Abstract

The origin of eukaryotes is a fundamental, forbidding evolutionary puzzle. Comparative genomic analysis clearly shows that the last eukaryotic common ancestor (LECA) possessed most of the signature complex features of modern eukaryotic cells, in particular the mitochondria, the endomembrane system including the nucleus, an advanced cytoskeleton and the ubiquitin network. Numerous duplications of ancestral genes, e.g. DNA polymerases, RNA polymerases and proteasome subunits, also can be traced back to the LECA. Thus, the LECA was not a primitive organism and its emergence must have resulted from extensive evolution towards cellular complexity. However, the scenario of eukaryogenesis, and in particular the relationship between endosymbiosis and the origin of eukaryotes, is far from being clear. Four recent developments provide new clues to the likely routes of eukaryogenesis. First, evolutionary reconstructions suggest complex ancestors for most of the major groups of archaea, with the subsequent evolution dominated by gene loss. Second, homologues of signature eukaryotic proteins, such as actin and tubulin that form the core of the cytoskeleton or the ubiquitin system, have been detected in diverse archaea. The discovery of this ‘dispersed eukaryome’ implies that the archaeal ancestor of eukaryotes was a complex cell that might have been capable of a primitive form of phagocytosis and thus conducive to endosymbiont capture. Third, phylogenomic analyses converge on the origin of most eukaryotic genes of archaeal descent from within the archaeal evolutionary tree, specifically, the TACK superphylum. Fourth, evidence has been presented that the origin of the major archaeal phyla involved massive acquisition of bacterial genes. Taken together, these findings make the symbiogenetic scenario for the origin of eukaryotes considerably more plausible and the origin of the organizational complexity of eukaryotic cells more readily explainable than they appeared until recently.

Highlights

  • The origin of eukaryotes is one of the hardest and most intriguing problems in the study of the evolution of life, and arguably, in the whole of biology

  • The first line of evidence comes from the reconstructions of archaeal genome evolution which imply complex ancestral forms, with the subsequent evolution in most lineages dominated by gene loss

  • The related and perhaps most important clues come from the observations on the archaeal eukaryome that is scattered among diverse extant archaea

Read more

Summary

Introduction

The origin of eukaryotes is one of the hardest and most intriguing problems in the study of the evolution of life, and arguably, in the whole of biology. Independent phylogenomic analyses of multiple conserved genes consistently support a deeply rooted archaeal ‘TACK’ superphylum that originally encompassed Thaumarchaeota, Aigarchaeota, Crenarchaeota and Korarchaeota [80,81,82,83,84], but according to the latest comprehensive phylogenetic study, contains two novel phyla, Bathyarchaeota and Geoarchaeota (a subsequent re-analysis has suggested inclusion of Geoarchaeota into Crenarchaeota, denying this group the status of a new phylum (figure 1)) This new phylogeny includes another putative superphylum designated DPANN that combines Nanoarchaeota and other archaeal groups with small genomes. Could it be that most if not all major groups of archaea emerged from botched endosymbiotic events? Should that be the case, eukaryogenesis only differs in that the endosymbiont survived, retaining part of its physical and genetic identity

The scattered archaeal eukaryome
Conclusion
71. Nunoura T et al 2011 Insights into the evolution of
73. Castelle CJ et al 2015 Genomic expansion of

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.