Was the nucleus the first endosymbiont?

Major Evolutionary Transitions and the Roles of Facilitation and Information in Ecosystem Transformations

A small number of extraordinary “Major Evolutionary Transitions” (METs) have attracted attention among biologists. They comprise novel forms of individuality and information, and are defined in relation to organismal complexity, irrespective of broader ecosystem-level effects. This divorce between evolutionary and ecological consequences qualifies unicellular eukaryotes, for example, as a MET although they alone failed to significantly alter ecosystems. Additionally, this definition excludes revolutionary innovations not fitting into either MET type (e.g., photosynthesis). We recombine evolution with ecology to explore how and why entire ecosystems were newly created or radically altered – as Major System Transitions (MSTs). In doing so, we highlight important morphological adaptations that spread through populations because of their immediate, direct-fitness advantages for individuals. These are Major Competitive Transitions, or MCTs. We argue that often multiple METs and MCTs must be present to produce MSTs. For example, sexually-reproducing, multicellular eukaryotes (METs) with anisogamy and exoskeletons (MCTs) significantly altered ecosystems during the Cambrian. Therefore, we introduce the concepts of Facilitating Evolutionary Transitions (FETs) and Catalysts as key events or agents that are insufficient themselves to set a MST into motion, but are essential parts of synergies that do. We further elucidate the role of information in MSTs as transitions across five levels: (I) Encoded; (II) Epigenomic; (III) Learned; (IV) Inscribed; and (V) Dark Information. The latter is ‘authored’ by abiotic entities rather than biological organisms. Level IV has arguably allowed humans to produce a MST, and V perhaps makes us a FET for a future transition that melds biotic and abiotic life into one entity. Understanding the interactive processes involved in past major transitions will illuminate both current events and the surprising possibilities that abiotically-created information may produce.

Photosynthetic Systems Suggest an Evolutionary Pathway to Diderms

Bacteria are divided primarily into monoderms (with one cell membrane, and usually Gram-positive, due to a thick peptidoglycan layer) and diderms (with two cell membranes, and mostly Gram-negative, due to a thin peptidoglycan layer sandwiched between the two membranes). Photosynthetic species are spread among the taxonomic groups, some having type I reaction centers (RCI in monoderm phylum Firmicutes; and diderm phyla Acidobacteria and Chlorobi), others with type II reaction centers (RCII in monoderm phylum Chloroflexi; and diderm taxa Gemmatimonadetes, and alpha-, beta-, and gamma-Proteobacteria), and some containing both (RCI and RCII, only in diderm phylum Cyanobacteria). In most bacterial phylograms, photosystem types and diderm taxa are polyphyletic. A more parsimonious arrangement, which is supported by photosystem evolution, as well as additional sets of molecular characters, suggests that endosymbiotic events resulted in the formation of the diderms. In the model presented, monoderms readily form a monophyletic group, while diderms are produced by at least two endosymbiotic events, followed by additional evolutionary changes.

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.

Gene Duplications Trace Mitochondria to the Onset of Eukaryote Complexity

The last eukaryote common ancestor (LECA) possessed mitochondria and all key traits that make eukaryotic cells more complex than their prokaryotic ancestors, yet the timing of mitochondrial acquisition and the role of mitochondria in the origin of eukaryote complexity remain debated. Here, we report evidence from gene duplications in LECA indicating an early origin of mitochondria. Among 163,545 duplications in 24,571 gene trees spanning 150 sequenced eukaryotic genomes, we identify 713 gene duplication events that occurred in LECA. LECA's bacterial-derived genes include numerous mitochondrial functions and were duplicated significantly more often than archaeal-derived and eukaryote-specific genes. The surplus of bacterial-derived duplications in LECA most likely reflects the serial copying of genes from the mitochondrial endosymbiont to the archaeal host's chromosomes. Clustering, phylogenies and likelihood ratio tests for 22.4 million genes from 5,655 prokaryotic and 150 eukaryotic genomes reveal no evidence for lineage-specific gene acquisitions in eukaryotes, except from the plastid in the plant lineage. That finding, and the functions of bacterial genes duplicated in LECA, suggests that the bacterial genes in eukaryotes are acquisitions from the mitochondrion, followed by vertical gene evolution and differential loss across eukaryotic lineages, flanked by concomitant lateral gene transfer among prokaryotes. Overall, the data indicate that recurrent gene transfer via the copying of genes from a resident mitochondrial endosymbiont to archaeal host chromosomes preceded the onset of eukaryotic cellular complexity, favoring mitochondria-early over mitochondria-late hypotheses for eukaryote origin.

Phagocytosis-like cell engulfment by a planctomycete bacterium

Phagocytosis is a key eukaryotic feature, conserved from unicellular protists to animals, that enabled eukaryotes to feed on other organisms. It could also be a driving force behind endosymbiosis, a process by which α-proteobacteria and cyanobacteria evolved into mitochondria and plastids, respectively. Here we describe a planctomycete bacterium, 'Candidatus Uab amorphum', which is able to engulf other bacteria and small eukaryotic cells through a phagocytosis-like mechanism. Observations via light and electron microscopy suggest that this bacterium digests prey cells in specific compartments. With the possible exception of a gene encoding an actin-like protein, analysis of the 'Ca. Uab amorphum' genomic sequence does not reveal any genes homologous to eukaryotic phagocytosis genes, suggesting that cell engulfment in this microorganism is probably not homologous to eukaryotic phagocytosis. The discovery of this "phagotrophic" bacterium expands our understanding of the cellular complexity of prokaryotes, and may be relevant to the origin of eukaryotic cells.

Endosymbiosis: The feeling is not mutual

Endosymbiosis is an idea that provided a remarkable amount of explanatory power about the origins of eukaryotic organelles. But it also promoted a number of assumptions that have also been influential, but are less well-examined. Here we look at two of these to see whether or not they fit current evidence. The assumption we first address is that endosymbiotic relationships such as nutritional symbioses and eukaryotic organelles are mutualisms. We argue instead that they are more one-sided associations that can be regarded as context-dependent power struggles like any other ecological interaction. The second assumption is that during endosymbiotic interactions (such as the origin of organelles), the host genomes will acquire a great many genes from endosymbionts that assume functions in host systems (as opposed to the well-documented genes whose products are simply targeted back to the endosymbiont or organelle). The idea that these genes exist in large numbers has been influential in a number of hypotheses about organelle evolution and distribution, but in the most carefully-examined systems no such mass migration of genes is evident. Overall, we argue that both the nature and impact of endosymbiosis need to be constantly re-evaluated to fully understand what roles it really plays in both cell biology and evolution.

