> If you take those genes and put them into organisms like bacteria and yeast, which normally do not have these proteins, they actually become much more desiccation-tolerant
Well I have a newfound fear of humans creating a bacteria as hard to kill as a tardigrade…
A different article from 2022 claims that following work found a different mechanism. """However, last year another team of Japanese scientists called this "vitrification" hypothesis into question, citing experimental data suggesting that the 2017 findings could be attributed to water retention of the proteins. This latest study supports that counter-hypothesis. "Our data suggest a novel desiccation tolerance mechanism based on filament/gel formation," the authors of the new study wrote."""
Article: https://arstechnica.com/science/2022/09/scientists-glean-new...
> tardigrade-specific intrinsically disordered proteins (TDPs)
Going from "Tartigrade-specific intrinsically" to a single T in the acronym is rather interesting...
> ... that looks like something out of a Disney nightmare scene: strange but not particularly threatening.
Funny, I always thought the electron microscope images of tardigrades looked like the monsters in HAZMAT suits from Monsters Inc.
https://www.intelligentliving.co/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/...
It turns itself into glass.
When desiccation begins and TDP is activated, it engages a process known as vitrification. Boothby said, “The glass is coating the molecules inside of the tardigrade cells, keeping them intact.”
Can this be used to store larger organisms for prolonged duration? Maybe instead of cryochambers the future space travelers will use drychambers.
So that's how the paperclip maximizer nanobots are going to look like.
Great! Looking forward for hand-sanitizer-proof virus in the next GoF research.
Reminds me of the people who dehydrate to survive the chaotic eras in Three-Body Problem.
Headline is misleading. Waterbears are quite fragile, albeit tougher than most. I bought some and found nearly all would die after short exposure to low vacuum. Manuscripts seem to corroborate our findings. It is the exaggerated headlines that lead me to believe they are indestructible.
"This article was originally published in Big Think." In 2017. Word for word copy.
Intersting, however, there is something about this format of headline that always makes me twitch a bit inside. There should be a law of scientific headlines, something along the lines: Whenever a reporter writes, "Scientists finally discover why...." you can be sure to interpret as "Scientists have even more questions about why...". The phrasing confuses the understanding of the general public about how sciences and scientists actually work.