"It is not a normal show" You aren't kidding. It's one of the most unique shows in existence right now. I'm happy to do my part. From an amateur research microscope owner, I'm glad people are really getting interested in this stuff.
Journey to the Microcosmos, I want to thank you for you have been part of my precious niece's decision to change courses from nursing to medical technology which will cover the fundamentals of microbiology. I bought her a cool microscope which I think will be a nice investment after finishing her degree. Now, she is teaching my young son fascinating things about microbes. I love seeing them enthused as they peek into the microscope. Anyway, as always, thanks for another enjoyable and edifying upload. This episode on choanoflagellates is most enlightening.
"they spend most of their life not moving around" "stick themselves to a sturdy surface and grab whatever food passes by" so they really are our ancestors huh
To be fair, they are still alive and kicking it. Since they still make history I reject the prefix "pre". They are just historic?! Anyway, you got mad skills if you can draw these!
I appreciate the writing of this series. It is clear enough for someone without a science background to understand, but still informative and precise enough to be enjoyed by people with microbiology backgrounds. Like me! (Now I just gotta to use my degree for something.....)
If you had microscopes like this at your school, you would have already had to be rich... and be at a school that made cgi videos of what microbes might look like
Which is funny because if you watch his vlogbrothers videos he is so amped up and excitable! He has no chill! 😆 I guess he saves it all for these narrations 🤷😏
microcosmos is my go-to videos for sleep -- i watch the new ones awake & focused but when its time to zonk out, i want nothing more than chill hank describing microorganisms lol
I do Microscopy in my daily work with Children and you guys and girls helped me so much in understanding more of the Microcosmos and its variety in microbes etc. The work you upload here for free is amazing and let me tell you one thing. Your impact is bigger then you might expect, the kids love our Microscopy Projects and im glad I learned a lot of Knowledge from your Content that I can teach the children. Keep it up! :)
Hi MicroCosmos, Great channel name. I am OBSESSED by the idea that life can travel from planets to planets through meteorites. Kinda reminds me that. Awesome content, keep posting ! New fan
Question, if micro organisms could "see" as we do what would it look like to them swimming through very thick liquid, which is why maybe eyes aren't needed mostly and probably the cilia work as sensors and chemical identifiers?
That's a complicated topic. It was a process called abiogenesis, and I'll be real with you, while we have the starting points of an understanding of the process, we still have absolutely no idea how it happened. What we do know is: - The early Earth's oceans were a mixing pot of organic chemicals (those are chemicals with a carbon skeleton/structure) and all kinda of chemical reactions. These chemicals arrived on Earth from the building blocks of the planet, i.e., asteroids and comets, and we still find them in abundance in asteroids and comets to this day. - Somehow this 'primordial soup' generated the first living cells. It is likely that phospholipids (the chemicals that make up cell membranes) could've formed 'bubbles' of isolated chemistry. Any RNA that spontaneously generated in the primordial soup could've been captured in these bubbles, and provided conditions were acceptable, could've self-replicated to produce more RNA. In doing so, it would have acted like a single-molecule-sized living thing, eating (RNA nucleotides), reproducing (self-replicating), and evolving (random mutations). As with all things evolution, most mutations would suck. However, any beneficial mutations in the RNA structure would allow the RNA molecule to replicate more efficiently. In doing so it might out-compete other RNA sequences trying to do the same thing, becoming dominant in its environment. This process would continue until RNA gained the capacity to catalyze the formation of more complex structures, such as polypeptides (proteins), forming the first, true cells. This would've created an early Earth that was dominated by RNA-based life: the theory is called the "RNA world hypothesis". (FYI, RNA that catalyses things is called a ribozyme, and is the RNA equivalent to an enzyme. Ribosomes do this in cells to this day). - Somewhere along the line, RNA somehow got switched to DNA, providing us with our DNA-based world we see today. - Problems with this whole concept: somehow, cells must've gained the capacity to take in energy from their surroundings in order to facilitate their own chemical reactions. E.g., photosynthesis, but more likely, chemosynthesis. How this could've possible occurred is totally unknown. It's thought a likely place for it to have occurred, though, would be deep sea hydrothermal vents. Some scientists think having a metabolism is so important that this must've occurred first, before the addition of self-replicating molecules (metabolism-first hypothesis), but others remain convinced that self-replicating RNA was the initial kick that got abiogenesis going, and later, from this, RNA-based metabolisms arrived (replicator-first hypothesis). - Another problem: we have no idea how RNA could self-replicate on its own in an early-Earth environment. It requires changes in environmental energy to do so, and we really haven't got any good understanding of this process yet... If you hear about something called "panspermia", this is another idea for how unicellular life arrived on Earth. Basically, the theory goes: life arrived on Earth riding comets or meteorites, from somewhere else in the universe. While totally possible, this alien life would still have to have gone through abiogenesis somewhere else in the universe, so it just pushes the problem of the origin of life further back rather than explaining it. So, ignore anything about panspermia if you're trying to learn about abiogenesis.
