Theory of Life

7 Theories on the Origin of Life

By Charles Q. Choi 24 March 2016

Introduction

(Image: © NASA/JPL)

Life on Earth began more than 3 billion years ago, evolving from the most basic of microbes into a
dazzling array of complexity over time. But how did the first organisms on the only known home to life
in the universe develop from the primordial soup?

One theory involved a "shocking" start. Another idea is utterly chilling. And one theory is out of this
world!

Inside you'll learn just how mysterious this all is, as we reveal the different scientific theories on the
origins of life on Earth.

It started with an electric spark

(Image: © stock.xchng)

Lightning may have provided the spark needed for life to begin.
Electric sparks can generate amino acids and sugars from an atmosphere loaded with water, methane,
ammonia and hydrogen, as was shown in the famous Miller-Urey experiment reported in 1953,
suggesting that lightning might have helped create the key building blocks of life on Earth in its early
days. Over millions of years, larger and more complex molecules could form. Although research since
then has revealed the early atmosphere of Earth was actually hydrogen-poor, scientists have suggested
that volcanic clouds in the early atmosphere might have held methane, ammonia and hydrogen and
been filled with lightning as well.

Or could simple clay have fueled life’s beginning? Read on to find out.

Molecules of life met on clay

(Image: © Chemistry)

Ad

The first molecules of life might have met on clay, according to an idea elaborated by organic chemist
Alexander Graham Cairns-Smith at the University of Glasgow in Scotland. These surfaces might not only
have concentrated these organic compounds together, but also helped organize them into patterns
much like our genes do now.

The main role of DNA is to store information on how other molecules should be arranged. Genetic
sequences in DNA are essentially instructions on how amino acids should be arranged in proteins.
Cairns-Smith suggests that mineral crystals in clay could have arranged organic molecules into organized
patterns. After a while, organic molecules took over this job and organized themselves.

Or maybe life began at the bottom of the sea. Keep going to learn how.

Life began at deep-sea vents

Ad
(Image: © MARUM)

The deep-sea vent theory suggests that life may have begun at submarine hydrothermal vents spewing
key hydrogen-rich molecules. Their rocky nooks could then have concentrated these molecules together
and provided mineral catalysts for critical reactions. Even now, these vents, rich in chemical and thermal
energy, sustain vibrant ecosystems.

The next idea is a chilling thought. Read on!

Life had a chilly start

Ad

(Image: © Eric Rignot, NASA JPL)

Ice might have covered the oceans 3 billion years ago, as the sun was about a third less luminous than it
is now, scientists say. This layer of ice, possibly hundreds of feet thick, might have protected fragile
organic compounds in the water below from ultraviolet light and destruction from cosmic impacts. The
cold might have also helped these molecules to survive longer, allowing key reactions to happen.
[Related: The Ingredients of Life]

Understanding life’s origin may involve unravelling the mystery of DNA's formation, as we explain next.

The answer lies in understanding DNA formation

Ad

(Image: © © Yunxiang987 | Dreamstime.com)

Nowadays DNA needs proteins in order to form, and proteins require DNA to form, so how could these
have formed without each other? The answer may be RNA, which can store information like DNA, serve
as an enzyme like proteins, and help create both DNA and proteins. Later DNA and proteins succeeded
this "RNA world," because they are more efficient.

RNA still exists and performs several functions in organisms, including acting as an on-off switch for
some genes. The question still remains how RNA got here in the first place. And while some scientists
think the molecule could have spontaneously arisen on Earth, others say that was very unlikely to have
happened. Other nucleic acids other than RNA have been suggested as well, such as the more esoteric
PNA or TNA.

A study in 2015 suggests the missing link in this RNA puzzle may have been found.

Ad

We have two last ideas to throw at you . . .

Life had simple beginnings

Instead of developing from complex molecules such as RNA, life might have begun with smaller
molecules interacting with each other in cycles of reactions. These might have been contained in simple
capsules akin to cell membranes, and over time more complex molecules that performed these
reactions better than the smaller ones could have evolved, scenarios dubbed "metabolism-first" models,
as opposed to the "gene-first" model of the "RNA world" hypothesis.

