There are many stars in the universe that aren’t the ones you remember: the stars of Star Wars, the famous “Star Wars” characters, the fictional planets, the movie franchises.
And then there are those you have to wonder about.
In the early 1980s, when a handful of scientists at the National Institutes of Health (NIH) began searching for new, “Starfish-like” organisms, they stumbled across a bacterium that was able to grow in a petri dish.
In 1987, a team at the University of California at Davis identified an “animal-like life form” that had the potential to mimic these traits.
But it was a different animal.
A few years later, a small team of scientists led by biologist John M. Schott and biochemist James B. Young found a novel “animal” of the same species, but that was not a bacteria but an archaea.
In 1995, the team discovered a new “living” organism, a type of archaea called the Archaea, that was very similar to bacteria.
The archaea were thought to be the source of the life in the Petri Dish.
But a few years ago, an archaeoecologist, Mark R. Sperry of the University at Buffalo, and a colleague found evidence that the archaea in the petri-dish were actually part of a group of organisms called “fossils” that were preserved in rocks and mud.
In 2006, Sper, Young and their colleagues reported that the fossils belonged to an ancient group of bacteria called “epicasts” and that they were not the same as bacteria.
A number of different authors have suggested that the fossilized Archaea are the “missing link” to the “Star Trek” story, but Sper and his colleagues found evidence suggesting that the Star Trek characters and other members of the Trek universe may have existed before the Archaeans were discovered.
But they were the only archaea they could find.
“We don’t know why these organisms were there,” Sper said.
“There were a few species of archaeoevolvable bacteria in the early days of microbiology, but we didn’t have the tools to get to know the organisms.
It’s like trying to tell a dog how to bark, because you don’t have a collar with you.”
Some of the bacteria that are found in the ruins of Petri-Dish were not just a relic of a long-ago era; they were part of an evolutionary “gold rush,” in which the bacteria became more common than they otherwise would have been.
The fossils were discovered in the late 1970s in a rock shelter at the site of a prehistoric lake on the campus of the New Mexico Museum of Natural History in Albuquerque.
Scientists at the museum found the fossils in the form of a large clump of sediment.
It took about 30 years to complete the analysis of the fossils, but in 2009, researchers reported the finding in the journal Science.
The sediment contains fragments of DNA, the genetic material that is passed down through generations in plants and animals.
This DNA is the same kind of DNA that is used to encode proteins in our cells, which can help us tell apart different types of bacteria and their functions.
It also contains information about the organisms’ lifestyles and the types of chemical environments they lived in.
The team, which included scientists from the New York City Museum of Science, the University College of London and the University in London, used the information to date the fossils to the early Cambrian period about 540 million years ago.
Archaea were already in existence when the fossils were found, but they didn’t appear until after the Cambrian.
The discovery of the petrified remains in Petri dish was the culmination of a decade-long search that has involved scientists in Europe, Australia, the United States and South America, as well as a number of museums and universities.
It has also provided the most detailed and complete picture yet of the microbial community that lived in Petris-Dishes, which may explain why some of the ancient bacterial communities in the basin may have formed in ways that were not compatible with the organisms living in the lake and on its shores.
Spermatozoa “A lot of the fossil evidence points to the fact that the bacterial community that we have is not representative of the bacterial diversity that existed in the Cambrias,” said Sper.
The new results, which Sper presented at the annual meeting of the Society for Microbial Ecology (SME) in November, show that the bacteria on Petri dishes were more diverse than the ones found on the lake.
The microbial communities were not completely uniform, but there were similarities in how the bacteria were behaving.
“If you look at the genomes of the different species of Archaea on Petris Dish, you see that there is an abundance of DNA from bacterial species that have adapted to living in a particular environment,” said M.