User:Drbogdan/sandbox-Hemolithin

ALSO SEE => SUBPAGES

HEMOLITHIN - DRAFT - WORK IN PROGRESS - 20200304

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hemolithin

ARCHIVES - Hemolithin - possibly first extraterrestrial protein - 20210728
 * https://web.archive.org/web/20210720002812/https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hemolithin
 * https://web.archive.org/web/20210209102156/https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Hemolithin
 * https://archive.st/ks8w - Hemolithin => https://archive.st/archive/2021/7/en.wikipedia.org/ks8w/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hemolithin.html
 * https://archive.st/eanf - Talk (20210728) => https://archive.st/archive/2021/7/en.wikipedia.org/eanf/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Hemolithin.html
 * https://archive.ph/wip/BDOKt - Hemolithin
 * https://archive.ph/wip/0OaOK - Talk (20210728)

ARTICLE VERSION - 08:02, 25 July 2021
Hemolithin is a proposed protein containing iron and lithium, of extraterrestrial origin, according to an unpublished preprint. The protein was purportedly found inside two CV3 meteorites, Allende and Acfer-086, by a team of scientists led by Harvard University biochemist Julie McGeoch. The report of the discovery was met with some skepticism and suggestions that the researchers had extrapolated too far from incomplete data. However, X-ray analysis of the crystalized polymer was performed by the same researchers at the APS, Argonne National Laboratory, under Contract No. DE-AC02-06CH11357, and published in June 2021.

Structure
According to the researchers' mass spectrometry, hemolithin is largely composed of glycine and hydroxyglycine amino acids. The researchers noted that the protein was related to “very high extraterrestrial" ratios of Deuterium/Hydrogen (D/H); such high D/H ratios are not found anywhere on Earth, but are "consistent with long-period comets" and suggest, as reported, "that the protein was formed in the proto-solar disc or perhaps even earlier, in interstellar molecular clouds that existed long before the Sun’s birth".

A natural development of hemolithin may have started with glycine forming first, and then later linking with other glycine molecules into polymer chains, and later still, combining with iron and oxygen atoms. The iron and oxygen atoms reside at the end of the newly found molecule. The researchers speculate that the iron oxide grouping formed at the end of the molecule may be able to absorb photons, thereby enabling the molecule to split water (H2O) into hydrogen and oxygen and, as a result, produce a source of energy that might be useful to the development of life.

Exobiologist and chemist Jeffrey Bada expressed concerns about the possible protein discovery commenting, "The main problem is the occurrence of hydroxyglycine, which, to my knowledge, has never before been reported in meteorites or in prebiotic experiments. Nor is it found in any proteins. ... Thus, this amino acid is a strange one to find in a meteorite, and I am highly suspicious of the results." Likewise, Lee Cronin of the University of Glasgow stated, "The structure makes no sense."

In June 2021, related X-ray structural studies on purified polymers from meteorites were reported. According to the researchers, the polymer of chains of glycine (rods of glycine) with silicon, iron, oxygen and lithium formed at least 4.5 billion years ago in a molecular cloud prior to the formation of our solar system. It was extracted from micron particles of Acfer-086, a CV3 meteorite. Such meteorites form when matter in molecular clouds accretes in the process of forming a solar system and some fall to Earth, allowing analysis of early space molecules. Further, the researchers noted that this polymer type could be responsible for the accretion of all material in the Universe which would mean it first formed 12.5 billion years ago. The polymer forms a very low-density space filling lattice which at 32 mg/cm3 is 30 times less dense than water. Such a structure as it swept through the near vacuum of space would collect the largest amount of glycine molecules to produce additional rod polymers that could be added to the structure. Carried to completion, such a process would sweep up most of the material in a protoplanetary disc to create planetary bodies, small and large – the “accretion” process not well-explained prior to this work. It's noted that the very existence of our planet may owe a lot to the behavior of a small protein-like molecule in the nascent solar system. Earlier calculations (in 2014) show that a similar process will be possible at the formation of other solar systems throughout the Universe.

History
Hemolithin is the name given to a protein molecule isolated from two CV3 meteorites, Allende and Acfer-086. Its deuterium to hydrogen ratio is 26 times terrestrial which is consistent with it having formed in an interstellar molecular cloud, or later in the protoplanetary disk at the start of our solar system 4.567 billion years ago. The elements hydrogen, lithium, carbon, oxygen, nitrogen and iron that it is composed of, were all available for the first time 13 billion years ago after the first generation of massive stars ended in nucleosynthetic events. The horizontal arrow in the time line graph below shows, on the scale of the start of the Universe to the present, when Hemolithin could have formed and reformed.