Rings Reconcile Genotypic and Phenotypic Evolution within the Proteobacteria

Although prokaryotes are usually classified using molecular phylogenies instead of phenotypes after the advent of gene sequencing, neither of these methods is satisfactory because the phenotypes cannot explain the molecular trees and the trees do not fit the phenotypes. This scientific crisis still exists and the profound disconnection between these two pillars of evolutionary biology--genotypes and phenotypes--grows larger. We use rings and a genomic form of goods thinking to resolve this conundrum (McInerney JO, Cummins C, Haggerty L. 2011. Goods thinking vs. tree thinking. Mobile Genet Elements. 1:304-308; Nelson-Sathi S, et al. 2015. Origins of major archaeal clades correspond to gene acquisitions from bacteria. Nature 517:77-80). The Proteobacteria is the most speciose prokaryotic phylum known. It is an ideal phylogenetic model for reconstructing Earth's evolutionary history. It contains diverse free living, pathogenic, photosynthetic, sulfur metabolizing, and symbiotic species. Due to its large number of species (Whitman WB, Coleman DC, Wiebe WJ. 1998. Prokaryotes: the unseen majority. Proc Nat Acad Sci U S A. 95:6578-6583) it was initially expected to provide strong phylogenetic support for a proteobacterial tree of life. But despite its many species, sequence-based tree analyses are unable to resolve its topology. Here we develop new rooted ring analyses and study proteobacterial evolution. Using protein family data and new genome-based outgroup rooting procedures, we reconstruct the complex evolutionary history of the proteobacterial rings (combinations of tree-like divergences and endosymbiotic-like convergences). We identify and map the origins of major gene flows within the rooted proteobacterial rings (P < 3.6 × 10(-6)) and find that the evolution of the "Alpha-," "Beta-," and "Gammaproteobacteria" is represented by a unique set of rings. Using new techniques presented here we also root these rings using outgroups. We also map the independent flows of genes involved in DNA-, RNA-, ATP-, and membrane- related processes within the Proteobacteria and thereby demonstrate that these large gene flows are consistent with endosymbioses (P < 3.6 × 10(-9)). Our analyses illustrate what it means to find that a gene is present, or absent, within a gene flow, and thereby clarify the origin of the apparent conflicts between genotypes and phenotypes. Here we identify the gene flows that introduced photosynthesis into the Alpha-, Beta-, and Gammaproteobacteria from the common ancestor of the Actinobacteria and the Firmicutes. Our results also explain why rooted rings, unlike trees, are consistent with the observed genotypic and phenotypic relationships observed among the various proteobacterial classes. We find that ring phylogenies can explain the genotypes and the phenotypes of biological processes within large and complex groups like the Proteobacteria.

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.

Origin and evolution of metabolic sub-cellular compartmentalization in eukaryotes

A high level of subcellular compartmentalization is a hallmark of eukaryotic cells. This intricate internal organization was present already in the common ancestor of all extant eukaryotes, and the determination of the origins and early evolution of the different organelles remains largely elusive. Organellar proteomes are determined through regulated pathways that target proteins produced in the cytosol to their final subcellular destinations. This internal sorting of proteins can vary across different physiological conditions, cell types and lineages. Evolutionary retargeting - the alteration of a subcellular localization of a protein in the course of evolution - has been rampant in eukaryotes and involves any possible combination of organelles. This fact adds another layer of difficulty to the reconstruction of the origins and evolution of organelles. In this review we discuss current themes in relation to the origin and evolution of organellar proteomes. Throughout the text, a special focus is set on the evolution of mitochondrial and peroxisomal proteomes, which are two organelles for which extensive proteomic and evolutionary studies have been performed.

Minimization of extracellular space as a driving force in prokaryote association and the origin of eukaryotes

BACKGROUND

Internalization-based hypotheses of eukaryotic origin require close physical association of host and symbiont. Prior hypotheses of how these associations arose include chance, specific metabolic couplings between partners, and prey-predator/parasite interactions. Since these hypotheses were proposed, it has become apparent that mixed-species, close-association assemblages (biofilms) are widespread and predominant components of prokaryotic ecology. Which forces drove prokaryotes to evolve the ability to form these assemblages are uncertain. Bacteria and archaea have also been found to form membrane-lined interconnections (nanotubes) through which proteins and RNA pass. These observations, combined with the structure of the nuclear envelope and an energetic benefit of close association (see below), lead us to propose a novel hypothesis of the driving force underlying prokaryotic close association and the origin of eukaryotes.

RESULTS

Respiratory proton transport does not alter external pH when external volume is effectively infinite. Close physical association decreases external volume. For small external volumes, proton transport decreases external pH, resulting in each transported proton increasing proton motor force to a greater extent. We calculate here that in biofilms this effect could substantially decrease how many protons need to be transported to achieve a given proton motor force. Based as it is solely on geometry, this energetic benefit would occur for all prokaryotes using proton-based respiration.

CONCLUSIONS

This benefit may be a driving force in biofilm formation. Under this hypothesis a very wide range of prokaryotic species combinations could serve as eukaryotic progenitors. We use this observation and the discovery of prokaryotic nanotubes to propose that eukaryotes arose from physically distinct, functionally specialized (energy factory, protein factory, DNA repository/RNA factory), obligatorily symbiotic prokaryotes in which the protein factory and DNA repository/RNA factory cells were coupled by nanotubes and the protein factory ultimately internalized the other two. This hypothesis naturally explains many aspects of eukaryotic physiology, including the nuclear envelope being a folded single membrane repeatedly pierced by membrane-bound tubules (the nuclear pores), suggests that species analogous or homologous to eukaryotic progenitors are likely unculturable as monocultures, and makes a large number of testable predictions.

REVIEWERS

This article was reviewed by Purificación López-García and Toni Gabaldón.

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.