@@SynKronik Viruses aren't entirely what you'd call 'living' and we're not sure if any of their ancestors were either. They could be the result of cells losing elements and becoming parasitic, or they could've evolved inside cells from bits of DNA that are able to move and copy themselves like plasmids or transposons. We don't actually know.
@SpongeBob Imagination Ok, as scientists we don't rule out possibilities like this until proven otherwise. This, as you have stated, could hypothetically be possible. That being said, it's unlikely for a few reasons, and it's definitely not "the simplest explanation" as you put it. - We haven't seen evidence of extraterrestrials, ever, no matter how far or thoroughly we search. We've barely even discovered bio-signatures of life outside of Earth, and even these are controversial. To explain your idea, you'd have to first explain the existence of extraterrestrials, how and why they would spread life across the universe (if by accident or purposefully, and why), where they themselves came from, why they haven't shown up since, how they traveled from other star systems (you'd need to explain FTL travel, or if not, why they'd bother to come here in generation ships), etc. etc. etc. - Those extraterrestrials would, themselves, have had to have gone through abiogenesis at some point. Thus, abiogenesis would still have had to occurred regardless, making this argument akin to the panspermia hypothesis - invalid when considering the true origins of life in the universe. It just pushes the origins of life further back in time rather than helping to explain the process. Again, this makes the hypothesis less parsimonious than the abiogenesis hypothesis. - LUCA, the last universal common ancestor of all life on Earth, based on DNA analysis, was most likely a hydrothermal vent endemic autotrophic microorganism (doi.org/10.1038/nmicrobiol.2016.116). It was very simple and supports the hypothesis of abiogenesis/evolutionary divergence. - The argument that the Earth is "life hosting" rather than "life-producing" is invalid for numerous reasons. One, the Earth as we see it today is hardly comparable to the toxic, boiling mixing pot of chemicals and protoplanetary material that the Earth was when life first emerged on it. Two, if a series of chemical reactions began to occur in which life might arise again, the life that already thrives on our planet would out-compete, and if not, probably consume these simple RNA compounds. Many bacteria do this today through osmotrophy. The planet, through the appearance of life, has simply become incapable of going through abiogenesis a second time. There's many other reasons this is invalid... I could go on. Of course, the idea of life being transmitted by aliens isn't impossible. That being said, it's not parsimonious. In science, nothing is aliens... Until it's aliens. If other hypotheses exist, they're more parsimonious from our current understanding of the universe. If I were you I'd remain open to other possibilities. It's always good to speculate, but you should never be so sure of your ideas until they're tested and either proven or falsified - and your idea is not falsifiable, so it can't be tested, and therefore it's not of use to us as scientists. We don't currently know how life first appeared on Earth. It's better to be open to all the possibilities rather than to assume one is true, even if it sounds cooler than the others. Plus, trust experts on the topic. If they don't consider it a valid hypothesis, let's trust them on that assumption.
