In the traditional 3-domain system, the domains Bacteria, Archaea, and Eukaryota are all distinct from one another, with the latter 2 usually being sister-groups in a clade.
However recent evidence has come to light showing that Eukaryotes might have arose within Archaea, rather than being the sister group to it. More specifically, Eukaryotes might have evolved from the Asgard archaean superphylum.
What is the current consensus towards this issue? Do most evolutionary scientists today still consider Eukaryotes to be the sister group to Archaea? Or is it thought that eukaryotes are archaeans?
Today I found out that Archaea are closer to Eukaryotes than Bacteria. This was a huge shock for me since bacteria and Archaea are both classified as Prokaryotes. As well as they both have similar structures Eg. Single celled and plasmids. That they're both essentially "bacteria". How is it that they are closer to Eukaryotes? Archaea doesn't even have mitochondria (from what I know).
I also have known for a bit that Archaea are not pathogens/parasites (at least to humans?). Why is that?
I said goodbye to Quiet in the previous episode.
The AA guns at the far end of the runway aren't there.
My LMG and SMG at are level 5. WTF!? Halp.
I find it surprising and amazing that currently there are no pathogenic archaea identified. The review below is from 2003 and since our understanding of the diversity of archaea and the relevance of microbiomes for health and disease has increased significantly. But still, there are no pathogenic archaea identified yet. There are so many archaea in our gut, for example even methanogenes. It is not even clear how we acquire them, as they cannot survive in an oxygenated atmosphere.
Why do you think there are no archae pathogens, there are reports this is due to different vitamin requirements.
De-spac Play (M&A closed: 9/15/21) currently undervalued
LFG is the Leading Renewable Natural Gas (RNG) Company through the simultaneous merger of Aria Energy and Archaea Energy
Sector Opportunity: Natural Gas has seen a major price increase based on Hurricane Ida, up 80% YTD and 31% last month; LFG is tracking that performance up 79% YTD and 32% last month; Goldman thinks the price of Natural Gas could double and recently invested $40M
Revenue: $204M, growing at 38% CAGR; 2x better than the competitors
Profitability: Day 1 profitable $40M in β20; In β21, $65M, 38% margin; 10x EBITDA growth in 5 years; 3x better than the competitors
Valuation: Trading at ~16x 2022 EV/EBITDA, Comps trading at 31x; Implies the stock is currently undervalued and could double
Analyst coverage: PT $32 based on Ortex data, implies a 66% upside
Institutions: Very high Ownership Accumulation Score on fintel, (Ranked 93 out of 21,606 companies); 72 Institutional Investors; Goldman recently invested $40M
Stock: Up 30% in the last month; 100% upside based on comps: PT $40 Thinly traded stock with no shares to borrow, major volume spike could really drive price higher
Catalysts: Natural gas price increases, Initiation reports from more established banks, continued institution buying,
Why did they make the decision that Domains need to even exist if they don't do anything with the Kingdom taxa for Bacteria and Archaea? It seems to go:
Domain: Bacteria
Kingdom: ...still "Bacteria"...
Phylum: *lots of categories*
Shouldn't all of those phyla actually be kingdoms? It makes things difficult to explain to schoolkids. "So we take big taxa and split them into smaller taxa in order to categorize and organize. We start with three Domains and then have six Kingdoms." "But what about those two being the exact same?" "...Um..."
In the traditional 3-domain system, the domains Bacteria, Archaea, and Eukaryota are all distinct from one another, with the latter 2 usually being sister-groups in a clade.
However recent evidence has come to light showing that Eukaryotes might have arose within Archaea, rather than being the sister group to it. More specifically, Eukaryotes might have evolved from the Asgard archaean superphylum.
What is the current consensus towards this issue? Do most evolutionary scientists today still consider Eukaryotes to be the sister group to Archaea? Or is it thought that eukaryotes are archaeans?
In the traditional 3-domain system, the domains Bacteria, Archaea, and Eukaryota are all distinct from one another, with the latter 2 usually being sister-groups in a clade.
However recent evidence has come to light showing that Eukaryotes might have arose within Archaea, rather than being the sister group to it. More specifically, Eukaryotes might have evolved from the Asgard archaean superphylum.
What is the current consensus towards this issue? Do most evolutionary scientists today still consider Eukaryotes to be the sister group to Archaea? Or is it thought that eukaryotes are archaeans?
