Sea sponges share 70% of human DNA

[Elmore Furth]

It is nice to know I have an excuse for being as dumb as a sponge.

Mankind may be descended from apes but Australian scientists have found proof of links much closer to the sea floor, with a study revealing that sea sponges share almost 70 percent of human genes.

Genetic sequencing of sea sponges from the World Heritage-listed Great Barrier Reef showed the ancient marine animal shared many of its genes with humans, including a large number typically associated with disease and cancer.

Lead researcher Bernard Degnan, of the University of Queensland, said the findings "would shed light on a whole range of different things," and could lay the foundation for breakthroughs in cancer and stem cell research.

"Sponges have what's (considered) the 'Holy Grail' of stem cells," Degnan told AFP.


Scientists find sea sponges share human genes

[Rosa Luxemburg]

1. OMG! fascinating

the ocean has the key

[slackmaster]

2. At one point they sucked up about 10% of all life

:hide:

[Madam Mossfern]

3. So that explains

my brother-in-law!

[Orrex]

4. Obviously!

[Botany]

5. So this explains O'Reilly and his love of loofahs

http://lh4.ggpht.com/trakblue/Rw2oxiZQYZI/AAAAAAAAC4w/RGC_8yJow_c/ST+Loofah%5B4%5D.jpg

[pokerfan]

9. I thought that was a falafel!

:rofl:

[Orsino]

6. Or 75% of my old Sergeant Major's. n/t

[feslen]

7. except we all came from God, no such thing as evolution!

*Sarcasm*.

that's a neat article. thanks for sharing!

[frogmarch]

8. Fascinating

Apparently all animals share genes with sponges, not just us.

http://www.pbs.org/kcet/shapeoflife/episodes/origins_explo2.html

snip: (no date on article)

Molecular Biologist Mitch Sogin, of The Marine Biological Laboratory at Woods Hole, Massachusetts, recently sent shock waves through the scientific world when his genetic research supported the placement of sponges at the base of the animal kingdom.
Sogin made this discovery by extracting DNA from a sponge and investigating one gene common to all animals. After painstakingly sequencing this gene, he compared its nucleotide sequence (represented by letters) to that of the same gene in other animals like worms, mammals, insects and more. Little variation of this gene in different animal groups would signify the groups were closely related while large variations would represent a more distant relationship. After comparing all the groups, Sogin traced out an evolutionary family tree, knowing that the animal at the base of the tree would be our oldest ancestor. He discovered that sponges indeed, were the most basal group that must have laid the foundation for all animal life to follow. "The sponge was the first animal with the genetic blueprint for living large," Sogin says. "All animals are based upon that same blueprint."

Here's a snip from Wiki (sorry about using Wiki as a source)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sponge

"...it is thought that Eumetazoa (more complex animals) are descendants of a sub-group of sponges. However it is uncertain which group of sponges is closest to Eumetazoa, as both calcareous sponges and a sub-group of demosponges called Homoscleromorpha have been nominated by different researchers. In addition a study in 2008 suggested that the earliest animals may have been similar to modern comb jellies. Since comb jellies are considerably more complex than sponges, this would imply that sponges had mobile ancestors and greatly simplified their bodies as they adapted to a sessile filter feeding lifestyle. Chancelloriids, sessile, bag-like organisms whose fossils are found only in rocks from the Cambrian period, increase the uncertainty as it has been suggested that they were sponges but also that their external spines resemble the "chain mail" of the slug-like Halkieriids."
~~

So, what kind of sponge was used in the study? A calcereous sponge? A sponge from demosponge sub-group Homoscleromorpha? Anyone know?