THE ORIGIN

OF LIFE

NOHELIA GRADIZ
The main objective of biology is the study of life. For
this reason, one of the most exciting - and intriguing
- unknowns for biologists is proposing theories and
formulating hypotheses to reveal how the origin of
this phenomenon occurred.

The origin of life is a big mystery that scientist have

been trying to solve for years.
There are many theories of where life began on
Earth.

The theories of the origin of life try to explain how

living beings originated, how life arose as we know, it is
a question that many theological and scientific
philosophers have asked for many years.
 Origin of life
theories:
Below we will find some of the main hypothetical
theories raised by different authors to explain the
origin of the first living organisms from which the
most advanced forms of life presumably evolved, the
main theories of the origin of life.

Theories:
Spontaneous generation (Abiogenesis)
theory.
Biogenesis theory
Endosymbiotic theory

 SPONTANEOUS
GENERATION
This theory says that living things could arise spontaneously.
Without other parental organisms, that is, they arose from
non-living matter.

Therefore, for many centuries, different thinkers were

convinced that insects, worms, frogs and other vermin formed
spontaneously on mud or on decomposing matter, these
theories were discredited on more than one occasion by the
experiments carried out by Francesco Redi (1668) and Louis
Pasteur (1861)
For example Redi proved that unless adult insects laid their
eggs on a piece of meat the larvae did not arise
spontaneously on it, on the other hand, Pasteur later showed
that the microorganisms could only come from pre-existing
microorganisms
 BIOGENESIS
The idea of spontaneous generation was not completely
rejected until mid-1800s. It was replaced by the theory of
biogenesis, which states that only living organisms can
produce other living organisms.

This theory was supported by several scientists, among

them Francisco Redi, Louis Pasteur, Huxley and Lazzaro
Spallanzani; All of these researchers stand out for their
enormous contributions to the biological sciences.

However, the theory of biogenesis assumes that all life

appears alive. So we must ask ourselves, where did or
how did that first form of life appear?

Today it is widely known that living organisms come only

from other organisms
Biologists support the hypothesis that life on earth
developed from non-living substances that formed
molecular aggregates. These aggregates managed to
replicate adequately and developed a metabolism -
remarkable characteristics of the beings that we consider
"alive."
However, we had already raised evidence that the living
could not arise from non-living matter. So how do we
resolve this apparent paradox?

Earth's early atmosphere was very different from what it

is now. The oxygen concentration was extremely low,
there were lightning, volcanic activity, constant meteorite
bombardment and the arrival of ultraviolet radiation was
more intense.

Under these conditions, a chemical evolution could occur

which, after a significant period of time, led to the first
forms of life.
 ENDOSYMBIOTIC
THEORY
Eukaryotic cells developed 1500 million years ago, but how
did they develop a nuclear membrane and membranes in
organelles as well as mitochondria and chloroplasts? For this
the American researcher Lynn Margulis from the University
of Massachusetts developed a hypothesis to answer this
question. In her hypothesis, she proposed that mitochondria
evolved from aerobic and free-living prokaryotic cells, while
chloroplasts evolved from prokaryotic cells and synthetic
photos and thus with this idea which she called the
endosymbiotic hypothesis.

The free-living ancestors of mitochondria and chloroplasts

were encompassed by larger cells that captured them for
food and thus some of these remained undigested, the
hypothesis of Lynn Margulis presents much evidence that
supports it, for example, mitochondria and Chloroplasts look
like prokaryotic cells, in the same way, mitochondria and
chloroplasts contain their own DNA and ribosomes,
therefore they can make their own proteins and carry out
the reproduction process. On the other hand, the DNA of the
mitochondria and chloroplast is circular as well as in the
chromosomes of bacteria and finally the ribosomes of
mitochondria and chloroplasts are similar to those of
bacteria and not to those of eukaryotic cells.
OPINION

I think the theory that is most reasonable to "believe"

is biogenesis, because I think life comes from another
life so that is the theory that I think is the best. Well,
we exist from our mother and our mother exists from
her mother and goes on. With Redi's experiment that
totally proves that life comes from life, the meat that
he left with the lid did not have any living organism,
but the meat that he left uncovered had larvae that
some flies could have put in the meat, for it is enough
to think that the most reasonable theory is
biogenesis. There are also many more theories, but of
the ones I put into this essay, biogenesis is the most
reasonable for me.