![]() The bone had its own unique microbiome, which could cause confusion as to whether proteins and possible genetic material belonged to the dinosaur itself or to bacteria that had come to reside within it during the fossilization process. ![]() The researchers said that they unearthed DNA inside the bone, but it was from lineages of bacteria and other microorganisms that had not been seen before. Hot on the heels of Bailleul’s paper-and inspired by the controversy over what the biomolecules inside dinosaur bones represent-a separate team, led by Princeton University geoscientist Renxing Liang, recently reported on unexpected microbes found inside one from Centrosaurus, a horned dinosaur of similar age to Hypacrosaurus. The question is whether these proteins and other traces are really what they seem. “I think exceptional preservation is really more common than what we think, because, as researchers, we have not looked at enough fossils yet,” Bailleul says. And that would mean there may be an entire world of biological information experts are only just getting to know. If upheld, Bailleul and her colleagues’ findings would indicate that biochemical traces of organisms can persist for tens of millions of years longer than previously thought. ![]() Still, these potential tatters of ancient DNA would be far older (by millions of years) than the next closest trace of degraded genetic material in the fossil record. At best, their biological makers seem to be degraded remnants of genes that cannot be read-broken-down components rather than intact parts of a sequence. Such potential tatters of ancient DNA are not exactly Jurassic Park–quality. Yet first, paleontologists need to confirm that these possible genetic traces are the real thing. The fossil record would not be bones and footprints alone: it would contain scraps of the genetic record that ties together all life on Earth. DNA from nonavian dinosaurs would add a wealth of new information about the biology of the “terrible lizards.” Such a find would also establish the possibility that genetic material can remain detectable not just for one million years, but for tens of millions. Working on more recently extinct creatures-such as mammoths and giant ground sloths-paleontologists have been able to revise family trees, explore the interrelatedness of species and even gain some insights into biological features such as variations in coloration. Recovering genetic material of such antiquity would be a major development. In a study published earlier this year, Chinese Academy of Sciences paleontologist Alida Bailleul and her colleagues proposed that in that fossil, they had found not only evidence of original proteins and cartilage-creating cells but a chemical signature consistent with DNA. This speed would mean paleontologists can only hope to recover recognizable DNA sequences from creatures that lived and died within the past 6.8 million years-far short of even the last nonavian dinosaurs.īut then there is the Hypacrosaurus cartilage. Findings from a 2012 study on moa bones show an organism’s genetic material deteriorates at such a rate that it halves itself every 521 years. Genetic material is not supposed to last over such time periods-not by a long shot. But it may contain something never before seen from the depths of the Mesozoic era: degraded remnants of dinosaur DNA. ![]() The object is a just a scant shard of cartilage from the skull of a baby hadrosaur called Hypacrosaurus that perished more than 70 million years ago. It is not as big as an Apatosaurus femur or as impressive as a Tyrannosaurus jaw. ![]() The tiny fossil is unassuming, as dinosaur remains go. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |