that there might be a hive of multi-billion year old bacterium out there?? Just waiting for some little kid with a rock hammer to set them free?

      Scary thought...

    6. Re:The geeky perspective... by b-baggins · · Score: 1

      The alternative explanation, of course, is that the bacteria are only a few hundred/thousand years old, and the geologic dating is off. Then it wouldn't be surprising at all that they survived this long as frozen spores.

      I've always wondered why the geologic dating is given the priority of being accurate and the improbability of bacteria surviving that long is NOT taken as a check on the geologic dating.

      --
      You can tell a great deal about the character of a man by observing those who hate him.
    7. Re:The geeky perspective... by Sarin · · Score: 1

      I think these bacteria have evolved a mechanism to allow them to be frozen easily. Antarctica is the place where they have been found, it's not like it became a freezingly cold place that froze everything overnight some millions years ago. So these bacteria evolved to survive regular freezing and unfreezing.

      It would be more surprising to see a bacteria that is common in high temperature areas to do the same.

    8. Re:The geeky perspective... by ralphclark · · Score: 2, Funny
      I have whole freezers full of mammalian, bacteria, and yeast cells that I can though out and revive with a usual 80% efficiency.Freezing cells for later use is VERY common in the research world.

      Yeah I have meat, yoghurt and bread dough in my freezer as well. Its very common in the "breakfast lunch and dinner" world as well.

    9. Re:The geeky perspective... by sd211 · · Score: 1

      No, I do not know if they were classified at all. Logically thinking, they were not living at extreme temperature, right? They should not be classified as extremophiles. Longevity, - that's different story.

    10. Re:The geeky perspective... by sd211 · · Score: 1

      Sure it's possible. It is not necessarily scary though, the bactria will be very unadapted to the environment if it was dormant couple billion years.

  6. Obviously... by Your_Mom · · Score: 4, Funny

    ...these scientists haven't watched enough horror movies.

    --
    Objects in the blog are closer then they ap
  7. Sci-fi mumbojumbo by mwheeler01 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I love the comments so far that are foretelling doom. Perhaps these microbes will lead us in the direction of a cure for cancer or be ultra efficient energy producers that can live in batteries. Those seem just a likely to me.

    --
    Pretty widgets? What pretty widgets?
    1. Re:Sci-fi mumbojumbo by zero_offset · · Score: 1

      The only comments preceding yours are jokes based on bad horror movies or stories. At the time you posted this, there were no comments "foretelling doom".

      --

      Slashdot quality declines as the number of hot grits posts decreases. - Provolt's Law, Apr-09-2005

    2. Re:Sci-fi mumbojumbo by mwheeler01 · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Oh they were jokes, I didn't even think of that. Thank you captain obvious.

      --
      Pretty widgets? What pretty widgets?
  8. Really Grave Responsibility Here by mosel-saar-ruwer · · Score: 2, Insightful

    No, I did not RTFA, but I hope these guys know what the hell they're doing, i.e. I hope to hell [er- heaven] that they're doing this in one of those negative pressure Category III facilities, and that they're all wearing those Intel bunny spacesuits.

    While I'll agree that it's a low probability event, if they were to revive some bacteria for which modern organisms lacked an immune response, there could be some serious hell to pay.

    I have the same feeling about this idiotic mission to return a mist sample from a [water-based] comet, or to return a soil sample from Mars - while it's a low probability event, the expected consequences from releasing some sort of organic agent into our ecosystem for which we have no immune protection are simply catastrophic.

    You may laugh, but hospitals are having a helluva time trying to protect patients from methicillin and vancomycin resistant staphylococcus aureus, and, fifteen years ago, we didn't even know that pseudo-living, pseudo-non-living things like prions even existed.

    PS: This little screed is brought to you by a card-carrying, gun-toting, eco-sceptic pillar of what many /.ers would call the right-wing fringe, but folks, we need to be very, very careful with this stuff.

    1. Re:Really Grave Responsibility Here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do not worry citizen, we followed your advice. In case you are wondering it tastes a bit like chicken.

    2. Re:Really Grave Responsibility Here by grimsweep · · Score: 1

      Correct me if I'm wrong, but wouldn't the bacteria/microbe have to be properly suited for conditions inside the human body before it could do damage? It's not exactly a friendly place for most invaders, especially those that are not grown in our environment.

      Certainly, there's a chance with older Earth-bound microbes, but I wonder if 'space-faring' organisms would even survive (much less thrive) in our rather rare environment.

