How many bacteria can the world support?

  • Thread starter Thread starter dipungal
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Bacteria Support
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the vast and largely unknown biomass of bacteria and other microorganisms found beneath the Earth's surface. It references David W. Wolfe's work, which suggests that a significant portion of Earth's biomass is subterranean, primarily consisting of bacteria-like organisms. An exercise estimates the total biomass, combining above-ground and subterranean figures to reach approximately 67.2 billion tons of fixed carbon. The conversation highlights the human microbiome, noting that the body contains about 100 trillion cells, with a higher number of microorganisms, particularly in the intestines, which perform essential metabolic functions. The thread emphasizes the predominance of bacteria in subsurface environments compared to those associated with humans, suggesting that most bacteria are not harmful and play vital ecological roles.
dipungal
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
The title says all I'm asking. Thank you.
 
Biology news on Phys.org
The short answer is: nobody knows, and it is very unlikely that anything really reliable, unlike the exercise below, will be available any time soon.


See:
'A Natural History of Subterranean Life' by David W. Wolfe

A large percentage of the total Earth's biomass is found beneath the surface, mostly as
bacteria-like organisms [per Wolfe]. Biomass estimates for above ground biomass vary a lot, however, for fun and a way to make a wild guess let's use 56 billion metric tons of fixed carbon. For above ground biomass.

Since this is just a fun exercise, not real Science, let's also assume that 20% of the biomass above ground is 'bacterial' however that gets defined... In the same vein, we can use 56 billion tons as the amount of fixed carbon in subterranean life.

So we have 56 * .20 = 11.2 billion tons (above ground) + 56 billion tons (subterranean) , so our total is 67.2 billion tons.

So you can get a grip on what we're doing: your body has about one trillion cells in it,
and let's pretend you weigh 150 pounds. That means we can guess that 1 pound of you is: 1 trillion / 150. This comes out close to 660,000,000,000 cells. (that's 660 billion, the US billion)

So, let's pretend that our cells and bacterial cells are similar in size and mass (which is not a great assumption). Therefore, to get an really rough idea of the number of bacteria and their relatives on Earth now, multiply 660,000,000,000 * 672,000,000,000.

I should also mention that some of your biomass is bacteria, e.g., about 10% of the volume of your colon is bacteria and other primitive organisms.

Also note that what we are calling bacteria here are really a whole range of living one-celled things from primitive algae to organisms that metabolize metals like manganese, to what you probably think of as germs.
 
jim mcnamara said:
I should also mention that some of your biomass is bacteria, e.g., about 10% of the volume of your colon is bacteria and other primitive organisms.

IIRC we carry about 1kg of bacteria. There are far more bacteria than human cells in our body with far more genetic material than our genome;
wikipedia said:
The human body, consisting of about 100 trillion cells, carries about ten times as many microorganisms in the intestines. The metabolic activities performed by these bacteria resemble those of an organ, leading some to liken gut bacteria to a "forgotten" organ. It is estimated that these gut flora have around 100 times as many genes in aggregate as there are in the human genome.
 
dipungal said:
The title says all I'm asking. Thank you.

How about we start off with Earth.:smile:
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
Vol. 95, pp. 6578–6583, June 1998
Perspective
Prokaryotes: The unseen majority
William B. Whitman*†, David C. Coleman‡, and William J. Wiebe§
Departments of *Microbiology, ‡Ecology, and §Marine Sciences, University of Georgia, Athens GA 30602
http://www.pnas.org/content/95/12/6578.full.pdf+html

ScienceDaily reported the article as well entitled First-Ever Scientific Estimate Of Total Bacteria On Earth Shows Far Greater Numbers Than Ever Known Before:
When people think of bacteria, they likely first consider the nasty ones that cause disease, but the bacteria inside all animals combined -- including humans -- makes up less than one percent of the total amount. By far the greatest numbers are in the subsurface, soil and oceans.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/1998/08/980825080732.htm
 
Last edited:
Off topic posts deleted. Thread closed.
 
Deadly cattle screwworm parasite found in US patient. What to know. https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/health/2025/08/25/new-world-screwworm-human-case/85813010007/ Exclusive: U.S. confirms nation's first travel-associated human screwworm case connected to Central American outbreak https://www.reuters.com/business/environment/us-confirms-nations-first-travel-associated-human-screwworm-case-connected-2025-08-25/...
Chagas disease, long considered only a threat abroad, is established in California and the Southern U.S. According to articles in the Los Angeles Times, "Chagas disease, long considered only a threat abroad, is established in California and the Southern U.S.", and "Kissing bugs bring deadly disease to California". LA Times requires a subscription. Related article -...
I am reading Nicholas Wade's book A Troublesome Inheritance. Please let's not make this thread a critique about the merits or demerits of the book. This thread is my attempt to understanding the evidence that Natural Selection in the human genome was recent and regional. On Page 103 of A Troublesome Inheritance, Wade writes the following: "The regional nature of selection was first made evident in a genomewide scan undertaken by Jonathan Pritchard, a population geneticist at the...
Back
Top