The deep roots of the rings of life

Reconstructing early evolutionary events like the origins of informational and operational genes, membranes, and photophosphorylation is difficult because early evolutionary events can be masked by subsequent gene flows. Furthermore, as evolution progresses through both Darwinian survival of the fittest (tree-like evolution) and symbiotic/endosymbiotic cooperation (ring-like evolution), trees alone are not adequate to represent Earth's evolutionary history. Here, we reconstruct and root the New Rings of Life and use it as a framework for interpreting early events in the evolution of life. Unlike the three-domain hypothesis, the rings do not fit all life into one of three immutable categories, but rather accommodate new gene flows as novel organisms are discovered. A draft of the Rooted Rings of Life is reconstructed by analyzing the phylogenetic distributions of indels (insertions/deletions) and genes coding for fundamental molecular processes. Their phylogenetic distributions are inconsistent with all trees. Hypergeometric distribution analyses of them strongly localize the root of the rings to a segment of the deepest ring (P < 10(-21) and P < 10(-194)), and whole-genome analyses independently confirm the topology of the rooted rings (P < 7.1 × 10(-6)). The rings identify several large gene flows, including a flow of a thousand genes into the Halobacteria and the Eubacteria, the related photocyte flow, the flow of genes into the last common ancestor of the eocytes and the eukaryotes, and the informational and operational gene flows into the eukaryotes. The rooted rings also chronologically order steps in the evolution of extant taxa, that is, phototrophy evolved from Halobacteria (photophosphorylation) → Heliobacteria (photosynthesis) → Cyanobacteria (oxygenic photosynthesis).

The impact of history on our perception of evolutionary events: endosymbiosis and the origin of eukaryotic complexity

Evolutionary hypotheses are correctly interpreted as products of the data they set out to explain, but they are less often recognized as being heavily influenced by other factors. One of these is the history of preceding thought, and here I look back on historically important changes in our thinking about the role of endosymbiosis in the origin of eukaryotic cells. Specifically, the modern emphasis on endosymbiotic explanations for numerous eukaryotic features, including the cell itself (the so-called chimeric hypotheses), can be seen not only as resulting from the advent of molecular and genomic data, but also from the intellectual acceptance of the endosymbiotic origin of mitochondria and plastids. This transformative idea may have unduly affected how other aspects of the eukaryotic cell are explained, in effect priming us to accept endosymbiotic explanations for endogenous processes. Molecular and genomic data, which were originally harnessed to answer questions about cell evolution, now so dominate our thinking that they largely define the question, and the original questions about how eukaryotic cellular architecture evolved have been neglected. This is unfortunate because, as Roger Stanier pointed out, these cellular changes represent life's "greatest single evolutionary discontinuity," and on this basis I advocate a return to emphasizing evolutionary cell biology when thinking about the origin of eukaryotes, and suggest that endogenous explanations will prevail when we refocus on the evolution of the cell.

Phylogenomic test of the hypotheses for the evolutionary origin of eukaryotes

The evolutionary origin of eukaryotes is a question of great interest for which many different hypotheses have been proposed. These hypotheses predict distinct patterns of evolutionary relationships for individual genes of the ancestral eukaryotic genome. The availability of numerous completely sequenced genomes covering the three domains of life makes it possible to contrast these predictions with empirical data. We performed a systematic analysis of the phylogenetic relationships of ancestral eukaryotic genes with archaeal and bacterial genes. In contrast with previous studies, we emphasize the critical importance of methods accounting for statistical support, horizontal gene transfer, and gene loss, and we disentangle the processes underlying the phylogenomic pattern we observe. We first recover a clear signal indicating that a fraction of the bacteria-like eukaryotic genes are of alphaproteobacterial origin. Then, we show that the majority of bacteria-related eukaryotic genes actually do not point to a relationship with a specific bacterial taxonomic group. We also provide evidence that eukaryotes branch close to the last archaeal common ancestor. Our results demonstrate that there is no phylogenetic support for hypotheses involving a fusion with a bacterium other than the ancestor of mitochondria. Overall, they leave only two possible interpretations, respectively, based on the early-mitochondria hypotheses, which suppose an early endosymbiosis of an alphaproteobacterium in an archaeal host and on the slow-drip autogenous hypothesis, in which early eukaryotic ancestors were particularly prone to horizontal gene transfers.

Strasburger's legacy to mitosis and cytokinesis and its relevance for the Cell Theory

Eduard Strasburger was one of the most prominent biologists contributing to the development of the Cell Theory during the nineteenth century. His major contribution related to the characterization of mitosis and cytokinesis and especially to the discovery of the discrete stages of mitosis, which he termed prophase, metaphase and anaphase. Besides his observations on uninucleate plant and animal cells, he also investigated division processes in multinucleate cells. Here, he emphasised the independent nature of mitosis and cytokinesis. We discuss these issues from the perspective of new discoveries in the field of cell division and conclude that Strasburger's legacy will in the future lead to a reformulation of the Cell Theory and that this will accommodate the independent and primary nature of the nucleus, together with its complement of perinuclear microtubules, for the organisation of the eukaryotic cell.

Prokaryote or eukaryote? A unique microorganism from the deep sea

There are only two kinds of organisms on the Earth: prokaryotes and eukaryotes. Although eukaryotes are considered to have evolved from prokaryotes, there were no previously known intermediate forms between them. The differences in their cellular structures are so vast that the problem of how eukaryotes could have evolved from prokaryotes is one of the greatest enigmas in biology. Here, we report a unique organism with cellular structures appearing to have intermediate features between prokaryotes and eukaryotes, which was discovered in the deep sea off the coast of Japan using electron microscopy and structome analysis. The organism was 10 µm long and 3 µm in diameter, having >100 times the volume of Escherichia coli. It had a large 'nucleoid', consisting of naked DNA fibers, with a single nucleoid membrane and endosymbionts that resemble bacteria, but no mitochondria. Because this organism appears to be a life form distinct from both prokaryotes and eukaryotes but similar to eukaryotes, we named this unique microorganism the 'Myojin parakaryote' with the scientific name of Parakaryon myojinensis ('next to (eu)karyote from Myojin') after the discovery location and its intermediate morphology. The existence of this organism is an indication of a potential evolutionary path between prokaryotes and eukaryotes.

Breaking through a phylogenetic impasse: a pair of associated archaea might have played host in the endosymbiotic origin of eukaryotes

For over a century, the origin of eukaryotes has been a topic of intense debate among scientists. Although it has become widely accepted that organelles such as the mitochondria and chloroplasts arose via endosymbiosis, the origin of the eukaryotic nucleus remains enigmatic. Numerous models for the origin of the nucleus have been proposed over the years, many of which use endosymbiosis to explain its existence. Proposals of microbes whose ancestors may have served as either a host or a guest in various endosymbiotic scenarios abound, none of which have been able to sufficiently incorporate the cell biological as well as phylogenetic data which links these organisms to the nucleus. While it is generally agreed that eukaryotic nuclei share more features in common with archaea rather than with bacteria, different studies have identified either one or the other of the two major groups of archaea as potential ancestors, leading to somewhat of a stalemate. This paper seeks to resolve this impasse by presenting evidence that not just one, but a pair of archaea might have served as host to the bacterial ancestor of the mitochondria. This pair may have consisted of ancestors of both Ignicoccus hospitalis as well as its ectosymbiont/ectoparasite ‘Nanoarchaeum equitans’.