Ad

The final theory is truly out of this world. Check out the next slide.

Life was brought here from elsewhere in space

(Image: © © Mark Rasmussen | Dreamstime.com)

Perhaps life did not begin on Earth at all, but was brought here from elsewhere in space, a notion known
as panspermia. For instance, rocks regularly get blasted off Mars by cosmic impacts, and a number of
Martian meteorites have been found on Earth that some researchers have controversially suggested
brought microbes over here, potentially making us all Martians originally. Other scientists have even
suggested that life might have hitchhiked on comets from other star systems. However, even if this
concept were true, the question of how life began on Earth would then only change to how life began
elsewhere in space.

Ad

Oh, and if you thought all that was mysterious, consider this: Scientists admit they don't even have a
good definition of life!

Abiogenesis: 7 Scientific Theories for the Origin of Life... and One New One!

Futurism in Hard Science

abiogenesis

Can science explain the origin of life? Previous source.

Since its inception in 1924, the Primordial Soup Theory has gained a firm following in scientific circles.
The theory states that a young Earth possessed a reducing atmosphere and, following exposure to
various forms of energy, basic compounds were formed. These compounds are then said to have
accumulated in a ‘soup’ from which life evolved.

The big question this leaves is… How and why did life evolve from this collection of simple elements and
compounds? How did it all start? Ultimately, the question revolves around abiogenesis, which is the
process by which a living organism forms naturally from non-living matter. Here is a list (in no particular
order) of seven existing theories for this initial abiogenesis, and an exciting new one. Fir the purposes of
this article, we are looking at how life developed on Earth.

Beneath the Ice

Some evidence indicates that, around three billion years ago, Earth’s oceans were covered with ice. This
ice may have been hundreds of metres thick and was mainly due to the sun being much less fierce than
it is nowadays. This theory contends that the ice may have protected the compounds, allowing them to
interact and, thereby, creating life.

Electricity

Yes, there is a theory that life on Earth began Frankenstein style! It has been proven that electricity can
produce simple sugars and amino acids from simple elements in the atmosphere. This leads to the
theory that lightning may have been responsible for the origins of life, primarily by striking through rich
volcanic clouds.

Panspermia

Now, from the horror of Frankenstein, to the realms of science fiction. Panspermia is the proposal that
life on Earth didn’t actually begin on Earth at all. Rocks, and other debris from impacts, are plentiful. In
fact, rocks from Mars have been found here on Earth, and it has been suggested they any one of these
would have brought microbes that could have kick-started life. So… would that make us all aliens?

RNA

Ribonucleic acid (RNA) is today most known for its role in the expression of genes. To put it simply, DNA
unzips, revealing the necessary gene that is being called for by the body, then RNA is transcribed from
single nucleotides, copying the revealed segment for gene expression.

This theory states that all life sprouted from a complex RNA world. This is plausible, as RNA is far more
self regulating, if less efficient, than DNA.

Simple Metabolism and Reactions

In contrast to the RNA theory, this approach suggests that the primordial soup simply continued to react
with itself over time, producing more and more complex molecules, eventually yielding life. This is the
most simple of the standing theories, and is difficult to dismiss.

Clay Breeding Ground

Research at the University of Glasgow, in Scotland, has given rise to the theory that life on Earth may
have evolved in clay. It is suggested that clay may have served as an area of concentrated chemical
activity, providing a breeding ground for DNA and other components.

Submarine Hydrothermal Vents

Submarine hydrothermal vents, or deep-sea vents, contain vast and diverse ecosystems. The nutrient
rich environment filled with reactive gases and catalysts, creates a habitat teeming with life. Studies
suggest that life may have originated from within these vents, a theory that cannot be ignored, and one
that may in fact tie in with the ice theory at the beginning of this article.

The New Theory!

The newest addition to this mix of theories has been clearly articulated by the Massachusetts Institute of
Technology in the USA (though a series of individuals have contributed over the years). The contention
from supporters of this idea is that life evolved out of necessity, following the laws of nature, rather
than through any accident or freak occurrence. In a number of papers, physicists have argued that the
occurrence of life is a matter of inevitability, and they have a sound formula to support their claims.

