Why sulphur granules are the core of Morgellons. They work with the mercury gas in your mouth from fillings. It is not the spirochete, but the sulphur granules. These form the MSP oligomer. Sulphur granules: in biofilm in mouth. HERE is the granule,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ==========================
Fig.4. Sulfurgranule from periapical lesion of tooth with refractory apical periodontitis. The granule is soft, yellowish in color and 3–4mm in diameter. Threeadditional granules were recovered from the samelesion. From (66). Reproduced with permission fromLippincott, Williams & Wilkins
htmlimg1.scribdassets.com/8i1k3as534izwxi/images/8-df7f676fe6.jpg --------------------------------------- This is not Bb as is being claimed. The Stricker report never looked at what is being found in the mouth already. The crossover of MSP oligomers, oligomers are PLASTIC DNA These grow the biofilm which grows the polymers. The granule needs to be located. Here it is.
============================ How to build a biofilm: a fungal perspective It has a silicon substrate.
Figure 1. Confocal and scanning electron microscopy (SEM) biofilm images. (a) A confocal scanning laser microscopic image of a biofilm produced by C. albicans strain DAY286 after 48 h on a silicon disk. In this depth image, red is furthest from the silicon substrate (350 μm) and blue is closest to the biofilm substrate. Note yeast cells budding from hyphae in upper layers, which might represent a step in cell dispersal. (b) An SEM of a biofilm formed after 24 h by strain DAY185 on a central venous catheter in a rat model of biofilm formation. This image was kindly provided by Jeniel Nett and David Andes, and was modified from reference .
Quorum sensing might be an important factor in dispersal of biofilm cells. The past two years have seen the emergence of several genomic strategies to uncover global events in biofilm formation and directed studies to understand more specific events, such as hyphal formation, in the biofilm setting.
MSP oligomers are plastic morpholinos. If an oligomer, what is the buried surface area?
MSROLL, a program in the Molecular Surface Package (MSP), provides an accurate method to calculate molecular surface area. To calculate the buried surface area of interaction for a multimeric protein one first calculates the molecular or accessible surface area of each monomer and then the surface area of the oligomer. The sum of the monomer surface areas minus the oligomer surface area defines the buried surface area.
Listed below are the relevant records from the output of MSROLL for the pyrococcus woesei TATA-binding protein.
molecule name = pwtbp_mnra molecular area = 8671.963 accessible area = 9882.129
molecule name = pwtbp_mnrb molecular area = 8607.990 accessible area = 9719.247
molecule name = dimer molecular area = 15899.066 accessible area = 16782.808
Multiple archaeans are extremophiles, and some would say this is their ecological niche. They can survive high temperatures, often above 100°C, as found in geysers, black smokers, and oil wells. Some are found in very cold habitats and others in highly saline, acidic, or alkaline water. Mesophiles favor milder conditions in marshland, sewage and soil. Many methanogenic archaea are found in the digestive tracts of animals such as ruminants, termites, and humans. As of 2007, no clear examples of archaeal pathogens are known, [color=Red]although a relationship has been proposed between the presence of some methanogens and human periodontal disease[/color].[/b]
Winthrop Professor Mark Barley, from The University of Western Australia's Centre for Exploration Targeting, and colleagues from the University of Alberta led by Professor Kurt Konhauser, made the discovery by examining key elements in banded iron formations through time.
The study, published in the journal Nature, has identified how links between tectonics and ocean and land chemistry combined to give rise to life on earth about 2.5 billion years ago, during a period known as the Great Oxidation Event (GOE). The GOE changed surface environments on Earth and ultimately made advanced life possible.
Professor Barley said the research team found a rising abundance of chromium in the banded iron formations starting 2.48 billion years ago, which was an important indication of links between life and the growth of continents. Using this data, they were able to see cyanobacteria had started to produce oxygen, and that aerobic respiring chemolithotrophic bacteria oxidised pyrite linked to acid rock drainage that dissolved chromium on land and added chromium and sulphate to the ocean. This confirms that the 2.48 to 2.32 billion year period was the protracted Great Oxidation Event which eventually helped the formation of complex life.
Professor Barley said it was important to understand how and when oxygen levels rose and their links to organisms and the tectonic growth of continents.