The research leading to the discovery of Hemolithin started in 2007 when another protein, one of the first to form on Earth, was observed to entrap water. That property being useful to chemistry before biochemistry on earth developed, theoretical enthalpy calculations on the condensation of amino acids were performed in gas phase space asking: “whether amino acids could polymerize to protein in space?” - they could, and their water of condensation aided their polymerization. This led to several manuscripts of isotope and mass information on Hemolithin.

ARTICLE VERSION - OLD (March 2021)
Hemolithin is an iron and lithium-containing protein, purported to be found inside a meteorite called Acfer 086, a CV3 carbonaceous chondrite Allende meteorite, and thought to be the first protein discovered that may be of extraterrestrial origin. The protein was detected by teams of scientists, led by biochemist Julie McGeoch, from Harvard University, and from the biotech and physics companies of Bruker Scientific and the superconductor X-ray source supplier PLEX Corporation. The study is an extension of published and unpublished results by the teams.

Structure
Hemolithin, the newly found protein, was found, aided by the use of "state-of-the-art" mass spectrometry, to be largely composed of glycine, hydroxyglycine and amino acids. Hemolithin also contained atoms of oxygen, lithium and iron in an up-to-now unobserved arrangement. The researchers noted that the protein was related to “very high extraterrestrial" ratios of Deuterium/Hydrogen (D/H); such high D/H ratios are not found anywhere on Earth, but are "consistent with long-period comets" and suggest, as reported, "that the protein was formed in the proto-solar disc or perhaps even earlier, in interstellar molecular clouds that existed long before the Sun’s birth".

A natural development of hemolithin may have started with glycine forming first, and then later linking with other glycine molecules into polymer chains, and later still, combining with iron and oxygen atoms. The iron and oxygen atoms reside at the end of the newly found molecule. The researchers speculate that the iron oxide grouping formed at the end of the molecule may be able to absorb photons, thereby enabling the molecule to split water (H2O) into hydrogen and oxygen and, as a result, produce a source of energy that might be useful to the development of life.

Nonetheless, exobiologist and chemist Jeffrey Bada expressed concerns about the possible protein discovery commenting, "The main problem is the occurrence of hydroxyglycine, which, to my knowledge, has never before been reported in meteorites or in prebiotic experiments. Nor is it found in any proteins. ... Thus, this amino acid is a strange one to find in a meteorite, and I am highly suspicious of the results." Although some scientists seem supportive of the study, other scientists may be less so. [Note: Research Author Reply]: "On the question of hydroxy glycine in hemolithin, there is presented in the Hemolithin MS very clear evidence of multiple oxidations of a 17 glycine polymer: The hemolithin MS (arXiv) shows in figure S3.3 a characteristic oxidation series in which 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 oxygen atoms bond to glycine residues within a 17 glycine chain. This converts the corresponding numbers of mass 57 glycine residues into mass 73 hydroxy glycine residues (MS pages 27 and 28)."

Significance
The possible finding of the hemolithin protein supports the notion that life on Earth may not have started on Earth after all, but may have come from outer space instead – a process known as panspermia.

Besides this possible discovery of an extraterrestrial protein, other evidences of complex chemistry (amino acids, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, sugars, ribose, tholins) occurring in outer space have been accumulating from recent astrobiology studies, including those related to meteorites and comets. The presence of such complex chemistry occurring in the cosmos, as well as the observation by biologist Stephen Blair Hedges that life may have arisen quickly on the very early Earth,  suggests that life may be widespread thoughout the universe.

[Note: Omitted section as "Unrelated, no reason to have this quote here. Also, probably amounts to specious editorializing."]: Further, according to Didier Queloz, Swiss astronomer and winner of the 2019 Nobel Prize in Physics, humans will discover extraterrestrial life in the next 30 years [by 2050] stating, "I can't believe we are the only living entity in the universe. There are just way [too] many planets, way too many stars, and the chemistry is universal. The chemistry that led to life has to happen elsewhere. So I am a strong believer that there must be life elsewhere."

Created talk-page
Created the talk-page for the "Hemolithin" article - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 18:16, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

Dubious and unverified, this article should be deleted
Hemolithin immediately looks like a dubious result to me, and others agree. The arxiv paper is not a reliable source (WP:SOURCE), I think this page should be deleted.Maneesh (talk) 21:57, 4 March 2020 (UTC)
 * reply|Maneesh}} Thank you for your comments - and efforts - as presented in the main article: "Although some scientists seem supportive of the study, other scientists may be less so. " - in any case - Comments Welcome here - or - on the discussion page at "Articles for deletion/Hemolithin" - Thanks again for your comments - and - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 22:23, 4 March 2020 (UTC)

=

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hemolithin
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Hemolithin