The new(ish) models that physicists have come up with are formulated on previously established
theories in physics, and they conclude that matter will generally develop into systems that, when
“driven by an external source of energy” and “surrounded by a heat bath,” become increasingly efficient
at dissipating energy. Studies have shown that populations of random atoms, when exposed to energy,
will shuffle and organise themselves to dissipate energy more efficiently. It is suggested that this re-
modelling would eventually lead to life.

So, this new theory may be viewed as an addition to the simple metabolism and reaction theory above,
but with energy, such as is provided by the sun, as the catalyst.
This theory was touched upon by Charles Darwin himself, but was dismissed. However, the new
research from MIT is backed up by mathematical and scientific evidence. Only time and further research
can truly tell if there really is any energy in these claims.

Origin of Life: 5 Ancient Theories of Origin of Life

Article shared by :

ADVERTISEMENTS:

Some of the ancient theories regarding the origin of life are as follows !

Many theories have been put forward to explain the origin of life.

Origin of Life

Image Courtesy : images.fineartamerica.com/images-medium-large/origin-of-life-cheung-king-man.jpg

ADVERTISEMENTS:

Following ancient theories are important to mention.

1. Theory of Special Creation:

The greatest supporter of this theory was Father Suarez. According to this theory life was created by
supernatural power. According to the Bible the world was created within six days. On the first day God
made the heaven and the earth, on the second day, He separated the sky from the water, on the third
day. He made the dry land and plants, on the fourth day. He formed the sun, the moon and the stars, on
the fifth day.
Theory of Special Creation

Image Courtesy : nsf.gov/news/mmg/media/images/darwin_pr_h.jpg

ADVERTISEMENTS:

He made the fishes and the birds and on the sixth day, He formed the land animals and human beings.
The first man, Adam and the first woman, Eve were created by God. According to Hindu mythology the
world was created by God Brahma. Brahma is considered the God of creation.

He created the whole universe with his desire. The first man was Manu and the first woman was
Shradha. Special creation theory lacks scientific evidences, on account of which it is not accepted.

2. Theory of Spontaneous Generation (Abiogenesis or Autogenesis):

This theory states that life originated from nonliving things in a spontaneous manner. This concept was
held by early Greek philosophers like Thales, Anaximander, Xanophanes, Empedocles, Plato, Aristotle,
etc. In ancient Egypt, it was believed that the mud of the Nile could give rise to frogs, toads, snakes,
mice and even crocodiles when warmed by the sun.

Theory of Spontaneous Generation (Abiogenesis or Autogenesis)

Image Courtesy : 4.bp.blogspot.com/-

1mVRECXTN_A/TeKHreAucFI/AAAAAAAACc0/RVHwaL70eqM/s1600/Abiogenesis.jpg

ADVERTISEMENTS:

Van Helmont (1577-1644) held that human sweat and wheat grains could give rise to organisms. He
placed a dirty shirt in a receptacle containing wheat bran and found that after 21 days the gases from
the shirt and wheat had formed living mice. These beliefs have no scientific grounds and hence are
discarded.
Evidences against the Theory of Spontaneous Generation:

The theory of spontaneous generation was disproved by many scientists of 17th, 18th and 19th
centuries. They proved that new organisms can be formed from pre-existing ones, i.e., omnis vivum ex
ovo or vivo (‘Biogenesis’ of Harvey—1651 and Т. H. Huxley—1870). Noted scientists who experimentally
challenged the theory were Francesco Redi (1626-1697), Lazzaro Spallanzani (1729-1799) and Louis
Pasteur (1822-1895).

(i) Redi’s Experiment:

ADVERTISEMENTS:

Francesco Redi, an Italian physician, took the flesh and cooked it so that no organisms were left alive.
Then he placed flesh in three jars, of which, one was uncovered, the second was covered with
parchment and the third one was covered with fine muslin. He kept these jars for a few days and
observed that maggots developed only in the uncovered jar though the flies also visited other jars (Fig.
7.4).

clip_image002

(ii) Spallanzani’s Experiment:

Spallanzani (1765), an Italian scientist disproved the spontaneous generation of microorganisms. He

experimented that animal and vegetable broths boiled for several hours and soon after sealed, were
never infested with microorganisms. From this experiment he concluded that high temperature had
killed all living organisms in the broths and without them life could not appear. When the broths were
left exposed to air, were soon invaded by microorganisms.