For quite a few chromosomes more: the origin of eukaryotes…

The evolution of eukaryotes addresses an enigmatic question: what are the evolutionary advantages of having a nucleus? The nucleus is traditionally thought to act as protection for DNA, but eukaryotes are more fragile than bacteria. The compartmentalization of the eukaryotic cell might stem from invaginations of the plasma membrane, and I argue that this autogenous origin of the nucleus constituted a selective innovation caused by cellular constraints due to a large genome. The protoeukaryotic nucleus appears to be a physical and chemical solution to the problem of large amounts of DNA in the form of many linear chromosomes. The selective advantages of having a nuclear envelope are to house a large genome in a stabilized structure and to decouple gene translation from transcription. Supporting the karyogenic model, this new hypothesis opens an original perspective to help in understanding the very ancient origin of eukaryotes.

The evolution of cardiolipin biosynthesis and maturation pathways and its implications for the evolution of eukaryotes

Background

Cardiolipin (CL) is an important component in mitochondrial inner and bacterial membranes. Its appearance in these two biomembranes has been considered as evidence of the endosymbiotic origin of mitochondria. But CL was reported to be synthesized through two distinct enzymes--CLS_cap and CLS_pld in eukaryotes and bacteria. Therefore, how the CL biosynthesis pathway evolved is an interesting question.

Results

Phylogenetic distribution investigation of CL synthase (CLS) showed: most bacteria have CLS_pld pathway, but in partial bacteria including proteobacteria and actinobacteria CLS_cap pathway has already appeared; in eukaryotes, Supergroup Opisthokonta and Archaeplastida, and Subgroup Stramenopiles, which all contain multicellular organisms, possess CLS_cap pathway, while Supergroup Amoebozoa and Excavata and Subgroup Alveolata, which all consist exclusively of unicellular eukaryotes, bear CLS_pld pathway; amitochondriate protists in any supergroups have neither. Phylogenetic analysis indicated the CLS_cap in eukaryotes have the closest relationship with those of alpha proteobacteria, while the CLS_pld in eukaryotes share a common ancestor but have no close correlation with those of any particular bacteria.

Conclusions

The first eukaryote common ancestor (FECA) inherited the CLS_pld from its bacterial ancestor (e. g. the bacterial partner according to any of the hypotheses about eukaryote evolution); later, when the FECA evolved into the last eukaryote common ancestor (LECA), the endosymbiotic mitochondria (alpha proteobacteria) brought in CLS_cap, and then in some LECA individuals the CLS_cap substituted the CLS_pld, and these LECAs would evolve into the protist lineages from which multicellular eukaryotes could arise, while in the other LECAs the CLS_pld was retained and the CLS_cap was lost, and these LECAs would evolve into the protist lineages possessing CLS_pld. Besides, our work indicated CL maturation pathway arose after the emergence of eukaryotes probably through mechanisms such as duplication of other genes, and gene duplication and loss occurred frequently at different lineage levels, increasing the pathway diversity probably to fit the complicated cellular process in various cells. Our work also implies the classification putting Stramenopiles and Alveolata together to form Chromalveolata may be unreasonable; the absence of CL synthesis and maturation pathways in amitochondriate protists is most probably due to secondary loss.

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.

Primal eukaryogenesis: on the communal nature of precellular States, ancestral to modern life

This problem-oriented, exploratory and hypothesis-driven discourse toward the unknown combines several basic tenets: (i) a photo-active metal sulfide scenario of primal biogenesis in the porespace of shallow sedimentary flats, in contrast to hot deep-sea hydrothermal vent conditions; (ii) an inherently complex communal system at the common root of present life forms; (iii) a high degree of internal compartmentalization at this communal root, progressively resembling coenocytic (syncytial) super-cells; (iv) a direct connection from such communal super-cells to proto-eukaryotic macro-cell organization; and (v) multiple rounds of micro-cellular escape with streamlined reductive evolution-leading to the major prokaryotic cell lines, as well as to megaviruses and other viral lineages. Hopefully, such nontraditional concepts and approaches will contribute to coherent and plausible views about the origins and early life on Earth. In particular, the coevolutionary emergence from a communal system at the common root can most naturally explain the vast discrepancy in subcellular organization between modern eukaryotes on the one hand and both archaea and bacteria on the other.

Evolutionary diversification of eukaryotic DNA replication machinery

DNA replication research to date has focused on model organisms such as the vertebrate Xenopus laevis and the yeast species Saccharomyces cerevisiae and Schizosaccharomyces pombe. However, animals and fungi both belong to the Opisthokonta, one of about six eukaryotic phylogenetic 'supergroups', and therefore represent only a fraction of eukaryotic diversity. To explore evolutionary diversification of the eukaryotic DNA replication machinery a bioinformatic approach was used to investigate the presence or absence of yeast/animal replisome components in other eukaryotic taxa. A comparative genomic survey was undertaken of 59 DNA replication proteins in a diverse range of 36 eukaryotes from all six supergroups. Twenty-three proteins including Mcm2-7, Cdc45, RPA1, primase, some DNA polymerase subunits, RFC1-5, PCNA and Fen1 are present in all species examined. A further 20 proteins are present in all six eukaryotic supergroups, although not necessarily in every species: with the exception of RNase H2B and the fork protection complex component Timeless/Tof1, all of these are members of anciently derived paralogous families such as ORC, MCM, GINS or RPA. Together these form a set of 43 proteins that must have been present in the last common eukaryotic ancestor (LCEA). This minimal LCEA replisome is significantly more complex than the related replisome in Archaea, indicating evolutionary events including duplications of DNA replication genes in the LCEA lineage which parallel the early evolution of other complex eukaryotic cellular features.