    3. Re:Really Grave Responsibility Here by core+plexus · · Score: 1
      I remember reading a piece of fiction where the guy finds a preserved human carcass of one of the 1917 flu epidemic victims frozen in the permafrost in northern Alaska, and collects a sample. Having gone on a few digs and seeing how well preserved some tissue was from tens of thousands of years ago, well it made me think. We still turn up an occaisonal 36,000 y.o. Bison or mastodon here.

      -cp-

      Alaska Bugs Sweat Gold Nuggets

    4. Re:Really Grave Responsibility Here by hyc · · Score: 1

      Y'know, if these other articles on rapid climate change are to be believed, and a huge chunk of the Antarctic ice shelf really did just break off into the ocean recently, soon there's going to be a lot of these multi-million-year-old bacteria waking up and wandering around in our ecosystem, completely uncontrolled, carried by ocean currents and airborne wind patterns...

      Antarctic ice and CO2

      --
      -- *My* journal is more interesting than *yours*...
  9. Re:HEY by Tumbleweed · · Score: 4, Funny

    Hey, don't blame the bacteria - it was born that way! If it was born as a virus in a bacteria's body, you have NO RIGHT to superimpose your 'value system' on it. Get your laws of the bacteria's body!

    Damn right-wingers...

  10. reasonable? by BigChigger · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Yeah, a chance at new batteries vs. possible plague. Sounds like a reasonable risk to me. At least as long as someone else does the dying.

    BC

  11. 8 million years is nothing. by eggstasy · · Score: 5, Informative

    Around 1995 scientists extracted bacteria from an insect's stomach, that had been trapped in amber for 125 million years, and they lived.
    A few years later, scientists revived bacteria that had been dormant inside a crystal of common table salt for 250 million years!
    Even so, Mars has been geologically dead for 1.5 billion years, so I don't know how how these paltry 8 million years are suddenly so significant.

    1. Re:8 million years is nothing. by njchick · · Score: 1

      I think at this scale radiation becomes limiting factor even on Earth, let alone Mars. Radiation creates defects in the DNA that are not fixed if the bacteria is frozen.

    2. Re:8 million years is nothing. by Euphonious+Coward · · Score: 3, Informative
      The bacteria from bugs were, in fact, extracted from the crops of bees embedded in amber. The bacteria are of a type that is symbiotic with the bee.

      My wife's cousin Sid was on the team analyzing the heritage of these bacteria (actually, I think, their mitochondria). They were able to demonstrate that the strain extracted was ancestral to those found in various species of modern bees.

      Normally, when you publish stuff like this, everyone insists that the bacteria you have must have come from contamination on your equipment, and didn't really come out of the bee at all. To prove them wrong you have to show that the bacteria are quantifiably different from any modern strain.

    3. Re:8 million years is nothing. by eggstasy · · Score: 1

      Well yes, good point about the radiation.
      But how far does it penetrate ice and soil in general? Mars has polar caps, and while I dont know for sure, I always assumed they were like ours: huge layers of ice several miles thick.
      I'm not a physicist :)

    4. Re:8 million years is nothing. by Wireless+Joe · · Score: 1

      "A few years later, scientists revived bacteria that had been dormant inside a crystal of common table salt for 250 million years!"


      Table Salt? Makes me wonder where they found the 250 million year old saltshaker?
    5. Re:8 million years is nothing. by dan+dan+the+dna+man · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Erm bacteria don't have mitochondria, they are a feature of some eukaryotic cells not prokaryote ones. The accepted wisdom is that mitochondria are derived from intracellular prokaryote symbiotes.

      --
      I don't read your sig, why do you read mine?
    6. Re:8 million years is nothing. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      NaCl, dumbfuck.

    7. Re:8 million years is nothing. by Detritus · · Score: 2, Informative

      Soil is a good radiation shield. 8.4 cm of soil will block 50% of the radiation. Ice would probably be even better.

      --
      Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
  12. Seeds might also be revivable by justanyone · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Sorry, this may be apocryphal, but here's two stories I remember reading:

    • A house in Britain that was moved / removed. Underneath the stone and misc. flooring (which was all removed) a bunch of flowers sprouted that were totally unlike any in the area, but which matched descriptions from the middle ages of flowers at the time. But these flowers are long gone from Britain now.
    • Likewise, I've heard that some wheat taken from an Egyptian tomb was planted and it sprouted (this was probably great for some genetic diversity study).