But the Earth's early atmosphere was oxygen-poor in the Archaean prior to the Great Oxidation Event, which happened between 2.5 and 2.3 billion years ago, so it's vital that we understand how oxygen rose."
"However, a study of past and ongoing upper atmosphere aerosol programs confirms that the government has been active in this field for years.
The Atmospheric Radiation Measurement (ARM) Program was created in 1989 with funding from the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and is sponsored by the DOE’s Office of Science and managed by the Office of Biological and Environmental Research.
One of ARM’s programs, entitled Indirect and Semi-Direct Aerosol Campaign (ISDAC), is aimed at measuring “cloud simulations” and “aerosol retrievals”.
Another program under the Department of Energy’s Atmospheric Science Program is directed towards, “developing comprehensive understanding of the atmospheric processes that control the transport, transformation, and fate of energy related trace chemicals and particulate matter.”
The DOE website states that, “The current focus of the program is aerosol radiative forcing of climate: aerosol formation and evolution and aerosol properties that affect direct and indirect influences on climate and climate change.”
U.S. government scientists are already bombarding the skies with the acid-rain causing pollutant sulphur dioxide in an attempt to fight global warming by “geo-engineering” the planet, despite the fact that injecting aerosols into the upper atmosphere carries with it a host of both known and unknown dangers. The proposal to disperse sulphur dioxide in an attempt to reflect sunlight was discussed in a September 2008 London Guardian article entitled, Geoengineering: The radical ideas to combat global warming, in which Ken Caldeira, a leading climate scientist based at the Carnegie Institution in Stanford, California, promoted the idea of injecting the atmosphere with aerosols.
“One approach is to insert “scatterers” into the stratosphere,” states the article. “Caldeira cites an idea to deploy jumbo jets into the upper atmosphere and deposit clouds of tiny particles there, such as sulphur dioxide. Dispersing around 1m tonnes of sulphur dioxide per year across 10m square kilometres of the atmosphere would be enough to reflect away sufficient amounts of sunlight.” Experiments similar to Caldeira’s proposal are already being carried out by U.S. government -backed scientists, such as those at the U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE) Savannah River National Laboratory in Aiken, S.C, who last year began conducting studies which involved shooting huge amounts of particulate matter, in this case “porous-walled glass microspheres,” into the stratosphere. The project is closely tied to an idea by Nobel Prize winner Paul Crutzen, who “proposed sending aircraft 747s to dump huge quantities of sulfur particles into the far-reaches of the stratosphere to cool down the atmosphere.”
Such programs merely scratch the surface of what is likely to be a gargantuan and overarching black-budget funded project to geo-engineer the planet, with little or no care for the unknown environmental consequences this could engender.
What is known about what happens when the environment is loaded with sulphur dioxide is bad enough, since the compound is the main component of acid rain, which according to the EPA “Causes acidification of lakes and streams and contributes to the damage of trees at high elevations (for example, red spruce trees above 2,000 feet) and many sensitive forest soils. In addition, acid rain accelerates the decay of building materials and paints, including irreplaceable buildings, statues, and sculptures that are part of our nation’s cultural heritage[/color]
sulphur dioxide.............. is being put in the air.
We inhale, the mercury in our mouths create an action, activates the T. denticola, the p. gingivalis, the fusobacteirum nucleatum ( which puts Carbon dioxide back in environment from cenospheres microcpheres) and the msp oligomer carries on making the artificial from the sulphur granule.
This is why Carnicoms wine test works. It recognizes the "sulphur" in the wine. Pulls out the critters which live on sulphur mixed with the mercury. Wine has sulphur in it. As I drink my wine, I start to feel them move. Why is that? Because they recognize the freq of the sulphur in the wine and the sulphur in the biofilm. Wait, I will chug a bit more, see, if I can get the suckers out.
