On a possible relationship between bacterial endospore formation and the origin of eukaryotic cells

Evidence for a Syncytial Origin of Eukaryotes from Ancestral State Reconstruction

Modern accounts of eukaryogenesis entail an endosymbiotic encounter between an archaeal host and a proteobacterial endosymbiont, with subsequent evolution giving rise to a unicell possessing a single nucleus and mitochondria. The mononucleate state of the last eukaryotic common ancestor (LECA) is seldom, if ever, questioned, even though cells harboring multiple (syncytia, coenocytes, and polykaryons) are surprisingly common across eukaryotic supergroups. Here, we present a survey of multinucleated forms. Ancestral character state reconstruction for representatives of 106 eukaryotic taxa using 16 different possible roots and supergroup sister relationships, indicate that LECA, in addition to being mitochondriate, sexual, and meiotic, was multinucleate. LECA exhibited closed mitosis, which is the rule for modern syncytial forms, shedding light on the mechanics of its chromosome segregation. A simple mathematical model shows that within LECA's multinucleate cytosol, relationships among mitochondria and nuclei were neither one-to-one, nor one-to-many, but many-to-many, placing mitonuclear interactions and cytonuclear compatibility at the evolutionary base of eukaryotic cell origin. Within a syncytium, individual nuclei and individual mitochondria function as the initial lower-level evolutionary units of selection, as opposed to individual cells, during eukaryogenesis. Nuclei within a syncytium rescue each other's lethal mutations, thereby postponing selection for viable nuclei and cytonuclear compatibility to the generation of spores, buffering transitional bottlenecks at eukaryogenesis. The prokaryote-to-eukaryote transition is traditionally thought to have left no intermediates, yet if eukaryogenesis proceeded via a syncytial common ancestor, intermediate forms have persisted to the present throughout the eukaryotic tree as syncytia but have so far gone unrecognized.

A comparison of autogenous theories for the origin of eukaryotic cells

PREMISE

Eukaryotic cells have many unique features that all evolved on the stem lineage of living eukaryotes, making it difficult to reconstruct the order in which they accumulated. Nuclear endosymbiotic theories hold that three prokaryotes (nucleus, cytoplasm, and mitochondrion) came together to form a eukaryotic cell, whereas autogenous models hold that the nucleus and cytoplasm formed through evolutionary changes in a single prokaryotic lineage. Given several problems with nuclear endosymbiotic theories, this review focuses on autogenous models.

KEY INSIGHTS

Until recently all autogenous models assumed an outside-in (OI) topology, proposing that the nuclear envelope was formed from membrane-bound vesicles within the original cell body. Buzz Baum and I recently proposed an inside-out (IO) alternative, suggesting that the nucleus corresponds to the original cell body, with the cytoplasmic compartment deriving from extracellular protrusions. In this review, I show that OI and IO models are compatible with both mitochondria early (ME) or mitochondria late (ML) formulations. Whereas ME models allow that the relationship between mitochondria and host was mutualistic from the outset, ML models imply that the association began with predation or parasitism, becoming mutualistic later. In either case, the mutualistic interaction that eventually formed was probably syntrophic.

CONCLUSIONS

Diverse features of eukaryotic cell biology align well with the IOME model, but it would be premature to rule out the OIME model. ML models require that phagocytosis, a complex and energy expensive process, evolved before mitochondria, which seems unlikely. Nonetheless, further research is needed, especially resolution of the phylogenetic affinities of mitochondria.

Endosymbiotic theories for eukaryote origin

For over 100 years, endosymbiotic theories have figured in thoughts about the differences between prokaryotic and eukaryotic cells. More than 20 different versions of endosymbiotic theory have been presented in the literature to explain the origin of eukaryotes and their mitochondria. Very few of those models account for eukaryotic anaerobes. The role of energy and the energetic constraints that prokaryotic cell organization placed on evolutionary innovation in cell history has recently come to bear on endosymbiotic theory. Only cells that possessed mitochondria had the bioenergetic means to attain eukaryotic cell complexity, which is why there are no true intermediates in the prokaryote-to-eukaryote transition. Current versions of endosymbiotic theory have it that the host was an archaeon (an archaebacterium), not a eukaryote. Hence the evolutionary history and biology of archaea increasingly comes to bear on eukaryotic origins, more than ever before. Here, we have compiled a survey of endosymbiotic theories for the origin of eukaryotes and mitochondria, and for the origin of the eukaryotic nucleus, summarizing the essentials of each and contrasting some of their predictions to the observations. A new aspect of endosymbiosis in eukaryote evolution comes into focus from these considerations: the host for the origin of plastids was a facultative anaerobe.