Hemolithin

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

The underlying hemolithin paper has not been published in a journal yet and experts have expressed skepticism in public sources. I myself am very skeptical that the claims of the paper are true, if you are an expert, take a look at how they came up with the structure of the supposedly most ancient abiotic protein. Maneesh (talk) 22:06, 4 March 2020 (UTC)
 * reply|Maneesh}} Thank you for your comments - and efforts - as presented in the main article: "Although some scientists seem supportive of the study, other scientists may be less so. " - in any case - Comments Welcome here - or - on the talk page at "Talk:Hemolithin" - Thanks again for your comments - and - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 22:26, 4 March 2020 (UTC)
 * reply|Drbogdan}} how does the molecule hemolithin meet WP:SOURCE? The paper that coined the term is unpublished and 'Unpublished materials are not considered reliable'.Maneesh (talk) 22:30, 4 March 2020 (UTC)

reply|Maneesh}} Thank you for your comment - yes - *entirely* agree - a better source may be preferred - and may be in process pending further peer-review at the moment - nevertheless - the initial publication - in the publication "ArXiv" - represents a published effort afaik - and, as a result, satisfies "WP:SOURCE" - nevertheless - Comments Welcome from other editors of course - iac - Thanks again - and - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 22:50, 4 March 2020 (UTC)
 * reply|Drbogdan}} Cheers, believe me I was very excited by the headline on this, but was very disappointed when I looked closely at the work. I don't think it is a matter of a 'better' source. ArXiv can be fine (WP:RSE), but the extraordinary nature of the claim here needs special attention that makes it different from, say, a well known and credible group publishing a new result in neural networks with verifiable source code etc. The existence of hemolithin would be one of the most significant discoveries wrt to the origin of life, there are no other published sources that verify the existence of that molecule. I don't think there is a single expert that could be expert enough so that their preprint could be considered sufficiently reliable for an article with such an extraordinary claim (at least, not until it had been cited affirmatively many times).  I think this makes my position clear, I'll let others chime in.Maneesh (talk) 23:18, 4 March 2020 (UTC)


 * Draftify/userfy I appreciate the work that has been put into this article so far. This may be a case of the event being too soon for reliable secondary independent sources to develop. There are many reliable sources in the article, but they are just reporting on the announcement, parroting the PR. The discovery itself is not published; Arxiv filters out bogus submissions, but is a far cry from a peer-reviewed publication. And there are no secondary sources beyond a few shoot-from-the-hip quotes from colleagues in the field. I could believe that this will become notable after publication and secondary analysis, but for now, it may be best to park this in Draft or user space until good sources develop. I'm open to other approaches as well. -- 23:36, 4 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep for the time being. If it fails the peer review process, then it can be deleted. Wjfox2005 (talk) 11:00, 5 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep - Yeah, it's probably bunk. But it has attracted sufficient media attention to satisfy notability concerns, and does not rest entirely on the not-yet-peer-reviewed paper. The healthy skepticism of this supposed finding has been adequately covered. Once the issue settles down a bit the article will probably end up looking a bit different, but for now it shouldn't be deleted. Reyk YO! 11:52, 5 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep - Besides any supportive comments in keeping the article made above or elsewhere, the Wikipedia "Hemolithin" article itself seems to be very popular on the internet at the moment (3,418 views on 3/4/2020 re the "Hemolithin" article - and growing currently?) - about a very popular internet topic (33,300 Google Search results on 3/5/2020 re the "Hemolithin" topic at the moment) - perhaps useful to keep the "Hemolithin" article - to help inform, as well as to help clarify, any misleading informations about the "Hemolithin" topic - in any case - hope this helps in some way - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 12:57, 5 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 21:23, 5 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Biology-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 21:23, 5 March 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep, meets WP:GNG, numerous sources covering this ie. New York Post - "Scientists claim they’ve discovered the first extraterrestrial protein", Space.com - "First known extraterrestrial protein possibly spotted in meteorite ", Fox News - "Scientists claim they've discovered first extraterrestrial protein in meteorite that fell to Earth 30 years ago", Vice - "A Key Ingredient for Life Has Been Found on an ‘Extraterrestrial Source,’ Scientists Report", International Business Times - "Protein discovery in meteorite could suggest the possibility of alien existence". Coolabahapple (talk) 21:41, 5 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Draftify - WP:TOOSOON at best, with the coverage so far just WP:NOTNEWS that is unlikely to be enduring if it fails peer review. Agricolae (talk) 22:33, 5 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep - This is clearly a concept. Wikipedia is not here to prove a hypothesis is correct or not.  We only give the information.  We have articles like cold fusion and Loch Ness Monster, and we do not remove those on the basis of their reality as true technologies or organisms, respectively.  Readers are coming to Wikipedia to find out about hemolithin, and they deserve to know.  I agree there could be more sources added, but that doesn't seem to be insurmountable as a hurdle. --awkwafaba (📥) 16:30, 6 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep - both the discovery and its doubters have been widely reported, in depth, in reliable sources. Bearian (talk) 21:40, 6 March 2020 (UTC)