ABSTRACT Pyrolysis is the technique for the breakdown of high mol wt substances into smaller components, so that they can be separated and analysed by chromatographic techniques like Gas chromatography. This technique offers various advantages like less sample requirement, easy preparation and moreover easier reproducibility. Though the initial cost is high, its use is not limited and follows varied applications which have been compiled in the paper. Key words: Forensic, polymers, pyrolysis, PyGC, pyrolyzer. ______________________________________________________________________________
Pyrolysis a technique that is used in the analysis of biological and synthetic polymers.In pyrolysis, sample is heated up (mainly in vacuum or an inert atmosphere) to decompose into smaller units which are carried by a gas such as helium to the next instrument for characterization. Pyrolyzer is usually linked to a GC which can further be connected to detectors such as MS or FTIR . Pyrolysis is ideally suited for one stage combination with gas chromatography. In pyrolysis-gas chromatography (PyGC) the fragments generated by pyrolysis are passed through the GC for separation and identification. Different pyrolysis devices can be directly connected to the gas chromatographic inlet system. Suitable gas chromatographic system can resolve a pyrolysate mixture into a highly specific pattern of peaks usually called a pyrogram. For identification purposes Davison, Slaney and Wragg applied gas chromatography to analyse pyrolysate. Their work had significant importance in the development of PyGC since
PyGC has evolved to become a routine analytical tool for the characterisation and differentiation of macromolecules both biological and synthetic. Analytical scope of PyGC is improved by using various thermal analysis equipments. Introduction of laser pyrolysis is a new phenomenon for PyGC where laser energy is used as fragmentation source and has facilitated controlled pyrolysis of specific regions on a sample, giving data on the molecular compositional units of the macromolecules. Also newer pyrolyzers have been developed to address the issues of sample losses and discrimination of high molecular weight compounds and further research promises to expand the horizons of the application of the technique.
Thiopene has been deterimined by personnel. from prestigious group.
The effect and localization of thiophene-like poisons were studied on fluid catalytic cracking (FCC) catalyst at the individual particle level. The thiophene-like poisons interact on the Brønsted acid sites of the catalytic materials, forming oligomeric carbocations and coke species, which absorb and emit light in the visible region. The matrix components are not active in the formation of those light absorbing species. In contrast, zeolite Y and ZSM-5 were very active in inducing oligomer formation and the product distribution was different depending on the zeolite pore structure. Comparison of thiophene results with alkane and alkene catalytic cracking studies reveal that FCC particles have more affinity to react with thiophene molecules compared to n-hexane, but 1-hexene may compete with thiophene in the formation of carbocationic species on Brønsted acid sites. Moreover, a different reactivity was observed in thiophenes with distinct electron withdrawing/releasing substituents and molecular sizes. Our results demonstrate that the carbocations are coke intermediates, and the FCC particles containing zeolite Y promote to a higher extent coke formation: the large supercages allow the accommodation of more bulky coke species. On the other hand, FCC particles containing ZSM-5 stabilize the carbocations within the narrower cylindrical pores, diminishing coke formation. Confocal fluorescence microscopy can resolve the location of sulfur components at the single particle level with submicron resolution. Fluorescence microscopy images reveal heterogeneous domains with highly bright fluorescence across the FCC particles, which are attributed to the selective formation of oligomeric carbocations and coke species on the zeolitic material. The presence of thiophenes with different substituents and sizes was also studied by this approach. This demonstrates the potential of confocal fluorescence microscopy to identify reactivity differences of thiophene-like molecules on FCC catalyst particles in a spatially-resolved manner.
Archaea were identified in 1977 by Carl Woese and George E. Fox as being a separate branch based on their separation from other prokaryotes on 16S rRNA phylogenetic trees These two groups were originally named the Archaebacteria and Eubacteria, treated as kingdoms or subkingdoms, which Woese and Fox termed Urkingdoms. Woese argued that they represented fundamentally different branches of living things. He later renamed the groups Archaea and Bacteria to emphasize this, and argued that together with Eukarya they compose three Domains of living organisms
The sizes of prokaryotes relative to other organisms and biomolecules.
Individual archaeans range from 0.1 μm to over 15 μm in diameter, and some form aggregates or filaments up to 200 μm in length. They occur in various shapes, such as spherical, rod-shape, spiral, lobed, or rectangular. Recently, a species of flat, square archaean that lives in hypersaline pools has been discovered.
Archaea are similar to other prokaryotes in most aspects of cell structure and metabolism. However, their genetic transcription and translation — the two central processes in molecular biology — do not show many typical bacterial features, and are in many aspects similar to those of eukaryotes. For instance, archaeal translation uses eukaryotic-like initiation and elongation factors, and their transcription involves TATA Binding Proteins and TFIIB as in eukaryotes. Many archaeal tRNA and rRNA genes harbor unique archaeal introns which are neither like eukaryotic introns, nor like bacterial (type I and type II etc which can "home") introns.