@@limiv5272 Wile the origin of viruses is poorly understood and possibly occurred many times they are essential to the story of evolution of life on Earth. Especially in the case of Eukaryotes which growing evidence supports as potentially being the result of the Nucleocytoviricota a clade of Nucleocytoplasmic large DNA viruses to which the Eukaryotic nuclear genome shares a common ancestor. There is disagreement whether the last common ancestor was a Eukaryotic or Eukaryote like cell or a virus but the finding of prokaryotic viruses and the role of nucleolus like structures termed viral replication factories that decouple transcription from translation to help fight off prokaryotes CRISPR immune systems long enough to Highjack the cell seems to suggest at the very least that the nuclear membranes and structure are viral in origin. Also the thus far lack of evidence for the classes of proteins involved in the formation of the nucleolus within prokaryotes outside of Eukaryotes and the Nucleocytoviricota is interesting. Also apparently there is a similar situation with linear DNA and histones Prokaryotes use circular genomes with coupled transcription and translation. So it seems actually quite possible that we might be descended from viruses and even if we aren't then the Nucleocytoviricota would still be direct relatives and thus pox viruses and herpes viruses would both be related to us. Bad relatives indeed regardless. >_< Oh whoops forgot to post my reply >_>
I was wondering the same thing, it seems odd for a single celled organism to have genes for being multicellular. It is almost like whales having genes for legs.
Nah I think it would be pretty unlikely, because there are a lot of different proteins which are found only in metazoa that are not present in choanoflagellates. Also with quite a few proteins such as ATP9, it is possible to compare their sequences across animals, choanoflagellates, and fungi (which branched off from animals before choanoflagellates) and see that the amino acid sequence almost looks like an intermediate between the animal and fungal version of the protein. (Sorry for the rant lol)
I clicked on this video both to watch it and learn more about the micro cosmos and to see how any creationists had a meltdown in the comments. I was not disappointed on either front
Thank you I am new to microscopy and was trying to figure out what was on the tail end of a Ostracod I seen, I was just calling them butt munchers ;) Now I know!
Keep in mind that the choanaflagellates today are just as old genetic lineages as the most complex multi-cellular life. Its very unlikely that they have been unchanged over the past ~600MY, so maybe way way distant cousins, but not ancestors.
Mind blown: If these are the closest to animals, then that means that multicellularism evolved separately in plant animals and fungi. I had never thought of that.
No, they definitely would've had to change because the planet and other living things around them have also changed. When people talk about 'living fossils' they mean that the outward or general appearance and food finding strategies of a creature are more or less the same as they were a very long time ago, not that they're entirely the same. Some body plans and strategies simply work well enough that there's no need to make big changes
@@limiv5272 Agreed, I mean it seems like they messed up with semantics a bit. I hate when creationists abuse these small mistakes to argue against evolution theorum.
Whenever I meet someone 'proudly' wearing a necklace sporting a cross, for me, that's no different from if the person was wearing a necklace with a tag, saying; *_''I'm just stupid when it comes to Reality!''_*
Depends on what measurement you are referring to. For example 630x is the amount of microscope magnification, and 31um (13 millions of a meter) is a scale as mentioned by adobe doug
![เปิด อาณาจักร หมื่นล้าน "สาระตั้ม" l [Nickynachat]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/3XE0nPF4YkQ/mqdefault.jpg)
I'm watching a high quality documentary for free. What a time to be alive. Thank you!
"It is not a normal show"
You aren't kidding. It's one of the most unique shows in existence right now.
I'm happy to do my part. From an amateur research microscope owner, I'm glad people are really getting interested in this stuff.
An empty frustule of a diatom rents as an apartment in New York City for $1,500 per month. True!
Sounds about right, lol.
Utilities?
$3000 if your in California
Journey to the Microcosmos, I want to thank you for you have been part of my precious niece's decision to change courses from nursing to medical technology which will cover the fundamentals of microbiology. I bought her a cool microscope which I think will be a nice investment after finishing her degree. Now, she is teaching my young son fascinating things about microbes. I love seeing them enthused as they peek into the microscope. Anyway, as always, thanks for another enjoyable and edifying upload. This episode on choanoflagellates is most enlightening.
Great, as if the guest list for the family reunion wasn't long enough already. Hey, does anyone know postage rates for mailing 1-picogram invitations?
"they spend most of their life not moving around"
"stick themselves to a sturdy surface and grab whatever food passes by"
so they really are our ancestors huh
the apple doesn't fall too far from the tree
They must be Republicans.
@@JMDinOKC I shouldn’t laugh at this
@@JMDinOKC hAHa fNuNy, now laugh at US politics, nOaW
Pff, Americans...
finally pre-historic creatures I can draw
To be fair, they are still alive and kicking it. Since they still make history I reject the prefix "pre". They are just historic?! Anyway, you got mad skills if you can draw these!