Planctomycetes and eukaryotes: a case of analogy not homology

Planctomycetes, Verrucomicrobia and Chlamydia are prokaryotic phyla, sometimes grouped together as the PVC superphylum of eubacteria. Some PVC species possess interesting attributes, in particular, internal membranes that superficially resemble eukaryotic endomembranes. Some biologists now claim that PVC bacteria are nucleus-bearing prokaryotes and are considered evolutionary intermediates in the transition from prokaryote to eukaryote. PVC prokaryotes do not possess a nucleus and are not intermediates in the prokaryote-to-eukaryote transition. Here we summarise the evidence that shows why all of the PVC traits that are currently cited as evidence for aspiring eukaryoticity are either analogous (the result of convergent evolution), not homologous, to eukaryotic traits; or else they are the result of horizontal gene transfers.

The influence of rickettsiologists on post-modern microbiology

Many of the definitions in microbiology are currently false. We have reviewed the great denominations of microbiology and attempted to free microorganisms from the theories of the twentieth century. The presence of compartmentation and a nucleoid in Planctomycetes clearly calls into question the accuracy of the definitions of eukaryotes and prokaryotes. Archaea are viewed as prokaryotes resembling bacteria. However, the name archaea, suggesting an archaic origin of lifestyle, is inconsistent with the lifestyle of this family. Viruses are defined as small, filterable infectious agents, but giant viruses challenge the size criteria used for the definition of a virus. Pathogenicity does not require the acquisition of virulence factors (except for toxins), and in many cases, gene loss is significantly inked to the emergence of virulence. Species classification based on 16S rRNA is useless for taxonomic purposes of human pathogens, as a 2% divergence would classify all Rickettsiae within the same species and would not identify bacteria specialized for mammal infection. The use of metagenomics helps us to understand evolution and physiology by elucidating the structure, function, and interactions of the major microbial communities, but it neglects the minority populations. Finally, Darwin’s descent with modification theory, as represented by the tree of life, no longer matches our current genomic knowledge because genomics has revealed the occurrence of de novo-created genes and the mosaic structure of genomes, the Rhizome of life is therefore more appropriate.

Levels of biological organization and the origin of novelty

The concept of novelty in evolutionary biology pertains to multiple tiers of biological organization from behavioral and morphological changes to changes at the molecular level. Identifying novel features requires assessments of similarity (homology and homoplasy) of relationships (phylogenetic history) and of shared developmental and genetic pathways or networks. After a brief discussion of how novelty is used in recent literature, we discuss whether the evolutionary approach to homology and homoplasy initially formulated by Lankester in the 19th century informs our understanding of novelty today. We then discuss six examples of morphological features described in the recent literature as novelties, and assess the basis upon which they are regarded as novel. The six are: origin of the turtle shell, transition from fish fins to tetrapod limbs, origination of the neural crest and neural crest cells, cement glands in frogs and casquettes in fish, whale bone-eating tubeworms, and the digestion of plant proteins by nematodes. The article concludes with a discussion of means of acquiring novel genetic information that can account for novelty recognized at higher levels. These are co-options of existing genetic circuitry, gene duplication followed by neofunctionalization, gene rearrangements through mobile genetic elements, and lateral gene transfer. We conclude that on the molecular level only the latter category provides novel genetic information, in that there is no homologous precursor. However, novel phenotypes can be generated through both neofunctionalization and gene rearrangements. Therefore, assigning phenotypic or genotypic "novelty" is contingent on the level of biological organization addressed.

Early evolution without a tree of life

Life is a chemical reaction. Three major transitions in early evolution are considered without recourse to a tree of life. The origin of prokaryotes required a steady supply of energy and electrons, probably in the form of molecular hydrogen stemming from serpentinization. Microbial genome evolution is not a treelike process because of lateral gene transfer and the endosymbiotic origins of organelles. The lack of true intermediates in the prokaryote-to-eukaryote transition has a bioenergetic cause.

This article was reviewed by Dan Graur, W. Ford Doolittle, Eugene V. Koonin and Christophe Malaterre.

Evolutionary origin of the cell nucleus and its functional architecture

Understanding the evolutionary origin of the nucleus and its compartmentalized architecture provides a huge but, as expected, greatly rewarding challenge in the post-genomic era. We start this chapter with a survey of current hypotheses on the evolutionary origin of the cell nucleus. Thereafter, we provide an overview of evolutionarily conserved features of chromatin organization and arrangements, as well as topographical aspects of DNA replication and transcription, followed by a brief introduction of current models of nuclear architecture. In addition to features which may possibly apply to all eukaryotes, the evolutionary plasticity of higher-order nuclear organization is reflected by cell-type- and species-specific features, by the ability of nuclear architecture to adapt to specific environmental demands, as well as by the impact of aberrant nuclear organization on senescence and human disease. We conclude this chapter with a reflection on the necessity of interdisciplinary research strategies to map epigenomes in space and time.

The first eukaryote cell: an unfinished history of contestation

The eukaryote cell is one of the most radical innovations in the history of life, and the circumstances of its emergence are still deeply contested. This paper will outline the recent history of attempts to reveal these origins, with special attention to the argumentative strategies used to support claims about the first eukaryote cell. I will focus on two general models of eukaryogenesis: the phagotrophy model and the syntrophy model. As their labels indicate, they are based on claims about metabolic relationships. The first foregrounds the ability to consume other organisms; the second the ability to enter into symbiotic metabolic arrangements. More importantly, however, the first model argues for the autogenous or self-generated origins of the eukaryote cell, and the second for its exogenous or externally generated origins. Framing cell evolution this way leads each model to assert different priorities in regard to cell-biological versus molecular evidence, cellular versus environmental influences, plausibility versus evolutionary probability, and irreducibility versus the continuity of cell types. My examination of these issues will conclude with broader reflections on the implications of eukaryogenesis studies for a philosophical understanding of scientific contestation.

Evidence for an early prokaryotic endosymbiosis

Endosymbioses have dramatically altered eukaryotic life, but are thought to have negligibly affected prokaryotic evolution. Here, by analysing the flows of protein families, I present evidence that the double-membrane, gram-negative prokaryotes were formed as the result of a symbiosis between an ancient actinobacterium and an ancient clostridium. The resulting taxon has been extraordinarily successful, and has profoundly altered the evolution of life by providing endosymbionts necessary for the emergence of eukaryotes and by generating Earth's oxygen atmosphere. Their double-membrane architecture and the observed genome flows into them suggest a common evolutionary mechanism for their origin: an endosymbiosis between a clostridium and actinobacterium.