    What I'm wondering is, I wonder if any seeds (or at least pollen) can be found preserved by extreme cold in the Antartic that could grow to be real plants ? If so, it seems to me a study of the amino acids, etc. in the plants might be worthwhile of study.

    Does anyone know if plants have DNA? I am thinking that only animals have DNA, that plants have different structures like RNA or something. Sorry for my ignorance, I'm willing to read this online if someone can point me in the right direction to a site on the basics of plant biology without being too 'biochemical genetic engineering' (expert level) text. I've had HS bio, and college chem, and lots and lots and lots of physics, but that's it...

    Thanks,
    -- Kevin J. Rice

    1. Re:Seeds might also be revivable by Noofus · · Score: 4, Informative

      Every living thing that we have discovered on thsi planet so far has DNA. Everything. "Modern" (Eukaryotic) multi-celled and many single eleed organisms keep their DNA in the cell nuclei. Most bacteria (but not all) are of the "non-modern" (Prokaryotic) type. Their DNA just floats around in their cells. However they ALL have DNA.

      Even viruses, which are debatable as to their status as organisms keep DNA around (though a few are RNA based and known as retro viruses. HIV is an example)

    2. Re:Seeds might also be revivable by theslashdude · · Score: 1
    3. Re:Seeds might also be revivable by Elledan · · Score: 3, Interesting

      "Does anyone know if plants have DNA? I am thinking that only animals have DNA, that plants have different structures like RNA or something. Sorry for my ignorance, I'm willing to read this online if someone can point me in the right direction to a site on the basics of plant biology without being too 'biochemical genetic engineering' (expert level) text. I've had HS bio, and college chem, and lots and lots and lots of physics, but that's it..."

      All biological organisms use DNA. While early life forms are likely to have used RNA exclusively, DNA is used because it's very stable (from a biochemical point of view). Only some viruses contain a string of RNA instead of DNA.

      You might find this site interesting.

      --
      Site & blog: http://www.mayaposch.com
    4. Re:Seeds might also be revivable by phiala · · Score: 2, Informative
      Likewise, I've heard that some wheat taken from an Egyptian tomb was planted and it sprouted (this was probably great for some genetic diversity study). Nah, that seems to be an urban legend. It would be awfully cool, though! Kew Botanic Gardens talks abou it.

      A house in Britain that was moved / removed. Underneath the stone and misc. flooring (which was all removed) a bunch of flowers sprouted that were totally unlike any in the area, but which matched descriptions from the middle ages of flowers at the time. But these flowers are long gone from Britain now.

      This I haven't heard about. It seems unlikely to me, though. We have a reasonable idea as to what the flora of Britain was like during the Middle Ages, and where those species are now (mostly still there).

      I wouldn't be surprised if there were windborne seeds and pollen in the Antarctic ice, but I'm not sure if much effort has gone into looking. It's not too likely that seeds would germinate (seeds are tough, but there are limits), but it might be possible to extract DNA. At the moment, we could compare that DNA to extant plants, but not do a whole lot else... the days of recreating "Jurassic Park" type plants is still waaay off.

      --
      I prefer to be called Evil Scientist.
    5. Re:Seeds might also be revivable by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not only do plants have DNA, but humans and plants, as well as all other living things, share similar DNA. Most plants even reproduce the same way as humans, with an egg and sperm.

    6. Re:Seeds might also be revivable by fortheloveofjava · · Score: 2, Informative

      Every living organism on earth, plants and bacteria included, maintain their genome primarily in DNA, and use RNA during the process of converting the DNA source code into protein executables (see what a CS/Bio double major does for you?). To note an exception, there are many viruses that carry their entire genome in RNA, but there is some debate as to whether or not viruses are even alive, as they're little more than *NA wrapped in a protein shell.

    7. Re:Seeds might also be revivable by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Every living thing (know to us) has DNA and RNA. DNA is the code of the cell, while RNA is the messenger within the cell. BIO 101.

      From computer geek point of view, cellular biology is really interesting since DNA seems to both be software and hardware. RNA is like subroutines.

  13. Re:YAY by Noofus · · Score: 1

    Regardless, hopefully if we were to revive some sort of aincient virus it wont be able to infect us. SInce it would likely have evolved long before humans, it might not know what to do with us.