An inside-out origin for the eukaryotic cell

BACKGROUND

Although the origin of the eukaryotic cell has long been recognized as the single most profound change in cellular organization during the evolution of life on earth, this transition remains poorly understood. Models have always assumed that the nucleus and endomembrane system evolved within the cytoplasm of a prokaryotic cell.

RESULTS

Drawing on diverse aspects of cell biology and phylogenetic data, we invert the traditional interpretation of eukaryotic cell evolution. We propose that an ancestral prokaryotic cell, homologous to the modern-day nucleus, extruded membrane-bound blebs beyond its cell wall. These blebs functioned to facilitate material exchange with ectosymbiotic proto-mitochondria. The cytoplasm was then formed through the expansion of blebs around proto-mitochondria, with continuous spaces between the blebs giving rise to the endoplasmic reticulum, which later evolved into the eukaryotic secretory system. Further bleb-fusion steps yielded a continuous plasma membrane, which served to isolate the endoplasmic reticulum from the environment.

CONCLUSIONS

The inside-out theory is consistent with diverse kinds of data and provides an alternative framework by which to explore and understand the dynamic organization of modern eukaryotic cells. It also helps to explain a number of previously enigmatic features of cell biology, including the autonomy of nuclei in syncytia and the subcellular localization of protein N-glycosylation, and makes many predictions, including a novel mechanism of interphase nuclear pore insertion.

An evolutionary network of genes present in the eukaryote common ancestor polls genomes on eukaryotic and mitochondrial origin

To test the predictions of competing and mutually exclusive hypotheses for the origin of eukaryotes, we identified from a sample of 27 sequenced eukaryotic and 994 sequenced prokaryotic genomes 571 genes that were present in the eukaryote common ancestor and that have homologues among eubacterial and archaebacterial genomes. Maximum-likelihood trees identified the prokaryotic genomes that most frequently contained genes branching as the sister to the eukaryotic nuclear homologues. Among the archaebacteria, euryarchaeote genomes most frequently harbored the sister to the eukaryotic nuclear gene, whereas among eubacteria, the α-proteobacteria were most frequently represented within the sister group. Only 3 genes out of 571 gave a 3-domain tree. Homologues from α-proteobacterial genomes that branched as the sister to nuclear genes were found more frequently in genomes of facultatively anaerobic members of the rhiozobiales and rhodospirilliales than in obligate intracellular ricketttsial parasites. Following α-proteobacteria, the most frequent eubacterial sister lineages were γ-proteobacteria, δ-proteobacteria, and firmicutes, which were also the prokaryote genomes least frequently found as monophyletic groups in our trees. Although all 22 higher prokaryotic taxa sampled (crenarchaeotes, γ-proteobacteria, spirochaetes, chlamydias, etc.) harbor genes that branch as the sister to homologues present in the eukaryotic common ancestor, that is not evidence of 22 different prokaryotic cells participating at eukaryote origins because prokaryotic “lineages” have laterally acquired genes for more than 1.5 billion years since eukaryote origins. The data underscore the archaebacterial (host) nature of the eukaryotic informational genes and the eubacterial (mitochondrial) nature of eukaryotic energy metabolism. The network linking genes of the eukaryote ancestor to contemporary homologues distributed across prokaryotic genomes elucidates eukaryote gene origins in a dialect cognizant of gene transfer in nature.

Archaebacteria (Archaea) and the origin of the eukaryotic nucleus

The eukaryotic nucleus is a unique structure. Because it lacks an obvious homologue or precursor among prokaryotes, ideas about its evolutionary origin are diverse. Current attempts to derive the nuclear membrane focus on invaginations of the plasma membrane in a prokaryote, endosymbiosis of an archaebacterium within a eubacterial host, or the origin of a genuinely new membrane system following the origin of mitochondria in an archaebacterial host. Recent reports point to ways in which different ideas regarding the origin of the nucleus might someday be discriminated.