Felisa Wolfe-Simon is an American microbial geobiologist and biogeochemist. In 2010, Wolfe-Simon led a team that discovered GFAJ-1, an extremophile bacterium that they claimed was capable of substituting arsenic for a small percentage of its phosphorus to sustain its growth, thus advancing the remarkable possibility of non-RNA/DNA-based genetics. However, these conclusions were immediately debated and critiqued in correspondence to the original journal of publication, and have since come to be widely disbelieved. In 2012, two reports refuting the most significant aspects of the original results were published in the same journal in which the original findings had been previously published.
Attributes | Values |
---|
rdf:type
| |
rdfs:label
| |
rdfs:comment
| - Felisa Wolfe-Simon is an American microbial geobiologist and biogeochemist. In 2010, Wolfe-Simon led a team that discovered GFAJ-1, an extremophile bacterium that they claimed was capable of substituting arsenic for a small percentage of its phosphorus to sustain its growth, thus advancing the remarkable possibility of non-RNA/DNA-based genetics. However, these conclusions were immediately debated and critiqued in correspondence to the original journal of publication, and have since come to be widely disbelieved. In 2012, two reports refuting the most significant aspects of the original results were published in the same journal in which the original findings had been previously published.
|
sameAs
| |
dcterms:subject
| |
foaf:homepage
| |
dbkwik:nasa/proper...iPageUsesTemplate
| |
Residence
| |
Name
| - Felisa Lauren Wolfe-Simon
|
Caption
| - Wolfe-Simon at the 2011 Time 100 gala
|
Alma mater
| |
Fields
| |
Known For
| |
workplaces
| |
Birth name
| |
abstract
| - Felisa Wolfe-Simon is an American microbial geobiologist and biogeochemist. In 2010, Wolfe-Simon led a team that discovered GFAJ-1, an extremophile bacterium that they claimed was capable of substituting arsenic for a small percentage of its phosphorus to sustain its growth, thus advancing the remarkable possibility of non-RNA/DNA-based genetics. However, these conclusions were immediately debated and critiqued in correspondence to the original journal of publication, and have since come to be widely disbelieved. In 2012, two reports refuting the most significant aspects of the original results were published in the same journal in which the original findings had been previously published.
|