Several other characteristics also set the Archaea apart. Like bacteria and eukaryotes, archaea possess glycerol-based phospholipids. However, three features of the archaeal lipids are unusual:
The archaeal lipids are unique because the stereochemistry of the glycerol is the reverse of that found in bacteria and eukaryotes. This is strong evidence for a different biosynthetic pathway. Most bacteria and eukaryotes have membranes composed mainly of glycerol-ester lipids, whereas archaea have membranes composed of glycerol-ether lipids. Even when bacteria have ether-linked lipids, the stereochemistry of the glycerol is the bacterial form. These differences may be an adaptation on the part of Archaea to hyperthermophily. However, it is worth noting that even mesophilic archaea have ether-linked lipids. this means they have methanogens.
Archaeal lipids are based upon the isoprenoid sidechain. This is a five-carbon unit that is also common in rubber and as a component of some bacterial and eukaryotic vitamins. However, only the archaea incorporate these compounds into their cellular lipids, frequently as C-20 (four monomers) or C-40 (eight monomers) side-chains. In some archaea, the C-40 isoprenoid side-chain is long enough to span the membrane, forming a monolayer for a cell membrane with glycerol phosphate moieties on both ends. Although dramatic, this adaptation is most common in the extremely thermophilic archaea.
Although not unique, archaeal cell walls are also unusual. For instance, in most archaea they are formed by surface-layer proteins or an S-layer. S-layers are common in bacteria, where they serve as the sole cell-wall component in some organisms (like the Planctomyces) or an outer layer in many organisms with peptidoglycan. With the exception of one group of methanogens, archaea lack a peptidoglycan wall (and in the case of the exception, the peptidoglycan is very different from the type found in bacteria)
Archaeans also have flagella that are notably different in composition and development from the superficially similar flagella of bacteria. The bacterial flagellum is a modified type III secretion system, while archeal flagella resemble type IV pilli which use a sec dependent secretion system somewhat similar to but different from type II secretion system.
Archaea exhibit a variety of different types of metabolism; there are nitrifiers, methanogens and anaerobic methane oxidisers.[/color][color=Green] Methanogens live in anaerobic environments [/color][/b]and produce methane. Of note are the halobacteria, which use light to produce energy. Although no archaea conduct photosynthesis with an electron transport chain, light-activated ion pumps like bacteriorhodopsin and halorhodopsin play a role in generating ion gradients, which are harnessed into adenosine triphosphate (ATP). Archaea have one circular chromosome although up to 30% of their genetic material may be contained in plasmids, as evidenced by comparisons of GC content. Archaea can reproduce by binary and multiple fission, fragmentation, and budding.
A phylogenetic tree based on rRNA data, showing the separation of bacteria, archaea, and eukaryote.
An alternative tree based on the model of neomuran evolution from eubacteria. LUCA: Last Universal Common Ancestor
Archaea are divided into two main groups based on rRNA trees, the Euryarchaeota and Crenarchaeota. Three other groups have been tentatively created for certain environmental samples, the peculiar species Nanoarchaeum equitans, discovered in 2002 by Karl Stetter, and the Archael Richmond Mine Acidophilic Nanoorganisms (ARMAN) groups discovered by Brett Baker, but their affinities are uncertain.
Woese argued that the bacteria, archaea, and eukaryotes each represent a primary line of descent that diverged early on from an ancestral progenote with poorly developed genetic machinery. Later he treated these groups formally as domains, each comprising several kingdoms. This division has become very popular, although the idea of the progenote itself is not generally supported. Some biologists, however, have argued that the archaebacteria and eukaryotes arose from specialized eubacteria. The relationship between Archaea and Eukarya remains an important problem. Aside from the similarities noted above, many genetic trees group the two together. Some place eukaryotes closer to Euryarchaeota than Crenarchaeota are, although the membrane chemistry suggests otherwise. However, the discovery of archaean-like genes in certain bacteria, such as Thermotoga, makes their relationship difficult to determine, as horizontal gene transfer may have occurred. Some have suggested that eukaryotes arose through fusion of an archaean and eubacterium, which became the nucleus and cytoplasm, which accounts for various genetic similarities but runs into difficulties explaining cell structure.