@@MrEiht :)
@@MrEiht :>
@@MrEiht You can trace them using a microscope.
It is Sponge Bob
I appreciate the writing of this series. It is clear enough for someone without a science background to understand, but still informative and precise enough to be enjoyed by people with microbiology backgrounds. Like me! (Now I just gotta to use my degree for something.....)
If we had microscopes like this in school, I'd probably be a microbiologist
You are a microbiologist to me 💝
@@grogu8236 I'm an engineerd
@@thefatmoop 🤦♀️
If you had microscopes like this at your school, you would have already had to be rich... and be at a school that made cgi videos of what microbes might look like
James is a fantastic microscopist
Am I the only one who watches this channel as ASMR? Hank's low voice is so relaxing and close. And nothing is better than microbiology to chill!
Which is funny because if you watch his vlogbrothers videos he is so amped up and excitable! He has no chill! 😆 I guess he saves it all for these narrations 🤷😏
microcosmos is my go-to videos for sleep -- i watch the new ones awake & focused but when its time to zonk out, i want nothing more than chill hank describing microorganisms lol
I do too =) But I can't fall asleep to it because I wanna see the microbes and what he's explaining
Congratulations on one half million subscribers!!! 🥳
Thank you!!
I do Microscopy in my daily work with Children and you guys and girls helped me so much in understanding more of the Microcosmos and its variety in microbes etc.
The work you upload here for free is amazing and let me tell you one thing. Your impact is bigger then you might expect, the kids love our Microscopy Projects and im glad I learned a lot of Knowledge from your Content that I can teach the children. Keep it up! :)
What a time to be alive where you can see all these incredible things so easily, thanks guys I love your channel
This genre of video should be called "relaxa-learning" This channel is also my cat's favorite.. Occasionally he will try and attack a microbe.
I am a simple man I see micros I hit the like button.
Feels like I'm watching an episode of Inter-dimensional Cable.
Navicula is so pretty. I’ll have to look up more on it.
Hi MicroCosmos,
Great channel name. I am OBSESSED by the idea that life can travel from planets to planets through meteorites. Kinda reminds me that. Awesome content, keep posting ! New fan
Thank you! I was waiting for a choanoflagellate episode!
Seriously here’s the channel that promotes products and I then dash to buy....thank you!
Just loving these videos guys. James...your work is breathtaking. Hank, your VO is really engaging. Can’t wait to get my scope in June!!
Reject humanity
Return to prokaryotes
We are Eukaryotes, we need to go back! Return to Pre-Metazoan ciliates!
Wait, we’ve always been eukaryotes, and we’ll always be.
@@laserfan17 now it's correct
Return to Hydrogen!
@@dovahkiin_brasil perfect 👌🏻
very cool to see how the the unicellular beings are inside and working for the multicellular ones ♡
I like watching these videos with my headphones so I can hear the cool background music too 🎶
Thanks Beckett! This "microcosmos" stuff seems really interesting indeed! Just a message from your Gangrel friends, take care!
Question, if micro organisms could "see" as we do what would it look like to them swimming through very thick liquid, which is why maybe eyes aren't needed mostly and probably the cilia work as sensors and chemical identifiers?
This made me so happy! Choanoflagellates are my favorite!
Nice Work Earthling
Bless Up
Do a video on brine shrimp and packaged dry shrimp please
actually just learned about them this week in bio of organisms (: great camerawork and microscopy work.
Maybe those proteins that help bond animal cells together also helps this primitive version stick to surfaces?
yey more educational stuff now thats what i am craving!
Every drop of water is an universe.
It really is an whole universe 🤗
Is your microscope good enough to observe behavior of cell nuclei like mitosis / relaxing and densifying of the DNA in the nucleus and so on?
"the emergence of unicellular life"? just exactly how did that happen?
That's a complicated topic. It was a process called abiogenesis, and I'll be real with you, while we have the starting points of an understanding of the process, we still have absolutely no idea how it happened.
What we do know is:
- The early Earth's oceans were a mixing pot of organic chemicals (those are chemicals with a carbon skeleton/structure) and all kinda of chemical reactions. These chemicals arrived on Earth from the building blocks of the planet, i.e., asteroids and comets, and we still find them in abundance in asteroids and comets to this day.
