Talk:Parakaryon

It was an artifact
See follow up study: https://cir.nii.ac.jp/crid/1390004222622055040 2600:4040:71AB:C200:2899:AA38:13DB:1191 (talk) 20:10, 5 May 2023 (UTC)
 * I don't see that in the linked article. It does show how artifacts could arise in single slices, but also shows how the authors' 3D technique with many slices can resolve this issue. The conclusion reiterates the authors' interpretation of Parakaryon as a genuine organism. --Amble (talk) 16:48, 16 May 2023 (UTC)
 * The bacterium examined in that study is not P. Myoji. This study is about using their Serial Ultrathin Sectioning of Freeze-Substituted Specimen method to investigate a different specimen that appeared to have endosymbionts. P. Myoji. had undergone the same analysis in the original publication: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/283822944_C3-P-02_Discovery_of_a_Life_Intermediate_between_Prokaryote_and_Eukaryote_in_the_Deep_Sea, see "Materials and Methods", and, as far as i'm aware, was not found to have a broken cell wall. They have also done the same procedure on two other discovered species: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/328246223_Electron_Microscopy_and_Structome_Analysis_of_Unique_Amorphous_Bacteria_from_the_Deep_Sea_in_Japan , | , https://www.researchgate.net/publication/303558959_High-voltage_electron_microscopy_tomography_and_structome_analysis_of_unique_spiral_bacteria_from_the_deep_sea , which could have articles of their own. Timweak (talk) 17:28, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
 * This is indeed an artifact, it's not a real species. . Mattximus (talk) 23:49, 15 January 2024 (UTC)
 * No, as Timweak explained that 2020 study is on another deep-sea sample that appeared to have endosymbiotic bacteria but serial sectioning showed was a burst cell. The authors stand by their analysis of Parakaryon myojinensis as having endosymbionts. Fences  &amp;  Windows  10:42, 16 January 2024 (UTC)