However, a recent large scale phylogenetic analysis of the structure of proteins encoded in almost 200 completely sequenced genomes showed that the origin of Archaea is much more ancient and that the archaeal lineage may represent the most ancient that exists on earth.
The Archaea should not be confused with the geological term Archean eon, also known as the Archeozoic era. This refers to the primordial period of earth history when Archaea and Bacteria were the only cellular organisms living on the planet. Probable fossils of these microbes have been dated to almost 3.5 billion years ago, and the remains of lipids that may be either archaean or eukaryotic have been detected in shales dating from 2.7 billion years ago. The last common ancestor of Bacteria and Archaea was probably a non-methanogenic thermophile, raising the possibility that lower temperatures are extreme environments in archaeal terms, and organisms that can survive in cooler environments evolved later on.
okay so when did archaea become part of the microbes in the human body?
when it was introduced as a heat shock protein become of the coming onslaught of "climate change" engineered by the Idiot Environmental, Ecological Evolutionary Idiots. I remember and know who you are. From hippie to control freak, all accepted because you are part of the elite!
The wimpies who could not be men. You caved to the secrets. Because you have no guts!
You are one of them.
And today, you call it Green Technology". I am so sick of green, I could puke!
Archaea were identified in 1977 by Carl Woese and George E. Fox
Nice trick, they cannot be recognized..........heres why! No one would suspect. And they are not culutred. ===========================
Finally to the commentary title’s parenthetical question. Support from the more mission-oriented U.S. funding agencies has played a vital role in developing archaeal research in the United States, and a European community initiative has similarly supported a consortium of ∼40 research groups to investigate extremophile biology, predominantly archaeal projects, explicitly aimed at biotechnology development (2). Recently, following the Martian meteorite excitement, the National Science Foundation established a Life in Extreme Environments (LExEN) initiative and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration founded the astrobiology program. Funding for environmental and ecological studies of Archaea should therefore now increase, and hopefully this will expedite the isolation and characterization of the many globally important (paradoxically) nonextremophile Archaea that currently defy laboratory cultivation . But what about an archaeal animal, plant, or insect pathogen that might encourage more interest and support from the National Institutes of Health? Methanogens live as intracellular symbionts (33) and inhabit the rumen and lower digestive tracts of animals and insects, so they know how to interact with a host, but do they never cause problems?
As Archaeaare innately resistant to almost all clinically and agriculturally used antibiotics, surely there should be an occasional opportunistic archaeal infection, but where are the reports? Could Archaea be such clever pathogens that we don’t recognize them as the true causative agents of disease?
All in the teeth, where inorganic meets organic........the crossover. endodontic means teeth, oral infections.
Identification and Quantification of Archaea Involved in Primary Endodontic Infections
Members of the domain Archaea, one of the three domains of life, are a highly diverse group of prokaryotes, distinct from bacteria and eukaryotes. Despite their abundance and ubiquity on earth, including their close association with humans, animals, and plants, so far no pathogenic archaea have been described. As some archaea live in close proximity to anaerobic bacteria, for instance, in the human gut system and in periodontal pockets, the aim of our study was to assess whether archaea might possibly be involved in human endodontic infections, which are commonly polymicrobial. We analyzed 20 necrotic uniradicular teeth with radiographic evidence of apical periodontitis and with no previous endodontic treatment. Using real-time quantitative PCR based on the functional gene mcrA (encoding the methyl coenzyme M reductase, specific to methanogenic archaea) and on archaeal 16S rRNA genes, we found five cases to be positive. Direct sequencing of PCR products from both genes showed that the archaeal community was dominated by a Methanobrevibacter oralis-like phylotype. The size of the archaeal population at the diseased sites ranged from 1.3 × 105 to 6.8 × 105 16S rRNA gene target molecule numbers and accounted for up to 2.5% of the total prokaryotic community (i.e., bacteria plus archaea). Our findings show that archaea can be intimately connected with infectious diseases and thus support the hypothesis that members of the domain Archaea may have a role as human pathogens.[/b]
Now what archaean would be involved in tooth endos? Well this could explain why the labs ignore this, for they know what it is, and one is not to expose this what so ever!