- Somehow this 'primordial soup' generated the first living cells. It is likely that phospholipids (the chemicals that make up cell membranes) could've formed 'bubbles' of isolated chemistry. Any RNA that spontaneously generated in the primordial soup could've been captured in these bubbles, and provided conditions were acceptable, could've self-replicated to produce more RNA. In doing so, it would have acted like a single-molecule-sized living thing, eating (RNA nucleotides), reproducing (self-replicating), and evolving (random mutations). As with all things evolution, most mutations would suck. However, any beneficial mutations in the RNA structure would allow the RNA molecule to replicate more efficiently. In doing so it might out-compete other RNA sequences trying to do the same thing, becoming dominant in its environment. This process would continue until RNA gained the capacity to catalyze the formation of more complex structures, such as polypeptides (proteins), forming the first, true cells. This would've created an early Earth that was dominated by RNA-based life: the theory is called the "RNA world hypothesis". (FYI, RNA that catalyses things is called a ribozyme, and is the RNA equivalent to an enzyme. Ribosomes do this in cells to this day).
- Somewhere along the line, RNA somehow got switched to DNA, providing us with our DNA-based world we see today.
- Problems with this whole concept: somehow, cells must've gained the capacity to take in energy from their surroundings in order to facilitate their own chemical reactions. E.g., photosynthesis, but more likely, chemosynthesis. How this could've possible occurred is totally unknown. It's thought a likely place for it to have occurred, though, would be deep sea hydrothermal vents. Some scientists think having a metabolism is so important that this must've occurred first, before the addition of self-replicating molecules (metabolism-first hypothesis), but others remain convinced that self-replicating RNA was the initial kick that got abiogenesis going, and later, from this, RNA-based metabolisms arrived (replicator-first hypothesis).
- Another problem: we have no idea how RNA could self-replicate on its own in an early-Earth environment. It requires changes in environmental energy to do so, and we really haven't got any good understanding of this process yet...
If you hear about something called "panspermia", this is another idea for how unicellular life arrived on Earth. Basically, the theory goes: life arrived on Earth riding comets or meteorites, from somewhere else in the universe. While totally possible, this alien life would still have to have gone through abiogenesis somewhere else in the universe, so it just pushes the problem of the origin of life further back rather than explaining it. So, ignore anything about panspermia if you're trying to learn about abiogenesis.
@@dylaneverett4586 There one missing piece to the puzzle that you left out i.e the emergence and development of the virus.
@@SynKronik Viruses aren't entirely what you'd call 'living' and we're not sure if any of their ancestors were either. They could be the result of cells losing elements and becoming parasitic, or they could've evolved inside cells from bits of DNA that are able to move and copy themselves like plasmids or transposons. We don't actually know.
@SpongeBob Imagination Ok, as scientists we don't rule out possibilities like this until proven otherwise. This, as you have stated, could hypothetically be possible. That being said, it's unlikely for a few reasons, and it's definitely not "the simplest explanation" as you put it.
- We haven't seen evidence of extraterrestrials, ever, no matter how far or thoroughly we search. We've barely even discovered bio-signatures of life outside of Earth, and even these are controversial. To explain your idea, you'd have to first explain the existence of extraterrestrials, how and why they would spread life across the universe (if by accident or purposefully, and why), where they themselves came from, why they haven't shown up since, how they traveled from other star systems (you'd need to explain FTL travel, or if not, why they'd bother to come here in generation ships), etc. etc. etc.
- Those extraterrestrials would, themselves, have had to have gone through abiogenesis at some point. Thus, abiogenesis would still have had to occurred regardless, making this argument akin to the panspermia hypothesis - invalid when considering the true origins of life in the universe. It just pushes the origins of life further back in time rather than helping to explain the process. Again, this makes the hypothesis less parsimonious than the abiogenesis hypothesis.
- LUCA, the last universal common ancestor of all life on Earth, based on DNA analysis, was most likely a hydrothermal vent endemic autotrophic microorganism (doi.org/10.1038/nmicrobiol.2016.116). It was very simple and supports the hypothesis of abiogenesis/evolutionary divergence.
