Science and Belief

Beautiful Cells

with 7 comments

Chlamydomonas, by Ninghui Shin. Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported license.jpg

Chlamydomonas, by Ninghui Shin. Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported license.jpg

It appears to be a universal experience for a scientist to find their experimental system beautiful. Perhaps this is because the daily discipline of examining anything in detail brings an appreciation of its finer points? Most, I think, simply delight in the beauty of nature. For some, this gives a sense of the transcendent: a sort of natural spirituality.

I’ve written about a number of Christians and their appreciation of beauty in their scientific work, but I also want to feature some others who don’t share those beliefs. Science is open to all comers, and that’s a good thing. Everyone can enjoy exploring the universe. In my browsings online I have found a biologist who has written beautifully on her own research, and I want to share the biology she loves with you*.

Lynne Quarmby is a cell biologist who’s passionate about explaining her work to people outside of the scientific community. She writes a regular column, a ‘nexus of mystery, art, literature, beauty and science’, for the online literary magazine Numéro Cinq.

…if we can recognize and acknowledge that our direct biological senses, as wonderful as they are, give us only a tightly pinched and cloudy view of the world, then we open ourselves to unimagined beauty.

Lynne Quarmby, Numero Cinq, 2011

Biologists often label themselves according to the model organism they work on. I was a zebrafish person, and Quarmby is a Chlamydomonas person. Chlamydomonas is not an STD (you’re thinking of Chlamydia), but a gentle single-celled algae that is in all likelihood swimming around the standing water in your garden as you read. This microscopic creature is easy to grow in the lab (a jam jar on a sunny windowsill will do), its genome has been sequenced, and it is a surprisingly powerful tool for studying human disease.

Chlamydomonas was not an obvious choice for medical research, but the secret is in the cilia. Cilia are hair-thin appendages that wave around in a coordinated fashion to move their owner from A to B. A dish of Chlamydomonas algae in motion looks like the beginners pool during a breaststroke lesson (scroll down to the second video). But these algae don’t spend their whole lives swimming around. When they reproduce, their cilia are absorbed back into the cell body (scroll down to the 4th video). When conditions are stressful, the cilia simply drop off. Quarmby and her students studied mutants that hold on to their cilia, and discovered a family of proteins involved in the regulation of both cilia and cell division.

At the same time as Quarmby was studying the behaviour of cilia in Chlamydomonas, medical researchers were identifying genes that are mutated in humans. The same proteins involved in cilia and cell cycle control in Chlamydomonas were affected in some patients with polycystic kidney disease. What’s the connection?

Cell biologists knew that most of our cells have cilia on them, but assumed that they were not important. Our cells generally do not swim around, unless they’re sperm. It turns out that these tiny appendages are involved in a whole range of vital cell functions. The cilia on kidney cells are important for sensing the flow of urine, and without these the kidney cannot function properly.

Perhaps beauty is in the eye of the beholder when it comes to unicellular flagellates, but what I appreciate is the detail. To see the minutiae of cell structure is stunning, particularly when you find out how difficult it is to achieve images like this (click on figure 3**). This microscopic pond dweller has advanced our understanding of a devastating human disease. The combination of aesthetic experience and elegant solution is what I find beautiful.

Quarmby’s lab continues to probe the biology of Chlamydomonas for interesting behaviours that will in all likelihood prove very useful for humankind.

*I should highlight that I haven’t contacted Lynn Quarmby, and she has not in any way endorsed this blog.
** Apologies to those not on a university campus who don’t have access to academic journals.
 
References for the very keen:
http://quarmby.ca/
http://blog.quarmby.ca/
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed?term=Lynne%20Quarmby
http://www.ciliopathyalliance.org/
 

Written by Ruth Bancewicz

May 24, 2012 at 10:00 am

7 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. i appreciate the beauty & mathematics in Nature.Its like music to my eyes[ears]!joke.One may appreciate the beauty & form of Man[Hamlet.William Shakespeare] & would say modern humans are more closely genetically linked to neanderthals than the extinct ape.there is a fundamental difference between man & ape despite similarities.[language]Therefore,do we need the millions of years of evolution from ape to human?not really.Modern humans probably evolved quite recently from the middle east into europe,not out of africa.On that note,you could say God doesnt need evolution-evolution needs God.A simple paradox?anything but…the paradox of beauty…

    michala

    June 11, 2012 at 2:59 am

    • Out of Eden has now replaced Out of Africa.Its funny how recent archaeology can support the Bible together with the discovery that no neanderthals have been found in Africa.Maybe evolution is a paradox,but that would break the laws of physics,which in effect it does.Im no creationist,just a keen observer.

      michala

      June 16, 2012 at 10:21 pm

      • To continue,there are many non-darwinists theories of evolution which could explain the obvious gaps & problems with darwinism for e.g. mutations without natural selection,evidence of no evolution,lack of good mutations,mathematical probability against evolution[computer science],different timelines,different dating methods,species[fossils] found in wrong ‘layer’ of rock & the incredible discovery of red blood cells in a T-Rex bone[millions years ???]2005.cannot remember the BBC broadcasting that particular find.Sometimes the opposite is true-maybe for arguments sake, evolution has a life of its own and emerged independently,but quickly to operate within the eco system.life has intelligence or DNA & very hard to start out of nothing but very quick once it gets going.we have to think differently about evolution,work with science & perhaps consider darwin may have been wrong instead of trying to uphold a theory which is flawed.

        michala

        June 19, 2012 at 5:17 pm

        • Check out the New Scientist-‘Darwin Was Wrong’ article by Graham Lawton
          21st Jan 2009-www.newscientist.com
          Natural selection may not explain the whole picture of evolution,there is evidence of cells which mutate without natural selection.Therefore evolution may have progressed so far then stopped.[no evolution required-stable climate].
          After a unknown period of time,the atmosphere may have changed triggering an internal/automatic mutation and evolution started again.How this mechanism worked is down to speculation/assumption[like most theories,including darwinism]There could have been many chemical pools covering the earth or non detectable very quick evolution.But there is an obvious relationship between the eco system and intelligent life.

          michala

          June 21, 2012 at 10:07 pm

          • To continue…there may have been many chemical pools which enabled independent mutation without natural selection/climate change, whilst other species did change with natural selection within its family group.
            The genetic chemical pools could account for the ‘gaps’ in evolution as there is no evidence of a slow,painful, half – formed evolution of animals/plants.the earth must have looked like an experiment gone wrong if you follow darwins logic.in some cases evolution is not a slow process and works quickly with the eco system or it wouldnt work at all.some mechanisms can work independently…

            michala

            June 22, 2012 at 9:01 am

  2. [...] think that the beauty seen in science falls into four broad categories. First, a scientist may find beauty in their experimental system, whether it is a model organism, a certain diagnostic printout, or an aesthetically pleasing series [...]


Please leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: