T.Rex soft tissue and blood cells

In summary, the researchers have recovered soft tissue from a T. rex, which they believe is similar to blood vessels and cells found in ostrich bones. If they can isolate proteins from the material, they may be able to learn new details about how dinosaurs lived.
Biology news on Phys.org
  • #2
That is some crazy stuff
 
  • #3
Gold Barz said:
That is some crazy stuff

isn't it though! :smile:
we just have to wait and see how it plays out
I hope someone keeps track and gives an update here when more is known for certain
they may well be disappointed and find they cannot sequence any protein
(I do not think the possibility of finding Dna was seriously considered, just too unlikely, but there was talk of being able to analyze a protein)
 
  • #4
Classic Jurassic...

Both the dinosaur and ostrich blood vessels contained small, reddish brown dots that could be the nuclei of the endothelial cells that line blood vessels.
Microscopic examination showed what look like bone cells called osteocytes in both.

It would be interesting to switch some Tyrannosaurus rex osteocytic or endothelial cell nuclei with some viable, fertile ostrich proto-embrionic cell nuclei inside an ostrich egg, and see what happens...

a simple experiment that can be duplicated by anyone using a chicken bone...

Reference:
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2005/03/24/science/24dino.l.jpg
 
Last edited:
  • #5
Way cool, yet slightly scary.
 
  • #6
I heard about this on the news this morning. Unbelieveable, is what I first thought. Although, what an excellent new way to expand our knowledge of these creatures! I find it disgustingly interesting.:biggrin:
 
  • #7
Jurassic park anyone?
 
  • #8
Lol. No kidding! :laughing:
 
  • #9
Jurassic Classic...

WASHINGTON -- For more than a century, the study of dinosaurs has been limited to fossilized bones. Now, researchers have recovered 70 million-year-old soft tissue, including what may be blood vessels and cells, from a Tyrannosaurus rex in Montana.

If scientists can isolate proteins from the material, they may be able to learn new details of how dinosaurs lived, said lead
researcher Mary Higby Schweitzer of North Carolina State University.

It was recovered dinosaur DNA -- the blueprint for life -- that was featured in the fictional recreation of the ancient animals in the book and film "Jurassic Park."

The soft tissues were recovered from the thighbone of a T. rex, known as MOR 1125, that was found in a sandstone formation in Montana. The dinosaur was about 18 years old when it died.

The bone was broken when it was removed from the site. Schweitzer and her colleagues then analyzed the material inside the bone.

"The vessels and contents are similar in all respects to blood vessels recovered from ... ostrich bone," they reported in a paper bring published Friday in the journal Science.

Because evidence has accumulated in recent years that modern birds descended from dinosaurs, Schweitzer said she chose to compare the dinosaur remains with those of an ostrich, the largest bird available.

Brooks Hanson, a deputy editor of Science, noted that there are few examples of soft tissues, except for leaves or petrified wood, that are preserved as fossils, just as there are few discoveries of insects in amber or humans and mammoths in peat or ice.

John R. Horner of the Museum of the Rockies at Montana State University, said the discovery is "a fantastic specimen," but probably is not unique. Other researchers might find similarly preserved soft tissues if they split open the bones in their collections, said Horner, a co-author of the paper.

Most museums, he said, prefer to keep their specimens intact.

Schweitzer said that after removing the minerals from the specimen, the remaining tissues were soft and transparent and could be manipulated with instruments.

The bone matrix was stretchy and flexible, she said. Also, there were long structures like blood vessels. What appeared to be individual cells were visible.

She did not know if they were blood cells. "They are little round cells," Schweitzer said.

It is possible to scan inside semi-fossilized bone with X-ray or CAT or some other type of magnetic imaging scanner, without actually drilling, cutting or breaking open any of the available specimens for soft tissue.

Reference:
http://www.harktheherald.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=51031&mode=thread&order=0&thold=0
http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/40959000/jpg/_40959941_trex_pa_203.jpg.jpg
http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/40960000/jpg/_40960727_dino_science_203.jpg
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #10
I think it is somehow related to cold fusion. :rofl:

April Fools?
 
  • #11
Stupid computer won't let me access the links. :devil: They acquired the tissue from inside the bone of the dinosaur?
 
  • #12
They had an interview with Jack Horner (lead scientists in the discovery team) and others on NPR last night about this. They would be surprised to find any intact DNA or even any biological proteins after 70 million years. Even though it's "soft" tissue, it may be chemically altered after all this time. But keep your fingers crossed. Either way, they should still be able to learn a lot from this.

Even if they find DNA, they don't expect to start cloning. You need cells for that, not just DNA fragments.

Other interesting tidbits...
(1) It may be possible that other fossils already on hand also have soft tissue within them. It's mainly that no one has really looked before (there's a certain extraction process that is required...not just simply cracking open bones).
(2) Jack Horner is about to issue another paper with another (unrevealed) discovery about this fossil find (possibly related to the bone interior/soft tissue thing).
 
  • #13
misskitty said:
Stupid computer won't let me access the links. :devil: They acquired the tissue from inside the bone of the dinosaur?

Yes. The bone (+ casing) was too big to transport so they broke it in half. One of the scientists collected a sample from the interior of the bone and when she did some lab work on it, she found that it was soft tissue and not totally fossilized. The fossil specimen was very well preserved overall and the sample came from the interior of a thick leg bone (extra protection).
 

1. How is it possible that soft tissue and blood cells were found in a T.Rex fossil?

The preservation of soft tissue and blood cells in a T.Rex fossil is a rare occurrence and is still not fully understood. However, scientists believe that the tissue was preserved due to a combination of factors, including the rapid burial of the dinosaur after its death, the presence of minerals such as iron in the surrounding sediment, and the absence of oxygen.

2. How old is the soft tissue and blood cells found in the T.Rex fossil?

The soft tissue and blood cells found in the T.Rex fossil are estimated to be around 68 million years old. This is based on the age of the fossil itself, which was determined through radiometric dating methods.

3. Can the soft tissue and blood cells be used to clone a T.Rex?

No, the soft tissue and blood cells found in the T.Rex fossil are too degraded to be used for cloning. In addition, cloning a T.Rex would require finding a complete set of DNA, which is highly unlikely due to the age and preservation of the fossil.

4. Are there any implications of finding soft tissue and blood cells in a T.Rex fossil?

The discovery of soft tissue and blood cells in a T.Rex fossil has raised questions about the process of fossilization and the likelihood of finding similar preservation in other fossils. It has also sparked debates about the possibility of extracting DNA from fossils and the potential for new scientific discoveries.

5. How does the discovery of soft tissue and blood cells in a T.Rex fossil impact our understanding of dinosaurs?

The discovery of soft tissue and blood cells in a T.Rex fossil has challenged the long-held belief that dinosaur remains are completely fossilized and turned into stone. It has also provided new insights into the physiology and behavior of dinosaurs, as well as the conditions and processes involved in fossilization.

Similar threads

  • Biology and Medical
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • Biology and Medical
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • General Discussion
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • General Discussion
Replies
12
Views
4K
Replies
264
Views
25K
Replies
9
Views
4K
Replies
2
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
78
Views
10K
  • General Discussion
Replies
2
Views
2K
Back
Top