- The argument that the Earth is "life hosting" rather than "life-producing" is invalid for numerous reasons. One, the Earth as we see it today is hardly comparable to the toxic, boiling mixing pot of chemicals and protoplanetary material that the Earth was when life first emerged on it. Two, if a series of chemical reactions began to occur in which life might arise again, the life that already thrives on our planet would out-compete, and if not, probably consume these simple RNA compounds. Many bacteria do this today through osmotrophy. The planet, through the appearance of life, has simply become incapable of going through abiogenesis a second time. There's many other reasons this is invalid... I could go on.
Of course, the idea of life being transmitted by aliens isn't impossible. That being said, it's not parsimonious. In science, nothing is aliens... Until it's aliens. If other hypotheses exist, they're more parsimonious from our current understanding of the universe.
If I were you I'd remain open to other possibilities. It's always good to speculate, but you should never be so sure of your ideas until they're tested and either proven or falsified - and your idea is not falsifiable, so it can't be tested, and therefore it's not of use to us as scientists. We don't currently know how life first appeared on Earth. It's better to be open to all the possibilities rather than to assume one is true, even if it sounds cooler than the others. Plus, trust experts on the topic. If they don't consider it a valid hypothesis, let's trust them on that assumption.
@@limiv5272 Wile the origin of viruses is poorly understood and possibly occurred many times they are essential to the story of evolution of life on Earth. Especially in the case of Eukaryotes which growing evidence supports as potentially being the result of the Nucleocytoviricota a clade of Nucleocytoplasmic large DNA viruses to which the Eukaryotic nuclear genome shares a common ancestor.
There is disagreement whether the last common ancestor was a Eukaryotic or Eukaryote like cell or a virus but the finding of prokaryotic viruses and the role of nucleolus like structures termed viral replication factories that decouple transcription from translation to help fight off prokaryotes CRISPR immune systems long enough to Highjack the cell seems to suggest at the very least that the nuclear membranes and structure are viral in origin.
Also the thus far lack of evidence for the classes of proteins involved in the formation of the nucleolus within prokaryotes outside of Eukaryotes and the Nucleocytoviricota is interesting. Also apparently there is a similar situation with linear DNA and histones Prokaryotes use circular genomes with coupled transcription and translation. So it seems actually quite possible that we might be descended from viruses and even if we aren't then the Nucleocytoviricota would still be direct relatives and thus pox viruses and herpes viruses would both be related to us. Bad relatives indeed regardless. >_<
Oh whoops forgot to post my reply >_>
Could it be that choanoflagellates branched off from some colonial / multicellular organism and headed back towards unicellularity?
I was wondering the same thing, it seems odd for a single celled organism to have genes for being multicellular. It is almost like whales having genes for legs.
@@Triumph263 Strangely enough, whales did have legs and then lost them. :)
-James
Nah I think it would be pretty unlikely, because there are a lot of different proteins which are found only in metazoa that are not present in choanoflagellates. Also with quite a few proteins such as ATP9, it is possible to compare their sequences across animals, choanoflagellates, and fungi (which branched off from animals before choanoflagellates) and see that the amino acid sequence almost looks like an intermediate between the animal and fungal version of the protein. (Sorry for the rant lol)
It's beautiful thanks,
I knew l could sense Hank's style there
I love your job. Your videos are the best anxiolytics for me! Thank you.
I clicked on this video both to watch it and learn more about the micro cosmos and to see how any creationists had a meltdown in the comments. I was not disappointed on either front
What's your favorite micro-inhabitant? I'm still trying to decide mine.
can u grow algea in a tank fully sealed and harvest oxygen from it?
Thank you I am new to microscopy and was trying to figure out what was on the tail end of a Ostracod I seen, I was just calling them butt munchers ;) Now I know!
📈 _(I enjoyed the video and am commenting to appease the algorithm gods)_
On topic: I wonder if this knowledge could help health sciences, for instance how to heal a living sponge
Keep in mind that the choanaflagellates today are just as old genetic lineages as the most complex multi-cellular life. Its very unlikely that they have been unchanged over the past ~600MY, so maybe way way distant cousins, but not ancestors.
Terrific. You folks are the best.
Those non-motile choanoflagellates remind me of barnacles, the part where they stick to a surface and sift through the waters for food
Why I am just discovering this channel??!!!! And why hank doesn't talk about it!!
