ау, биологи

[juan_gandhi]

Есть тут биологи? А то Денис меня попрекает, что я смеюсь над Опариным и его коацерватами, сравниваю с Лепешинской.

А типа в российских учебниках до сих пор так и учат, про коацерватов, как они видоизменились в советского человека (через труд, наверно). 

Comments

[juan_gandhi]

В той, на самом деле.
Я это и задвигаю, что опаринские коацерваты были, наверно, хороши, пока генетики не было. А потом они использовались как что-то вроде туринской плащаницы против генетики.

[ypq]

ну коацерваты до сих пор (судя по Википедии) являются кирпичом теории возникновения жизни... хотя, я больше Докинзу доверяю.

[sassa_nf]

It looks like no one doubts the importance of coacervates. After all, it is clear they occur, and improve reaction rates many fold.

It just is clear that there is no connection between coacervates and evolution - no link between spontaneous formation of droplets due to electrostatic properties of the molecules and the directed formation of a membrane made of unrelated substance with selective permeability. But coacervates are not the only self-organising process. Fatty membranes do occur just as spontaneously at certain concentrations of lipids, you don't need coacervates as a "simpler" first step.

Some simpler membranes form within seconds. So if a "body" happens to produce lipids, it can get such a membrane as a side effect of its existence. But how does such a "cell" consume more material? If it were to envelope the "body" permanently, the "body" would consume everything inside, and then starve. It turns out such simple membranes exist for some time, then reopen again - within minutes.

It's not like they figured out what sort of "body" could do that, but it looks like a plausible first step - get a membrane that is only a temporary protection. Then get the pores to get a guaranteed opening in the membrane. Then you can afford a permanent non-permeable membrane.