Abstract
Background: Locating the root node of the "tree of life" (ToL) is one of the hardest problems in phylogenetics. The root-node or the universal common ancestor (UCA) divides descendants into organismal domains. Two notable variants of the two-domains ToL (2D-ToL) have gained support recently. One 2D-ToL posits that eukaryotes (organisms with nuclei) and akaryotes (organisms without nuclei) are sister clades that diverged from the UCA and that Asgard archaea are sister to other archaea, whereas the other proposes that eukaryotes emerged within archaea and places Asgard archaea sister to eukaryotes. Williams et al. ( Nature Ecol. Evol. 4: 138-147; 2020) re-evaluated the data and methods that support the competing two-domains proposals and concluded that eukaryotes are the closest relatives of Asgard archaea. Critique: We argue that important aspects of estimating evolutionary relatedness and assessing phylogenetic signal in empirical data were overlooked. We focus on phylogenetic character reconstructions necessary to describe the UCA or its closest descendants in the absence of reliable fossils. It is well known that different character types present different perspectives on evolutionary history that relate to different phylogenetic depths. Which 2D-ToL is better supported depends on which kind of molecular features - protein-domains or their component amino acids - are better for resolving common ancestors at the roots of clades. In practice, this involves reconstructing character compositions of the ancestral nodes all the way back to the UCA. We believe the criticisms of 2D-ToL focus on superficial aspects of the data and reflects common misunderstandings of phylogenetic reconstructions using protein domains (folds). Clarifications: Models of protein domain evolution support more reliable phylogenetic reconstructions. In contrast, even the best available amino acid substitution models fail to resolve the archaeal radiation, despite employing thousands of genes. Therefore, the primary domains Eukaryotes and Akaryotes are better supported in a 2D-ToL.
Highlights
In the present article (Harish and Morrison, 2020), Harish and Morrison argue that prior work (Williams et al, 20201) to elucidate the structure of the deepest branches of the tree of life, was misled by reliance on particular data types and models which are unsuited to the task
Will more complex models minimize uncertainties? Williams et al.[4] argue that (i) directional-evolution models[12,13] may be unsuitable to predict the unique origin of homologous protein domains; and (ii) the akaryote 2D-ToL1–3 is an unsatisfactory explanation of the evolution of clade-specific compositions of protein domains (Figure 2)
Rooting the tree of Life will always be depedent on some sort of model that assumes this or that about gains and losses and convergent gains as there is no outgroup, but this just reinforces the authors' initial assertion in the paper that models that people imagine will drive results
Summary
Models of character evolution are essential to determine the evolutionary relationships of organisms. Unlike amino acids, are biochemically non-redundant (see below) and have proven to be excellent “genomic characters”[1,2] that support a robust akaryote 2D-ToL (Figure 1a) Though undervalued, they afford many conceptual and technical advantages over amino acids for reliable phylogenetic modeling[1,7,11] and estimating ancestral compositions[2,3,12]:. Williams et al.[4] argue that (i) directional-evolution models[12,13] may be unsuitable to predict the unique origin of homologous protein domains; and (ii) the akaryote 2D-ToL1–3 is an unsatisfactory explanation of the evolution of clade-specific compositions of protein domains (Figure 2) Their arguments seem to imply that phylogenetic signal can be recovered only by modeling evolution of amino acid composition.
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary 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 callDisclaimer: 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.
