More Oxygen = ?

[Drachenjager]

Megarachne was later found to be a type of ancient scorpion, making T. blondi still the largest spider. Mesothelae another ancient spider was never found in sizes larger than the blondi and looks nothing like megarachne. Did you even read your own link? It says in the link that megarchne was incorrectly described as a giant spider.

mesothelae is a genus that still exists to day . Discovery channel (jeff corwin
GGGRRR) had a show that featured "megarachnae, they found it was not a spider at all and then rather than removing the part about a giant spider used the genus MEsothelae and made me believe they dont care about the truth but what they can make money off of.

 

[Drachenjager]

Yeah, thats what I meant. Chemistry is not my forte.

et tu forte?

 

[Galapoheros]

Something about the "oxygen" idea being associated with large size isn't agreeing with me. It was mentioned before, if the theory is true the genetic code that was formed because of the environment back then isn't there anymore because, up to the present, they have evolved with less oxygen and their genetic code has conformed to that. They don't have the "grow" gene to deal with more oxygen is what I'm thinking. I feel more oxygen wouldn't do much as far as "growth" goes with present day inverts. High levels of O2 can easily be toxic to life today. Haha, fun see all the info and opinions .

 

[UrbanJungles]

I believe i saw a special on this topic on a show called "Monster Quest" were a bunch of natives in the Amazon i believe, kept making reports of GIANT Ts the size of a small dog! So the scientific debate went on about how/if they could get that large based upon there lung type and low oxygen levels. It was a pretty interesting show and well i would like to own a T that large one day instead of a dog

I particularly enjoyed this episode because of the good-looking and oh-so-intelligent expert that debunked the myths surrounding the solfugids. That guy rocks!

[YOUTUBE]<object width="560" height="340"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/ZGVypDcYxZw&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/ZGVypDcYxZw&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="560" height="340"></embed></object>[/YOUTUBE]

 

[Arachn'auQuébec]

Not everything needs Oxygen, Some of the creatures and plants found at 7 mile ocean depths are proof of just that. Maybe we wouldn't either if things had turned out different

plants? at a 7 miles depth? and wich creatures? That I know of, and I might be wrong here, only some bacterias can live under anaerobic conditions. I also believe that there is still dissolved O2 even in the deepest grooves of the oceans. Most of the more complex life forms wouldn't be possible under anaerobic conditions, since the oxidation of molecules is a WAY more efficient reaction to gather energy than fermentation or photosynthesis.

 

[Galapoheros]

I've emailed Reddick(sp?) about this, she never emailed me back. I've hunted w tx at night on the road, talked to locals... a bunch of "hope" and fascination, makes for good TV and vids though, kind of fun.

 

[UrbanJungles]

I've emailed Reddick(sp?) about this, she never emailed me back. I've hunted w tx at night on the road, talked to locals... a bunch of "hope" and fascination, makes for good TV and vids though, kind of fun.

If she got half as many emails and phone calls as I did after the show aired it's no wonder she hasn't written. I had every freak from here to Kathmandu calling or emailing me to get info and tell me stories about giant spiders & scorpions in their home countries, villages, apartment complexes...

 

[Galapoheros]

Well, it doesn't matter anyway, there are prob are no giants in w tx from what I have experienced. I've been going out there since the mid 80's looking for this kind of stuff and talking to locals ..but makes good TV, you never know for sure though!, just my opinion from going out there.

 

[skips]

With all due respect, much of this is wrong.

Unless another gas is being removed, you would certainly get an increase in total pressure. Dalton's Law basically says that all the partial pressures add up to the total pressure (and gives us the definition of a partial pressure). If the partial pressure of oxygen has increased, and no other one has decreased, then the total pressure MUST go up.

That being said, the earth is quite a complicated system. Gasses, as you correctly state, will dissolve, using Henry's Law (which isn't so much a law as it is a statement of what a solubility equilibrium looks like).

Oxygen is a terrible solute in water - (~6 mg/L at body temperature). That's why haemoglobin is used to transport it. For the record, the saturation of haemoglobin isn't so much determined by the body, but it is removed by tissues which are demanding oxygen.

Haha, score! chemistry argument. If oxygen was more prevalent, why wouldn't other gasses be less prevalent by percentage? You're kind of acting like earth is encased by a solid reaction vessel. Plus, if there was more oxygen I would think the compositions of all other gasses would be completely different due to a whole other set of bacteria and other nutrient/gas cyclers being present. I really don't think it would be possible to have that kind of an increase in overall pressure, you'd just be changing relative percents of gasses, and therefore their partial pressures.