However, considering the range of known pathogens within the domains Bacteria and Eukarya, the complete absence of recognized pathogens within Archaea, whose ubiquity and phylogenetic diversity are comparable to those of the other two domains, is striking. Instead, the assumption that methanogens or other archaea are not causative agents of disease could be partly the result of the fact that these microbes are completely ignored in routine laboratory diagnostics.
well, some folks are attacking the issue, in a slick debunking of the idiots. I would say the introduction of methanogens just might be core to many new diseases. This was the plan. To evolutionize the human species with no record of it. For we all just assume that archaea was always present in the human body, but, lo and behold, the truth comes out from some very astute scientists and investigators. They sure had the correct HAT on that day!
So, why my dear Watson, are these microbes ignored? They are not in the pathogen records, so they do not exist. But, what if they were used to introduce a new pathogen, similar to bioweapons, just dump on the people, and they would never know? Precisely what has been done, "because they can". Haven't you heard that before? Now what does this mean?:
"Methanogens are a unique group of strictly anaerobic archaea which metabolize hydrogen, CO2, or acetate as a substrate with the resultant production of methane",,,,,,,
meaning they do not need oxygen, and if we are oxygen deprived because of the lack of CO2 in the blood, because the "carbon bucks" had to be made out of them, then therein would be our pathogen. The only ways these liars and phonies could win this war on humanity, was to do this. After all, there are too many of us.
This is not based on science at all, it is based on hatred. How can such evil persist? Because no one will challenge them!
Well, you ask for it. We are challenging you. the Morgellons community knows what you have done!
The other Morgellons cause finder would be's are part of the game. They are making too much money off Lymes patients. When it is not Lymes at all, but has an archaen element in the t. denticola in the teeth.
What methanogen was used? Balls or not, we are still going to tell the story! We Morgies know that something new has occurred. We know too, that Lymes Disease was the cover, never to be exposed or treated, covering MS and many other diseases.
"Methanogens are a unique group of strictly anaerobic archaea which metabolize hydrogen, CO2, or acetate as a substrate with the resultant production of methane. As terminal oxidizers in complex microbial communities, they are vital to the anaerobic microbial degradation of organic compounds in natural environments and probably also in defined ecological niches of the human body .
Since methanogens coexist and closely interact with anaerobic bacteria at certain sites (e.g., human colon or dental plaque), they could be implicated in mixed anaeorobic infections. I[color=Red]n fact, methanogens have recently been linked to periodontal disease, a polymicrobial infection that affects the gums and supporting structures of the teeth and is characterized by periodontal pockets."[/color][/b]
In order to find more evidence for the existence of pathogenic methanogens, we focused on primary endodontic infections, which are commonly polymicrobial and lead to inflammation and destruction of periradicular tissues, called apical periodontitis. Unlike periodontal diseases, the apical periodontitis is caused by infection of a tooth's root canal, a place devoid of microbes in a healthy state .
This means that endodontic microorganisms must have strategies to gain access into this sterile place and to evade host defense mechanisms, both features that are characteristically displayed by pathogens .
For assessing the possible existence of archaea, we selected clinical samples from endodontic infections that had previously been screened for the detection of bacteria (. To accomplish this, we used real-time quantitative PCR (RTQ-PCR) based on the functional gene mcrA, encoding methyl coenzyme M reductase, the terminal enzyme complex in the methane generation pathway. The ubiquity of this gene among methanogens has facilitated the development of mcrA as a molecular marker, allowing the detection and enumeration of methanogens without requiring laboratory culture .
We also determined the total load of archaea as well as bacteria by using two different 16S rRNA gene-based RTQ-PCR assays. Here we report for the first time the detection, identification, and quantification of a defined phylotype of archaea in infected root canals. This finding may contribute to an emerging view of archaea as potential human pathogens.
lets keep going here............ What is that "detection, identification, and quantification of a defined phylotype of archaea "?????????????????????????????????
Archaea as human pathogens?????????????????? ..... under the rug....never seen.......BOO!
"Prevalence and abundance of archaea in infected root canals. T[color=Blue]his study was based on an investigation of infected root canals of human teeth, which in the healthy condition constitute a sterile anatomical site. The fact that we detected methanogens in 5 of the 20 endodontic samples suggests that members of archaea can invade this naturally closed system and participate in the polymicrobial infection. [/color]
Comparative sequence analysis of PCR products from archaeal 16S rRNA and mcrA genes demonstrated that archaeal diversity was confined to Methanobrevibacter oralis-like sequence types. Although we did not find a 100% match with this species, the few nucleotide differences among endodontic samples may represent sequencing errors, intraoperon variability, or different strains of a single species and thus may reflect only one defined archaeal phylotype.