It's funny to hear "only one hundred and fifty species..." when referring to a microscopic being lol.
Great video, I hope I can reach your video quality one day :)
Did we ever get that Archaea episode?
We will make one in our 5th season! :)
-James
That's cousin Squishy. He's my 1st cousin, 7 billion times removed!
It is probably more like 700 septillion times removed.
lovely video wish I knew about this channedl years ago - subscribed! thank you for your work!
Hey That's my Uncle Earl 👋
I've heard about choanoflagelates before but I didn't know much about them other than they're related to animals
4:54 That looks just like my great grandpa!
1:57 What are the "big gold things" called? They're so pretty. Must look them up
Synura!
Thank you!
go grandpa go!
I always had an affinity for spongebob. Now it makes sense!🤓
So early multi celled TH-cam commenters have barely had time to evolve!
Mind blown: If these are the closest to animals, then that means that multicellularism evolved separately in plant animals and fungi. I had never thought of that.
Multicellularity has evolved separately at least 25 times in eukaryotes and prokaryotes.
@@MegaAwesomeNick Well then. Good to know.
8 seconds! I'm not bored...
> Closest ancestors of..
Hold on right there. Did you say they are our ancestor living over billions of years, completely unchanged?
No, they definitely would've had to change because the planet and other living things around them have also changed. When people talk about 'living fossils' they mean that the outward or general appearance and food finding strategies of a creature are more or less the same as they were a very long time ago, not that they're entirely the same. Some body plans and strategies simply work well enough that there's no need to make big changes
@@limiv5272 Agreed, I mean it seems like they messed up with semantics a bit. I hate when creationists abuse these small mistakes to argue against evolution theorum.
@@junholee4961 Oh yeah me too
beautiful. thank you.
Awesome video - thank you!
Thank you!
whats that spinning microbe at 7:07? its so pretty
Its a scooby snack
I miss u, rotifer.
Can anyone explain how the ancient Greeks could see these little critters to give them a name? They did not have microscopes back then...did they???
Not sure if serious
@@fluffysheap What do you mean? I’m 🧐 serious.
The scientists who discovered them liked Greek.
The Greeks didnt discover them lol. A lot of scientists just use greek and latin stem words to name things because it sounds prestigious.
The names are just greek or latin lol, the first microscope was invented in 1635
Love the work fellas ❤️❤️❤️
Nice!
07:28 Goose bumps intensifies
I love this episode!
I’d like to see an episode about zooxanthellae. (Is it 1 L or 2?)
We are working on it. :)
-James
What is the name of the soundtrack?
I kept waiting for them to tell us to get off their lawn...
Mikrokosmos
8:05 what is the green coil floating by?
A Scenedesmus :)
- James
Great video
Hello quill From the past, Heellloooo
I was just wondering when another video would come out lmao
8:02 What's that green thing traveling diagonally up the bottom-right of the screen? It looks like a pokemon.
I believe that's a diatom.
@@LimeyLassen Oh cool! Thanks man.
So how do we get James an electron microscope? :)
You should read The revolutionary phenotype
_It's a choanoflagellate, but _*_you_*_ can call it a sibling_
Love One Another
What a cool video!
Hey dudes
amazing!
Love it!
So what counts as an animal? What doesn't count?
Cell structure, metabolism, reproduction, inheritance, variability, growth, development, movements, irritability and the most important - heterotrophy
Anything that has the ability to reproduce
Looks like the origins of the plumbus.
Pretty cool that the guy was correct more than a century ago.
Like Animalities in Mortal Kombat??
Whenever I meet someone 'proudly' wearing a necklace sporting a cross, for me, that's no different from if the person was wearing a necklace with a tag, saying;
*_''I'm just stupid when it comes to Reality!''_*
What is the measurement on the screen?
It’s a scale so you can see the relative size of the objects shown.
Depends on what measurement you are referring to. For example 630x is the amount of microscope magnification, and 31um (13 millions of a meter) is a scale as mentioned by adobe doug
Imagine a single celled boi turn in a human
So they’re our siblings...
Creationists goes hmmmm....
Dangerously close to flatulates!
So, what you're saying is that without Choanoflagellates, there'd be no "No Country for Old Men", "Fargo" or "The Big Lebowski".