ADVERTISEMENTS:
clip_image004

(iii) Pasteur’s Experiment:

Louis Pasteur, a French scientist took broths in a long necked flask and then he bent the neck of the
flask. He boiled the broths in the flask to kill any microorganisms that might be present in them. The
curved neck acted as a filter. If the flask with ‘swan neck’ (curved neck) is kept for months together, no
life appeared, as the germ laden dust particles in the air were trapped by the curved neck which serves
as filter.

clip_image006

If the swan neck was broken off, the broths developed colonies of moulds and bacteria. Thus, he showed
that the source of the micro-organisms for fermentation or putrefaction such as for milk, sugar and
wine, etc., was the air and the organisms did not arise from the nutrient media.

Thus Louis Pasteur (famous for “Germ Theory of Disease and Immunology”) finally disapproved
abiogenesis and proved biogenesis.

But according to biogenesis, life originated from pre-existing life which does not explain the origin of life.
So / к biogenesis is also disapproved.

image

3. Theory of Panspermia or Cosmozoic Theory or Spore broth Theory:

This theory was proposed by Richter (1865). According to this theory, ‘protoplasm’ reached the earth in
the form of spores or germs or other simple particles from some unknown part of the universe with the
cosmic dust, and subsequently evolved into various forms of life. Helmholz (1884) speculated that
‘protoplasm’ in some form reached the earth with falling meteorites.
Spore broth Theory

Image Courtesy : img.docstoccdn.com/thumb/orig/420143.png

Arrhenius (1908, Nobel Prize Winner of 1903 in Chemistry) postulated the (= Panspermia Theory) and
stated that organisms existed throughout the universe and their spores etc., could freely travel through
space from one star to the others. In fact, panspermia theory is the alternative name of cosmozoic
theory.

Evidences against Cosmozoic Theory:

Living matter cannot survive the extreme cold, dryness and ultra-violet radiation from the sun required
to be crossed for reaching the earth.

4. Theory of Eternity of Life:

This theory was proposed by Preyer in 1880. According to this theory, different types of living beings
have always existed on earth and shall continue to exist forever, changing only in form.

Theory of Eternity of Life

ADVERTISEMENTS:

Image Courtesy : images.catholic.org/ins_news/2012054826heaven_6.jpg

Evidence against Theory of Eternity of Life:

It is accepted that earth had not always existed. If life is eternal, where did it exist before this planet was
formed.
5. Theory of Catastrophism:

Georges Cuvier (1769-1832), Father of “Modern Palaeontology” and Orbigney (1802- 1837) were the
chief advocates of this theory. According to this theory cataclysms (great destruction) or catastrophic
(concerning disastrous event) revolution occurs upon earth

from time to time which completely destroys all organisms (living beings).

Theory of Catastrophism

ADVERTISEMENTS:

Image Courtesy : blindinglight.files.wordpress.com/2007/08/torndao-lightning.png

New organisms, then, suddenly form from inorganic matter. Each creation consists of life quite different
from that of the previous one. In fact, this theory is merely a modification of theory of special creation.
This theory is also not accepted.

coacervate theory

coacervate theory a theory expressed by the Russian biochemist A.I. Oparin in 1936 suggesting that the
origin of life was preceded by the formation of mixed colloidal units called ‘coacervates’. These are
particles composed of two or more colloids which might be protein, lipid or nucleic acid. Oparin
proposed that whilst these molecules were not living, they behaved like biological systems in the ancient
seas. They were subject to natural selection in terms of constant size and chemical properties, there was
a selective accumulation of material and they reproduced by fragmentation. Subsequent work by the
American biochemists Stanley Miller and Harold Urey shows that such organic materials can be formed
from inorganic substances under the conditions prevailing on the prebiological earth. They synthesized
amino acids by passing a spark through a mixture of simple gases in a closed system.

Collins Dictionary of Biology, 3rd ed. © W. G. Hale, V