Oxygen is taken up by hemoglobin at high partial pressures...which depend solely on where it is in the body. Muscle has a pO2 of 20 torr (causing it to release O2) whereas lungs have a pO2 of 100 torr, causing it to taken up oxygen. In addition to that, the R (oxygen bound state) of hemoglobin is stabilized by ion salt bridges requiring some amino acids to be protonated. at high pH these a.a's are deprotonated which makes salt bridge formation not possible, thus switching hemoglobin to the T (deoxy) state (i.e. it releases oxygen). The increase in pH is caused by respiring tissues releasing CO2, which combines with water to from carbonic acid. CO2 levels vary depending on where in the body hemoglobin is. Therefore, hemoglobin releases oxygen depending on where it is in the body.

Just an FYI though, if we're talking about spiders we're talking about hemocyanin, not hemoglobin. Though hemocyanin is a bit less efficient.

 

[Galapoheros]

Some people thought the two solis where one animal??!! Fascinating but I guess it might be true. So very obvious though....

 

[DrAce]

plants? at a 7 miles depth? and wich creatures? That I know of, and I might be wrong here, only some bacterias can live under anaerobic conditions. I also believe that there is still dissolved O2 even in the deepest grooves of the oceans. Most of the more complex life forms wouldn't be possible under anaerobic conditions, since the oxidation of molecules is a WAY more efficient reaction to gather energy than fermentation or photosynthesis.

Deep Sea trenches, and the thermal vents therein have some quite spectacular ecology. It's all based on chemistry which can only occur in high sulfur, low oxygen environments.

Haha, score! chemistry argument. If oxygen was more prevalent, why wouldn't other gasses be less prevalent by percentage? You're kind of acting like earth is encased by a solid reaction vessel. Plus, if there was more oxygen I would think the compositions of all other gasses would be completely different due to a whole other set of bacteria and other nutrient/gas cyclers being present. I really don't think it would be possible to have that kind of an increase in overall pressure, you'd just be changing relative percents of gasses, and therefore their partial pressures.
...

Indeed, score. Here's how it works. If I have 0.79 atmospheres of Nitrogen, and 0.21 atmospheres of oxygen (both partial pressures), I have one total atmosphere. Right?
If I have 0.79 atmospheres of nitrogen, and 0.35 atmospheres of oxygen... how many atmospheres of total pressure do we now have?

The percentage of the gasses has changed, yes. But so MUST the total. That's Dalton's law. Unless one of the other gasses goes somewhere, then the pressure must go up. I am aware that the earth is not a solid vessel... but that's irrelevant.

And I hereby staple my Ph.D. in physical chemistry to the boards (not that it makes me right, but that it makes be uber-confident that Dalton's law is exactly as I describe it).

Oxygen is taken up by hemoglobin at high partial pressures...which depend solely on where it is in the body. Muscle has a pO2 of 20 torr (causing it to release O2) whereas lungs have a pO2 of 100 torr, causing it to taken up oxygen. In addition to that, the R (oxygen bound state) of hemoglobin is stabilized by ion salt bridges requiring some amino acids to be protonated. at high pH these a.a's are deprotonated which makes salt bridge formation not possible, thus switching hemoglobin to the T (deoxy) state (i.e. it releases oxygen). The increase in pH is caused by respiring tissues releasing CO2, which combines with water to from carbonic acid. CO2 levels vary depending on where in the body hemoglobin is. Therefore, hemoglobin releases oxygen depending on where it is in the body.

Just an FYI though, if we're talking about spiders we're talking about hemocyanin, not hemoglobin. Though hemocyanin is a bit less efficient.

You are, of course, quite right. It's a big change on what you originally wrote.

 

[Hamburglar]

Interesting conversation... the only thing I know about Henry's Law is that it is used to make sodi pop..... Well, I think anyway..

 

[skips]

Indeed, score. Here's how it works. If I have 0.79 atmospheres of Nitrogen, and 0.21 atmospheres of oxygen (both partial pressures), I have one total atmosphere. Right?
If I have 0.79 atmospheres of nitrogen, and 0.35 atmospheres of oxygen... how many atmospheres of total pressure do we now have?

The percentage of the gasses has changed, yes. But so MUST the total. That's Dalton's law. Unless one of the other gasses goes somewhere, then the pressure must go up. I am aware that the earth is not a solid vessel... but that's irrelevant.

And I hereby staple my Ph.D. in physical chemistry to the boards (not that it makes me right, but that it makes be uber-confident that Dalton's law is exactly as I describe it).


You are, of course, quite right. It's a big change on what you originally wrote.

Haha, thanks. I'm aware of what dalton's law says. My argument was that increased oxygen would lead to different concentrations of other gasses, thus equalling out to the same initial overall pressure--higher partial pressure of oxygen and lower concentrations/pressures of other gasses. this would be due to a completely different set of gas cyclers (i.e. bacteria) using the gas and producing...all the other different gasses they produce. However, my room mate informs be that my argument is bass ackward because the theory is that the atmosphere was quite a bit more dense. hhhmmmm...I concede to your PhD, especially compared to my undergrad. Stapling thoroughly accepted.