It is noteworthy that the prevalence of this archaeon is comparable to the prevalence of the bacterial phyla Fusobacteria and Actinobacteria, both of which include several recognized endodontic pathogens ",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Most methanogens, including members of the genus Methanobrevibacter, metabolize molecular hydrogen (H2) and carbon dioxide (CO2) with methane as the resultant product.
Hydrogen is a crucial intermediate product in anoxic environments, as a balance of hydrogen-producing and hydrogen-consuming processes is necessary for the efficient anaerobic digestion of organic matter. This is due to the unfavorable energetics of fermentation reactions in the presence of even low concentrations of hydrogen.
While the root canal infection is a dynamic process in which various bacterial species dominate at different stages of the infection due to changes in the availability of nutrition, oxygen level (redox potential), and the local pH, the hydrogen concentration might steadily increase until it reaches a level too high to sustain further microbial growth. By consuming H2, methanogens therefore could play an important role in supporting microbial growth and driving the infection process in root canals. Such an “interspecies hydrogen transfer” between anaerobic bacteria and methanogens is known from natural environments and seems to be an important factor for ecosystem functioning .
The fact that we did not find methanogens in all endodontic samples could be due to a different species combination in the root canal (i.e., no hydrogen-producing microorganisms and thus no substrate availability for methanogens) or to exclusion by other hydrogen-metabolizing bacteria. For instance, dissimilatory sulfate-reducing bacteria such as those of the genera Desulfomicrobium and Desulfovibrio are potential competitors for H2. Members of both genera have been found in periodontal pocketsthere is good reason to assume that they have an analogous function in root canal infections and probably also in other mixed anaerobic infections. This raises the interesting question as to whether some archaea can be considered potential human pathogens; that is, do they have features or strategies that characteristically distinguish pathogenic bacteria from commensals? This issue has recently been addressed by two different research groups, both of which compiled literature data about archaea in possible association with human disease. For instance, higher levels of breath methane (produced by methanogens) have been detected in patients with precancerous conditions (ulcerative colitis and colonic polyposis) and cancer of the colon.
Cell wall structures of the archaeon Sulfolobus solfataricus have been demonstrated to exhibit toxic activity similar to that of lipopolysaccharides in mice and rabbits, indicating a genetically programmed immune response in those animals that recognizes archaea as potential pathogens.
Furthermore, various toxin/antitoxin systems have been found in Methanococcus jannaschii,Archaeoglobus fulgidus, and haloarchaea. In addition, virulence genes for lipopolysaccharide biosynthesis and the tadA gene (e.g., required by Actinobacillus actinomycetemcomitans for nonspecific adherence) have been identified in archaea (reviewed in references 7 and 12).
In summary, these authors have developed a meaningful perspective concerning the potential for archaea to cause disease, yet there is still a large gap in knowledge regarding the diversity and abundance of archaea in the human body and the types of interactions they are engaged in with human cells and other microbes. Our results show that methanogens are implicated in an oral infectious disease and thus support the hypothesis that members of Archaea might function as human pathogens.
So, some have found indication of "methanogens" and one in particular is often found in further evaluation: Methanococcus jannaschii...... has a heat shock protein....... Ah yes, the Evolutionary capacitor, the one thing that can alter the evolution of man into the machine, either you become one or you don't. the fourth E....Extinction fullfills the EEE promise. Your teeth will tell the tale! How slick!
Methylation is one of the cornerstones for the new eugenics, ....
Now where does methanococcus jannaschii or sulfalobus, Methane and Sulphur types Here Woese and Olsen declare the 3 kingdoms:
Archaebacterial phylogeny: perspectives on the urkingdoms. Woese CR, Olsen GJ. Department of Genetics and Development, University of Illinois, Urbana 61801, USA.
Comparisons of complete 16S ribosomal RNA sequences have been used to confirm, refine and extend earlier concepts of archaebacterial phylogeny. The archaebacteria fall naturally into two major branches or divisions, I--the sulfur-dependent thermophilic archaebacteria, and II--the methanogenic archaebacteria and their relatives.