    A bacterium on the other hand very well might cause issues. Since bacteria dont normally try and make you sick. They just try and live their lives and sometimes happen to release toxins into you. SO aincient bacteria could very well cause us troubles (but its not really their fault).

  14. Current day implications... by rodney+dill · · Score: 4, Funny

    ...We're not sure how long Al Gore can go yet and still be revived.

    --

    Use your head, can't you, use your head,
    You're on earth, there's no cure for that
    - S. Beckett
  15. Yes, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Prions. I don't know that much about them. Would we say they are "living things"?

    1. Re:Yes, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Prions. I don't know that much about them. Would we say they are "living things"?

      Some would say yes, some would say no. It depends on what your definition of life is. I am among those that define life as a process of replication of information via physical means. Under this definition, viruses are alive, but prions and computer viruses fall into a gray zone. Prions seem to be a self-catalyzing protein reaction, so they're not alive according to my view of things.

      Stated another way, mad cow disease is a degenerative condition caused by a simple chemical reaction in a cow's brain. The chemical reaction kills the cow, and spreads from cow to cow.

    2. Re:Yes, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      so, are they good or are they whack?

  16. In related news.. by lecca · · Score: 2, Funny

    There have been scattered reports of glowing green swarms attacking people at night in the woods

    --
    "In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act" - George Orwell
  17. Bacteria? Antarctica? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think I saw the documentary on this... Clicky

  18. Re:YAY by datababe72 · · Score: 1

    Er... the virus isn't TRYING to make you sick either. It's not "trying" to do anything. All it does is replicate itself. The fact that you get sick is a byproduct of that (a combination of the facts that the virus is using up your cells' resources, the virus is killing some cells, and your immune system is also killing cells as it fights the infection).

    Theoretically, all an ancient virus needs to do to infect you is have some way of getting into your cells and a mechanism by which to copy itself (or co-opt your cells' into copying it).

  19. cruel and unusual! by Xtifr · · Score: 1

    Now, in addition to all the other dangers of scientific research, you want to add the possibility of torture? You inhuman bastard! Oh well, at least you're not asking them to read any of Crichton's dreck. Movies are a medium where Crichton's levels of ignorance, stupidity and scientific illiteracy are the norm, which helps numb the pain somewhat.... :)

    1. Re:cruel and unusual! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ok, fine. Then see "At The Mountains of Madness" by HPL. Maybe they're baby shoggoths.

  20. Oh Please! by Goo.cc · · Score: 1

    Five to eight million years old? Oh Please! Any good christian will tell you that the Earth is only a few thousand years old.

  21. At the Mountains of Madness by Rene_Daley · · Score: 1

    H.P. Lovecraft foresaw this type of discovery in his novella _At the Mountains of Madness_. Could this be evidence of the old ones??!

  22. Re:YAY by nege · · Score: 1

    You elitist, intellectual bastard! You are certainly off my team-time list.

  23. Feh by Valdrax · · Score: 2, Funny

    So you mean civilization will nearly be brought to the brink of extinction by an unknown plague only to have it mysteriously mutate completely and in unison to a rubber-eating form just in time for the total cop-out ending?

    --
    If it's for-profit but free, you're not the customer -- you're the product (e.g., the Slashdot Beta's "audience").
  24. obligatory by kzin602 · · Score: 1

    Well I, for one, welcome our new ancient bacterial overlords!

  25. In the words of G W..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    BRING IT ON! ! ! ! !

  26. From Kew Article by ackthpt · · Score: 1
    "Even greater longevity has been reported in a seed of the Indian or Sacred Lotus Nelumbo nucifera from an ancient lake bed in China. This seed has been germinated and subsequently radio-carbon-dated by Shen-Miller and colleagues in California in the 1990s as being 1,288 +/- 271 years old."

    I recall reading something about this. The lotus seed was found in a dugout canoe in a peat bog. The estimate in the article I read, was the seed would have been ~1,200 years old.

    While treating poison oak I found the compound which causes the allergic reaction has been noted to survive over 100 years in a bell jar (giving a rash to someone to handled the leaves or twigs.)

    I wouldn't hastily discount the 'British House' anecdote, as plants do tend to come and go. For several years there was a thick patch of goldenrod in a field, then it ceased, perhaps due to concentration of fungi or animals/insects which fed upon the plant. Generally the plants have spread their seeds further away, hence the species continues, but simply moves around in much the same manner a herd of animals does.

    --

    A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar