The deep(er) roots of Eukaryotes and Akaryotes

Protein structures unravel the signatures and patterns of deep time evolution

The formulation and testing of hypotheses using 'big biology data' often lie at the interface of computational biology and structural biology. The Protein Data Bank (PDB), which was established about 50 years ago, catalogs three-dimensional (3D) shapes of organic macromolecules and showcases a structural view of biology. The comparative analysis of the structures of homologs, particularly of proteins, from different species has significantly improved the in-depth analyses of molecular and cell biological questions. In addition, computational tools that were developed to analyze the 'protein universe' are providing the means for efficient resolution of longstanding debates in cell and molecular evolution. In celebrating the golden jubilee of the PDB, much has been written about the transformative impact of PDB on a broad range of fields of scientific inquiry and how structural biology transformed the study of the fundamental processes of life. Yet, the transforming influence of PDB on one field of inquiry of fundamental interest-the reconstruction of the distant biological past-has gone almost unnoticed. Here, I discuss the recent advances to highlight how insights and tools of structural biology are bearing on the data required for the empirical resolution of vigorously debated and apparently contradicting hypotheses in evolutionary biology. Specifically, I show that evolutionary characters defined by protein structure are superior compared to conventional sequence characters for reliable, data-driven resolution of competing hypotheses about the origins of the major clades of life and evolutionary relationship among those clades. Since the better quality data unequivocally support two primary domains of life, it is imperative that the primary classification of life be revised accordingly.

Viral histones: pickpocket's prize or primordial progenitor?

The common histones H2A, H2B, H3, and H4 are the characteristic components of eukaryotic nucleosomes, which function to wrap DNA and compact the genome as well as to regulate access to DNA for transcription and replication in all eukaryotes. In the past two decades, histones have also been found to be encoded in some DNA viruses, where their functions and properties are largely unknown, though recently histones from two related viruses have been shown to form nucleosome-like structures in vitro. Viral histones can be highly similar to eukaryotic histones in primary sequence, suggesting they have been recently picked up from eukaryotic hosts, or they can be radically divergent in primary sequence and may occur as conjoined histone doublets, triplets, or quadruplets, suggesting ancient origins prior to the divergence of modern eukaryotes. Here, we review what is known of viral histones and discuss their possible origins and functions. We consider how the viral life cycle may affect their properties and histories, and reflect on the possible roles of viruses in the origin of the nucleus of modern eukaryotic cells.

The tree of life describes a tripartite cellular world

The canonical view of a 3-domain (3D) tree of life was recently challenged by the discovery of Asgardarchaeota encoding eukaryote signature proteins (ESPs), which were treated as missing links of a 2-domain (2D) tree. Here we revisit the debate. We discuss methodological limitations of building trees with alignment-dependent approaches, which often fail to satisfactorily address the problem of ''gaps.'' In addition, most phylogenies are reconstructed unrooted, neglecting the power of direct rooting methods. Alignment-free methodologies lift most difficulties but require employing realistic evolutionary models. We argue that the discoveries of Asgards and ESPs, by themselves, do not rule out the 3D tree, which is strongly supported by comparative and evolutionary genomic analyses and vast genomic and biochemical superkingdom distinctions. Given uncertainties of retrodiction and interpretation difficulties, we conclude that the 3D view has not been falsified but instead has been strengthened by genomic analyses. In turn, the objections to the 2D model have not been lifted. The debate remains open. Also see the video abstract here: https://youtu.be/-6TBN0bubI8.