Comprehensive analysis of the origin of eukaryotic genomes

There is currently no consensus on the evolutionary origin of eukaryotes. In the search of the ancestors of eukaryotes, we analyzed the phylogeny of 46 genomes, including those of 2 eukaryotes, 8 archaea, and 36 eubacteria. To avoid the effects of gene duplications, we used inparalog pairs of genes with orthologous relationships. First, we grouped these inparalogs into the functional categories of the nucleus, cytoplasm, and mitochondria. Next, we counted the sister groups of eukaryotes in prokaryotic phyla and plotted them on a standard phylogenetic tree. Finally, we used Pearson's chi-square test to estimate the origin of the genomes from specific prokaryotic ancestors. The results suggest the eukaryotic nuclear genome descends from an archaea that was neither euryarchaeota nor crenarchaeota and that the mitochondrial genome descends from alpha-proteobacteria. In contrast, genes related to the cytoplasm do not appear to originate from a specific group of prokaryotes.

Biology and life-cycle of the microsporidium Kneallhazia solenopsae Knell Allan Hazard 1977 gen. n., comb. n., from the fire ant Solenopsis invicta

Thelohania solenopsae is a unique microsporidium with a life-cycle finely tuned to parasitizing fire ant colonies. Unlike other microsporidia of social hymenopterans, T. solenopsae infects all castes and stages of the host. Four distinctive spore types are produced: diplokaryotic spores, which develop only in brood (Type 1 DK spores); octets of octospores within sporophorous vesicles, the most prominent spore type in adults but never occurring in brood; Nosema-like diplokaryotic spores (Type 2 DK spores) developing in adults; and megaspores, which occur occasionally in larvae 4, pupae, and adults of all castes but predominantly infect gonads of alates and germinate in inseminated ovaries of queens. Type 2 DK spores function in autoinfection of adipocytes. Proliferation of diplokaryotic meronts in some cells is followed by karyogamy of diplokarya counterparts and meiosis, thereby switching the diplokaryotic sequence to octospore or megaspore development. Megaspores transmit the pathogen transovarially. From the egg to larvae 4, infection is inapparent and can be detected only by PCR. Type 1 DK spore and megaspore sequences are abruptly triggered in larvae 4, the key stage in intra-colony food distribution via trophallaxis, and presumably the central player in horizontal transmission of spores. Molecular, morphological, ultrastructural and life-cycle data indicate that T. solenopsae must be assigned to a new genus. We propose a new combination, Kneallhazia solenopsae.

Reconstructing evolutionary graphs: 3D parsimony

The increasing recognition that symbioses have greatly altered evolution through genome fusions is creating a need for algorithms that can reliably detect and reconstruct fusions. Here, we generalize the bootstrappers gambit algorithm (a quartet method) in order to permit it to analyze both bifurcations and fusions under a single mathematical model, and thereby detect past genomic branchings and endosymbioses. This new method, 3-dimensional parsimony, can be applied to aligned sequences, such as gene, indel, or other genomic presence/absence sequences. It also provides a statistical measure of support for each possible graph. The usefulness of this method is demonstrated by applying it to the ring of life.

The deep archaeal roots of eukaryotes

The set of conserved eukaryotic protein-coding genes includes distinct subsets one of which appears to be most closely related to and, by inference, derived from archaea, whereas another one appears to be of bacterial, possibly, endosymbiotic origin. The “archaeal” genes of eukaryotes, primarily, encode components of information-processing systems, whereas the “bacterial” genes are predominantly operational. The precise nature of the archaeo–eukaryotic relationship remains uncertain, and it has been variously argued that eukaryotic informational genes evolved from the homologous genes of Euryarchaeota or Crenarchaeota (the major branches of extant archaea) or that the origin of eukaryotes lies outside the known diversity of archaea. We describe a comprehensive set of 355 eukaryotic genes of apparent archaeal origin identified through ortholog detection and phylogenetic analysis. Phylogenetic hypothesis testing using constrained trees, combined with a systematic search for shared derived characters in the form of homologous inserts in conserved proteins, indicate that, for the majority of these genes, the preferred tree topology is one with the eukaryotic branch placed outside the extant diversity of archaea although small subsets of genes show crenarchaeal and euryarchaeal affinities. Thus, the archaeal genes in eukaryotes appear to descend from a distinct, ancient, and otherwise uncharacterized archaeal lineage that acquired some euryarchaeal and crenarchaeal genes via early horizontal gene transfer.

Did an ancient chlamydial endosymbiosis facilitate the establishment of primary plastids?

Phylogenomic analyses of the red alga Cyanidioschyzon merolae shows that at least 21 genes were transferred between chlamydiae and primary photosynthetic eukaryotes, suggesting an ancient chlamydial endosymbiosis with the ancestral primary photosynthetic eukaryote.

Background

Ancient endosymbioses are responsible for the origins of mitochondria and plastids, and they contribute to the divergence of several major eukaryotic groups. Although chlamydiae, a group of obligate intracellular bacteria, are not found in plants, an unexpected number of chlamydial genes are most similar to plant homologs, which, interestingly, often contain a plastid-targeting signal. This observation has prompted several hypotheses, including gene transfer between chlamydiae and plant-related groups and an ancestral relationship between chlamydiae and cyanobacteria.

Results

We conducted phylogenomic analyses of the red alga Cyanidioschyzon merolae to identify genes specifically related to chlamydial homologs. We show that at least 21 genes were transferred between chlamydiae and primary photosynthetic eukaryotes, with the donor most similar to the environmental Protochlamydia. Such an unusually high number of transferred genes suggests an ancient chlamydial endosymbiosis with the ancestral primary photosynthetic eukaryote. We hypothesize that three organisms were involved in establishing the primary photosynthetic lineage: the eukaryotic host cell, the cyanobacterial endosymbiont that provided photosynthetic capability, and a chlamydial endosymbiont or parasite that facilitated the establishment of the cyanobacterial endosymbiont.

Conclusion

Our findings provide a glimpse into the complex interactions that were necessary to establish the primary endosymbiotic relationship between plastid and host cytoplasms, and thereby explain the rarity with which long-term successful endosymbiotic relationships between heterotrophs and photoautotrophs were established. Our data also provide strong and independent support for a common origin of all primary photosynthetic eukaryotes and of the plastids they harbor.

