The literature

Every source behind the metabolism-first article, what it measured, whether anyone here opened it, which way it cuts, and the sources considered and not used.

The larger catalogue for the whole series is on the parent page, the origin of life:  the literature.

Sources cited

Source What it is Access Direction
Wächtershäuser 1988, Microbiol Rev 52:452 The founding surface-metabolism paper, with the pyrite-pulling thermodynamics. Opened in full; OCR poor in places and checked against the scan complicates
Huber & Wächtershäuser 1997, Science 276:245 Activated thioester and acetic acid from carbon monoxide and methanethiol on nickel-iron sulfide. Abstract verbatim from PubMed undercuts
Huber & Wächtershäuser 1998, Science 281:670 Peptide bonds from supplied amino acids on the same minerals. Abstract verbatim from PubMed undercuts
Martin & Russell 2003, Phil Trans R Soc B 358:59 The framing paper for alkaline vents, and the chicken-soup argument. Opened in full complicates
Orgel 2008, PLoS Biol 6:e18 The specificity objection, finished weeks before his death. Also the "if pigs could fly" line and the concession to hydrothermal chemistry. Opened in full (CC BY) supports
Vasas, Szathmáry & Santos 2010, PNAS 107:1470 Compositional replication "lacks evolvability." A hostile result from theoretical biology. Abstract verbatim supports
Herschy et al. 2014, J Mol Evol 79:213 The first vent reactor. Formaldehyde ~100 nM, "variable and inconsistent between runs." Opened in full (CC BY) supports
Jackson 2016, J Mol Evol 83:1 The physics objection: 0.004 pH units across a micrometre barrier, worth 24 J/mol. Opened in full (CC BY) supports
Jackson 2017, Life 7:36 The escape objection: organisms using a natural gradient would be "imprisoned in the vents." Opened in full (CC BY) supports
Lane 2017, BioEssays 39:1600217 The reply. The machines were always in lipid membranes; the rock conducts electrons; the log-scale correction; and the complaint about how Jackson is being cited. Accepted manuscript opened in full undercuts
Muchowska, Varma & Moran 2019, Nature 569:104 Iron in water gives nine of eleven Krebs intermediates and four amino acids. Author manuscript opened in full undercuts
Jordan et al. 2019, Nat Ecol Evol 3:1705 Vesicles at seawater ionic strength, 50 mM magnesium and 70 °C. Answers Deamer's membrane objection. Opened undercuts
Hudson et al. 2020, PNAS 117:22873 Microfluidic reactor: formate 1.5 µM, with a clean dose-response on vent-side pH and four controls that each kill the product. Opened in full complicates
Preiner et al. 2020, Nat Ecol Evol 4:534 Formate to 200 mM, acetate to 100 µM, pyruvate to 10 µM, over minerals with no gradient. Abstract verbatim from Europe PMC; body not opened undercuts, and complicates the vent theory
Xavier et al. 2020, Proc R Soc B 287:20192377 Autocatalytic networks in modern metabolism. Catalysts, not monomers, are the bottleneck. Opened in full (CC BY) complicates
Damer & Deamer 2020, Astrobiology 20:429 The hot-spring alternative, and the same energy objection Jackson makes, from the rival camp. Opened in full supports
Deamer 2017 "Self-assembly of membranes… has not been demonstrated in hydrothermal vents." Opened in full (CC BY) supports
Russell 2021, Life 11:429 The counter-objection: no dry land, an ocean never less than 4 km deep, no Icelands or Hawaiis. Opened in full (CC BY) supports, against the other camp
Mulkidjanian et al. 2012, PNAS 109:E821 The third camp. Cells need potassium, phosphate and transition metals that no marine setting supplies. Opened supports, against both
Kloprogge & Hartman 2022, Life 12:259 The clay story told first-hand by a participant, including the irreproducible 1981 result. Opened in full (CC BY) supports

Considered and not used

  • Preiner et al. 2020 body. Paywalled, abstract only. The article prints its three yield figures, which are in the abstract, and no others.
  • Vasas, Szathmáry & Santos 2010 body. Abstract only. The article prints one sentence from it and no numbers.
  • Kauffman's original autocatalytic-set proofs (1986 onward). Not opened. Orgel's characterisation of them is quoted instead, and it is labelled as his.
  • Weiss 1981, Angewandte Chemie. The irreproducible clay-replication claim. Not opened; the story is taken from Kloprogge and Hartman's first-hand review, and Hartman was one of the people who tried to reproduce it.
  • Ferris's montmorillonite oligomerisation papers. Named in passing as the surviving clay result; handled properly in the parent article rather than here.
  • Morowitz et al. 2000 and Smith & Morowitz 2004, the reverse-citric-acid-cycle proposals Orgel attacks by name. Not opened. The article describes the family rather than quoting them.
  • Gogarten & Deamer 2016, credited by Damer and Deamer for the thick-membrane energy argument. Not opened; the argument is quoted from the 2020 paper that cites it.

Open questions

  1. Nobody appears to have answered Jackson's escape objection in print. A search found no reply. If one exists it should be added, because the objection is about selection rather than chemistry and is the harder of his two.
  2. Whether the highest yields really do come from experiments without a pH gradient. The article states this as what the papers report. Confirming it as a general pattern means comparing methods sections across several groups, which was not done.
  3. No reactor of this kind has been reported forming a carbon-carbon bond. That negative should be re-checked before publication; it is the kind of claim a single new paper would overturn.
  4. Mulkidjanian's ionic-composition objection has no published answer this research could find, and it is the least-discussed of the three camps' arguments.