Electron micrograph of fibril bundles produced by the rough strain CU1000N. (a) Fibril bundle showing individual strands separating from the bundle at several places. Bar, 50 nm. (b) Parallel array of six or seven fibrils passing over the edge of a bacterial cell. The spherical structures at the bacterial cell surface are likely to be membranous vesicles, which are commonly seen in preparations of rough strains of A. actinomycetemcomitans (30). Bar, 20 nm. Actinobacillus actinomycetemcomitans
Sulphur granules: in teeth issues. Where do they come from?
Does the archaean have sulphur granules? this archaean dna was found in both Bb and T. palladium.
Whereas it was initially assumed that this novel type of LysRS was confined to certain Archaea, continued genomic sequencing efforts have suggested that it may also be found in some bacteria. Specifically, open reading frames (ORFs) encoding proteins with significant similarity to the archaeal-type LysRS were found in two genera of spirochetes, Borrelia burgdorferi and Treponema pallidum, the causative agents in humans of Lyme disease (14) and syphilis (15), respectively. Spirochetes are a phylogenetically ancient bacterial group (16–18) that share a unique morphology. The apparent existence of archaeal-type genes in at least two spirochetal genera raises questions concerning their evolutionary origin and development. The complete analysis of the B. burgdorferi genome will reveal if, in addition to lysS, other genes or unidentified ORFs resemble uniquely archaeal ORFs. Furthermore, the possibility that these pathogens contain an essential enzyme that bears no resemblance to the host protein that performs the same cellular function suggests that the archaeal-type LysRS may prove to be a novel therapeutic target. We therefore attempted to isolate and characterize the gene encoding the archaeal-type LysRS from B. burgdorferi.
skyship: those wormlike strands that make microtubules?
Jul 18, 2013 0:56:59 GMT -5
MK_Alberta: mpatability to D. discoideum for subcutaneous transmi
Jul 19, 2013 6:46:49 GMT -5
skyship: MK Alberta: I think you might have something, there, we looked at that long time ago, but, I think we did not think that it could be use actually in the human body. We thought it was used as a homologous thing meaning like cells, microtubules.
Jul 24, 2013 0:32:58 GMT -5
skyship: how come you can't read the threads, can you log on? Even as a guest you should be able to read what us hopeful researchers, or wanna be discoverers are doing as we morph the Morgellon Maze.
Jul 24, 2013 0:34:49 GMT -5
kritters: under "legend" are "new posts" and "no new posts". What is that about? clicking on new posts do not go to new posts.
Aug 9, 2013 9:47:15 GMT -5
XDelilah: I had 72 lesions this summer and was committed to a psyche ward 4x when I went to different hospitals, terrified by the biting, crawling and stinging sensations. They drugged me up and diagnoses me with 'delusional parasitosis'.
Aug 29, 2013 8:23:24 GMT -5
DonMae: I'm not seeing the pics.
Sept 14, 2013 13:09:29 GMT -5
aqt: how sickening XDeliliah.. I am truly sorry for your suffering as I can relate all too well. May you find peace.
Sept 16, 2013 15:09:15 GMT -5
kansas: Hello to all of you suffering from Morgellons I had the worst of it (hopefully) for a year and a half!
Oct 2, 2013 21:57:30 GMT -5
kansas: I just found this site and wanted to share what has finally stopped the horrific itching for me. It's seems that MSM and daily vitamin c, taken daily is helping. i have not idea why? i also think a dehumidifier and a uv air cleaner was used around the same
Oct 2, 2013 22:03:43 GMT -5
kansas: This is huge. A infectious disease doc on a plane with my best friend said this is bacterial. Really?! Not in our heads!
Oct 2, 2013 22:07:29 GMT -5
kansas: One more thing before I go, I sort of think this bacteria lives in our mouths. I have be using a germ killing mouthwash for the tooth pain and think it is helping the fight.
Oct 2, 2013 22:13:51 GMT -5
kansas: what is also terrible about this Morgellons is the predatory salesmen on the net and doctors pretending this is imaginary when we need medical help!
Oct 2, 2013 22:20:13 GMT -5
chelliebelle2468: does anyone know anything about the conditions and diseases associated from HLA-B27?
Oct 15, 2013 14:52:27 GMT -5