The structure of microbial evolutionary theory

The study of microbial phylogeny and evolution has emerged as an interdisciplinary synthesis, divergent in both methods and concepts from the classical evolutionary biology. The deployment of macromolecular sequencing in microbial classification has provided a deep evolutionary taxonomy hitherto deemed impossible. Microbial phylogenetics has greatly transformed the landscape of evolutionary biology, not only in revitalizing the field in the pursuit of life's history over billions of years, but also in transcending the structure of thought that has shaped evolutionary theory since the time of Darwin. A trio of primary phylogenetic lineages, along with the recognition of symbiosis and lateral gene transfer as fundamental processes of evolutionary innovation, are core principles of microbial evolutionary biology today. Their scope and significance remain contentious among evolutionists.

Genomic analyses and the origin of the eukaryotes

The availability of whole-genome data has created the extraordinary opportunity to reconstruct in fine details the 'tree of life'. The application of such comprehensive effort promises to unravel the enigmatic evolutionary relationships between prokaryotes and eukaryotes. Traditionally, biologists have represented the evolutionary relationships of all organisms by a bifurcating phylogenetic tree. But recent analyses of completely sequenced genomes using conditioned reconstruction (CR), a newly developed gene-content algorithm, suggest that a cycle graph or 'ring' rather than a 'tree' is a better representation of the evolutionary relationships between prokaryotes and eukaryotes. CR is the first phylogenetic-reconstruction method to provide precise evidence about the origin of the eukaryotes. This review summarizes how the CR analyses of complete genomes provide evidence for a fusion origin of the eukaryotes.

Centromeres were derived from telomeres during the evolution of the eukaryotic chromosome

The centromere is the DNA region of the eukaryotic chromosome that determines kinetochore formation and sister chromatid cohesion. Centromeres interact with spindle microtubules to ensure the segregation of chromatids during mitosis and of homologous chromosomes in meiosis. The origin of centromeres, therefore, is inseparable from the evolution of cytoskeletal components that distribute chromosomes to offspring cells. Although the origin of the nucleus has been debated, no explanation for the evolutionary appearance of centromeres is available. We propose an evolutionary scenario: The centromeres originated from telomeres. The breakage of the ancestral circular genophore activated the transposition of retroelements at DNA ends that allowed the formation of telomeres by a recombination-dependent replication mechanism. Afterward, the modification of the tubulin-based cytoskeleton that allowed specific subtelomeric repeats to be recognized as new cargo gave rise to the first centromere. This switch from actin-based genophore partition to a tubulin-based mechanism generated a transition period during which both types of cytoskeleton contributed to fidelity of chromosome segregation. During the transition, pseudodicentric chromosomes increased the tendency toward chromosomal breakage and instability. This instability generated multiple telocentric chromosomes that eventually evolved into metacentric or holocentric chromosomes.

The origin of eukaryotes: a reappraisal

Ever since the elucidation of the main structural and functional features of eukaryotic cells and subsequent discovery of the endosymbiotic origin of mitochondria and plastids, two opposing hypotheses have been proposed to account for the origin of eukaryotic cells. One hypothesis postulates that the main features of these cells, including their ability to capture food by endocytosis and to digest it intracellularly, were developed first, and later had a key role in the adoption of endosymbionts; the other proposes that the transformation was triggered by an interaction between two typical prokaryotic cells, one of which became the host and the other the endosymbiont. Re-examination of this question in the light of cell-biological and phylogenetic data leads to the conclusion that the first model is more likely to be the correct one.

Evolution and pathology in chagas disease--a review

Trypanosoma cruzi acute infections often go unperceived, but one third of chronically infected individuals die of Chagas disease, showing diverse manifestations affecting the heart, intestines, and nervous systems. A common denominator of pathology in Chagas disease is the minimal rejection unit, whereby parasite-free target host cells are destroyed by immune system mononuclear effectors cells infiltrates. Another key feature stemming from T. cruzi infection is the integration of kDNA minicircles into the vertebrate host genome; horizontal transfer of the parasite DNA can undergo vertical transmission to the progeny of mammals and birds. kDNA integration-induced mutations can enter multiple loci in diverse chromosomes, generating new genes, pseudo genes and knock-outs, and resulting in genomic shuffling and remodeling over time. As a result of the juxtaposition of kDNA insertions with host open reading frames, novel chimeric products may be generated. Germ line transmission of kDNA-mutations determined the appearance of lesions in birds that are indistinguishable from those seen in Chagas disease patients. The production of tissue lesions showing typical minimal rejection units in birds' refractory to T. cruzi infection is consistent with the hypothesis that autoimmunity, likely triggered by integration-induced phenotypic alterations, plays a major role in the pathogenesis of Chagas disease.

Homologs of eukaryotic Ras superfamily proteins in prokaryotes and their novel phylogenetic correlation with their eukaryotic analogs

Ras superfamily proteins are key regulators in a wide variety of cellular processes. Previously, they were considered to be specific to eukaryotes, and MglA, a group of obviously different prokaryotic proteins, were recognized as their only prokaryotic analogs or even ancestors. Here, taking advantage of quite a current accumulation of prokaryotic genomic databases, we have investigated the existence and taxonomic distribution of Ras superfamily protein homologs in a much wider prokaryotic range, and analyzed their phylogenetic correlation with their eukaryotic analogs. Thirteen unambiguous prokaryotic homologs, which possess the GDP/GTP-binding domain with all the five characteristic motifs of their eukaryotic analogs, were identified in 12 eubacteria and one archaebacterium, respectively. In some other archaebacteria, including four methanogenic archaebacteria and three Thermoplasmales, homologs were also found, but with the GDP/GTP-binding domains not containing all the five characteristic motifs. Many more MglA orthologs were identified than in previous studies mainly in delta-proteobacteria, and all were shown to have common unique features distinct from the Ras superfamily proteins. Our phylogenetic analysis indicated eukaryotic Rab, Ran, Ras, and Rho families have the closest phylogenetic correlation with the 13 unambiguous prokaryotic homologs, whereas the other three eukaryotic protein families (SRbeta, Sar1, and Arf) branch separately from them, but have a relatively close relationship with the methanogenic archaebacterial homologs and MglA. Although homologs were identified in a relative minority of prokaryotes with genomic databases, their presence in a relatively wide variety of lineages, their unique sequence characters distinct from those of eukaryotic analogs, and the topology of our phylogenetic tree altogether do not support their origin from eukaryotes as a result of lateral gene transfer. Therefore, we argue that Ras superfamily proteins might have already emerged at least in some prokaryotic lineages, and that the seven eukaryotic protein families of the Ras superfamily may have two independent prokaryotic origins, probably reflecting the 'fusion' evolutionary history of the eukaryotic cell.