Well, I wrote that oxygen release is due to its position in the body. I just didn't put in the details of what made different parts of the body different. Same explanation, different answer. Anyway, this is not the original argument. I think that argument is dead.

 

[DrAce]

Haha, thanks. I'm aware of what dalton's law says. My argument was that increased oxygen would lead to different concentrations of other gasses, thus equalling out to the same initial overall pressure--higher partial pressure of oxygen and lower concentrations/pressures of other gasses. this would be due to a completely different set of gas cyclers (i.e. bacteria) using the gas and producing...all the other different gasses they produce. However, my room mate informs be that my argument is bass ackward because the theory is that the atmosphere was quite a bit more dense. hhhmmmm...I concede to your PhD, especially compared to my undergrad. Stapling thoroughly accepted.
...

At the risk of flogging a dead horse, one of the few things that causes a gas to become more dense is... increased pressure.

Not that it was the reason.

 

[skips]

At the risk of flogging a dead horse, one of the few things that causes a gas to become more dense is... increased pressure.

Not that it was the reason.

Please, who doesnt love a good flogging? ok then, lets engage in a round of as the pchem proffesor. That seems counter intuitive. How could a gas not become more dense if you increase pressure. I mean, when you compress oxygen into a tank, it becomes more dense...

Or in a piston. If I push down on it to increase the pressure on the gas, the gas compresses, thus making it more dense. by definition, the there is more gas per unit volume.

 

[WS6Lethal]

I guess we could find a T. Blondi that smokes a lot, and put her on about 4 liters of oxygen a day. That, and the munchies she'll get from quitting cigarettes should make for one pretty big T!

 

[skips]

I guess we could find a T. Blondi that smokes a lot, and put her on about 4 liters of oxygen a day. That, and the munchies she'll get from quitting cigarettes should make for one pretty big T!

I see nothing wrong with your logic.

 

[Arachn'auQuébec]

Deep Sea trenches, and the thermal vents therein have some quite spectacular ecology. It's all based on chemistry which can only occur in high sulfur, low oxygen environments.

But these are bacterias only environments, maybe some tough eucaryotic unicellulars such as protozoans, and even then...I would be surprised......no multicellular organism that I know of could live without oxygen, with high sulfur and heat. Some plants could possibly...but light is absent at those distances from the surface.

 

[kalvaer]

plants? at a 7 miles depth? and wich creatures? That I know of, and I might be wrong here, only some bacterias can live under anaerobic conditions. I also believe that there is still dissolved O2 even in the deepest grooves of the oceans. Most of the more complex life forms wouldn't be possible under anaerobic conditions, since the oxidation of molecules is a WAY more efficient reaction to gather energy than fermentation or photosynthesis.

There was a TV series by BCC called "the Big blue ocean." Over a few years they did research by sending down highly specialised subs to investigate things.

They mentioned how on each trip down, they discovered species still unknown to man. Down at the bottom of some rifts, They found tube worms living on volcanic vents, and eating on these were massive crabs. The water was boiling, and almost sulphuric acid from the vents. Yet things were there. I'll have to watch it again to make certain, but I think they said the worms had evolved to process the methane gas simular to a form of "photosynthesis" and the crabs were eating them for food. There were also other things simular to plants (or algae fields rather)

At anything past 100m, light is pretty much non existant. At 7 mile, you can bet there isn't any but the luckiest of photons. Due to the pressure these things live at. Its also impossible to bring them to the surface. As they explode when bringing them up

They also found a spot somewhere off the coast of mexico I think it was were there were massive fields of plants living off the methane gas escaping from vents.

The fact that creatures were living in pressures in excess of 1000bar, greater than 100 degrees C and sulphric acid, makes you wonder what could be living on a planet like venus? Prove that life exists beyond our atmosphere can be found not out of it.. but under our oceans

 

[Radamanthys]

Indeed, score. Here's how it works. If I have 0.79 atmospheres of Nitrogen, and 0.21 atmospheres of oxygen (both partial pressures), I have one total atmosphere. Right?
If I have 0.79 atmospheres of nitrogen, and 0.35 atmospheres of oxygen... how many atmospheres of total pressure do we now have?

The percentage of the gasses has changed, yes. But so MUST the total. That's Dalton's law. Unless one of the other gasses goes somewhere, then the pressure must go up. I am aware that the earth is not a solid vessel... but that's irrelevant.

I understand that you are assuming that the oxygen is just appearing from nowhere. If that's right, than the "No mass is created, all is transformed" basic law of universe went were? I'm assuming (ASSUMING) that all that oxygen came from the Carbon Dioxide provenient from the erupted volcanos (sp.). The carbon is used by the plants to live, constructing organic molecules as food for them and the oxygen gas release from it goes to the atmosphere.
So, basically, you are taking CO2 and releasing O2, not increasing (significantly) the volume of gases in the atmosphere.