Evaluating hypotheses for the origin of eukaryotes

Numerous scenarios explain the origin of the eukaryote cell by fusion or endosymbiosis between an archaeon and a bacterium (and sometimes a third partner). We evaluate these hypotheses using the following three criteria. Can the data be explained by the null hypothesis that new features arise sequentially along a stem lineage? Second, hypotheses involving an archaeon and a bacterium should undergo standard phylogenetic tests of gene distribution. Third, accounting for past events by processes observed in modern cells is preferable to postulating unknown processes that have never been observed. For example, there are many eukaryote examples of bacteria as endosymbionts or endoparasites, but none known in archaea. Strictly post-hoc hypotheses that ignore this third criterion should be avoided. Applying these three criteria significantly narrows the number of plausible hypotheses. Given current knowledge, our conclusion is that the eukaryote lineage must have diverged from an ancestor of archaea well prior to the origin of the mitochondrion. Significantly, the absence of ancestrally amitochondriate eukaryotes (archezoa) among extant eukaryotes is neither evidence for an archaeal host for the ancestor of mitochondria, nor evidence against a eukaryotic host.

Sister chromatid junctions in the hyperthermophilic archaeon Sulfolobus solfataricus

Although the Archaea exhibit an intriguing combination of bacterial- and eukaryotic-like features, it is not known how these prokaryotic cells segregate their chromosomes before the process of cell division. In the course of our analysis of the third replication origin in the archaeon Sulfolobus solfataricus, we identify and characterise sister chromatid junctions in this prokaryote. This pairing appears to be mediated by hemicatenane-like structures, and we provide evidence that these junctions persist in both replicating and postreplicative cells. These data, in conjunction with fluorescent in situ hybridisation analyses, suggest that Sulfolobus chromosomes have a significant period of postreplicative sister chromatid synapsis, a situation that is more reminiscent of eukaryotic than bacterial chromosome segregation mechanisms.

Evolution and persistence of the cilium

The origin of cilia, a fundamental eukaryotic organelle, not present in prokaryotes, poses many problems, including the origins of motility and sensory function, the origins of nine-fold symmetry, of basal bodies, and of transport and selective mechanisms involved in ciliogenesis. We propose the basis of ciliary origin to be a self-assembly RNA enveloped virus that contains unique tubulin and tektin precursors. The virus becomes the centriole and basal body, which would account for the self-assembly and self-replicative properties of these organelles, in contrast to previous proposals of spirochaete origin or endogenous differentiation, which do not readily account for the centriole or its properties. The viral envelope evolves into a sensory bud. The host cell supplies the transport machinery and molecular motors to construct the axoneme. Polymerization of cytoplasmic microtubules in the 9+0 axoneme completes the 9+2 pattern.

The tree of one percent

As lateral gene transfer among prokaryotes and endosymbiotic gene transfer (from organelles) among eukaryotes are fundamentally not tree-like in nature, biologists need to depart from the notion that all genomes are related by a single bifurcating tree.

Two significant evolutionary processes are fundamentally not tree-like in nature - lateral gene transfer among prokaryotes and endosymbiotic gene transfer (from organelles) among eukaryotes. To incorporate such processes into the bigger picture of early evolution, biologists need to depart from the preconceived notion that all genomes are related by a single bifurcating tree.

Sex and the eukaryotic cell cycle is consistent with a viral ancestry for the eukaryotic nucleus

The origin of the eukaryotic cell cycle, including mitosis, meiosis, and sex are as yet unresolved aspects of the evolution of the eukaryotes. The wide phylogenetic distribution of both mitosis and meiosis suggest that these processes are integrally related to the origin of the earliest eukaryotic cells. According to the viral eukaryogenesis (VE) hypothesis, the eukaryotes are a composite of three phylogenetically unrelated organisms: a viral lysogen that evolved into the nucleus, an archaeal cell that evolved into the eukaryotic cytoplasm, and an alpha-proteobacterium that evolved into the mitochondria. In the extended VE hypothesis presented here, the eukaryotic cell cycle arises as a consequence of the derivation of the nucleus from a lysogenic DNA virus.

The archaeal origins of the eukaryotic translational system

Among the 78 eukaryotic ribosomal proteins, eleven are specific to Eukarya, 33 are common only to Archaea and Eukarya and 34 are homologous (at least in part) to those of both Bacteria and Archaea. Several other translational proteins are common only to Eukarya and Archaea (e.g., IF2a, SRP19, etc.), whereas others are shared by the three phyla (e.g., EFTu/EF1A and SRP54). Although this and other analyses strongly support an archaeal origin for a substantial fraction of the eukaryotic translational machinery, especially the ribosomal proteins, there have been numerous unique and ubiquitous additions to the eukaryotic translational system besides the 11 unique eukaryotic ribosomal proteins. These include peptide additions to most of the 67 archaeal homolog proteins, rRNA insertions, the 5.8S RNA and the Alu extension to the SRP RNA. Our comparative analysis of these and other eukaryotic features among the three different cellular phylodomains supports the idea that an archaeal translational system was most likely incorporated by means of endosymbiosis into a host cell that was neither bacterial nor archaeal in any modern sense. Phylogenetic analyses provide support for the timing of this acquisition coinciding with an ancient bottleneck in prokaryotic diversity.

Comparative genomics and structural biology of the molecular innovations of eukaryotes

Eukaryotes encode numerous proteins that either have no detectable homologs in prokaryotes or have only distant homologs. These molecular innovations of eukaryotes may be classified into three categories: proteins and domains inherited from prokaryotic precursors without drastic changes in biochemical function, but often recruited for novel roles in eukaryotes; new superfamilies or distinct biochemical functions emerging within pre-existing protein folds; and domains with genuinely new folds, apparently 'invented' at the outset of eukaryotic evolution. Most new folds emerging in eukaryotes are either alpha-helical or stabilized by metal chelation. Comparative genomics analyses point to an early phase of rapid evolution, and dramatic changes between the origin of the eukaryotic cell and the advent of the last common ancestor of extant eukaryotes. Extensive duplication of numerous genes, with subsequent functional diversification, is a distinctive feature of this turbulent era. Evolutionary analysis of ancient eukaryotic proteins is generally compatible with a two-symbiont scenario for eukaryotic origin, involving an alpha-proteobacterium (the ancestor of the mitochondria) and an archaeon, as well as key contributions from their selfish elements.