Literature DB >> 23669449

Rooted phylogeny of the three superkingdoms.

Ajith Harish1, Anders Tunlid, Charles G Kurland.   

Abstract

The traditional bacterial rooting of the three superkingdoms in sequence-based gene trees is inconsistent with new phylogenetic reconstructions based on genome content of compact protein domains. We find that protein domains at the level of the SCOP superfamily (SF) from sequenced genomes implement with maximum parsimony fully resolved rooted trees. Such genome content trees identify archaea and bacteria (akaryotes) as sister clades that diverge from an akaryote common ancestor, LACA. Several eukaryote sister clades diverge from a eukaryote common ancestor, LECA. LACA and LECA descend in parallel from the most recent universal common ancestor (MRUCA), which is not a bacterium. Rather, MRUCA presents 75% of the unique SFs encoded by extant genomes of the three superkingdoms, each encoding a proteome that partially overlaps all others. This alone implies that the common ancestor to the superkingdoms was very complex. Such ancestral complexity is confirmed by phylogenetic reconstructions. In addition, the divergence of proteomes from the complex ancestor in each superkingdom is both reductive in numbers of unique SFs as well as cumulative in the abundance of surviving SFs. These data suggest that the common ancestor was not the first cell lineage and that modern global phylogeny is the crown of a "recently" re-rooted tree. We suggest that a bottlenecked survivor of an environmental collapse, which preceded the flourishing of the modern crown, seeded the current phylogenetic tree.
Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23669449     DOI: 10.1016/j.biochi.2013.04.016

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Biochimie        ISSN: 0300-9084            Impact factor:   4.079


  17 in total

Review 1.  Rooting the tree of life: the phylogenetic jury is still out.

Authors:  Richard Gouy; Denis Baurain; Hervé Philippe
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2015-09-26       Impact factor: 6.237

Review 2.  Eukaryotes first: how could that be?

Authors:  Carlos Mariscal; W Ford Doolittle
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2015-09-26       Impact factor: 6.237

Review 3.  The ring of life hypothesis for eukaryote origins is supported by multiple kinds of data.

Authors:  James McInerney; Davide Pisani; Mary J O'Connell
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2015-09-26       Impact factor: 6.237

4.  The relative ages of eukaryotes and akaryotes.

Authors:  David Penny; Lesley J Collins; Toni K Daly; Simon J Cox
Journal:  J Mol Evol       Date:  2014-09-02       Impact factor: 2.395

Review 5.  The pre-endosymbiont hypothesis: a new perspective on the origin and evolution of mitochondria.

Authors:  Michael W Gray
Journal:  Cold Spring Harb Perspect Biol       Date:  2014-03-01       Impact factor: 10.005

6.  How natural a kind is "eukaryote?".

Authors:  W Ford Doolittle
Journal:  Cold Spring Harb Perspect Biol       Date:  2014-06-02       Impact factor: 10.005

Review 7.  The universal tree of life: an update.

Authors:  Patrick Forterre
Journal:  Front Microbiol       Date:  2015-07-21       Impact factor: 5.640

Review 8.  The common ancestor of archaea and eukarya was not an archaeon.

Authors:  Patrick Forterre
Journal:  Archaea       Date:  2013-11-17       Impact factor: 3.273

9.  A phylogenomic data-driven exploration of viral origins and evolution.

Authors:  Arshan Nasir; Gustavo Caetano-Anollés
Journal:  Sci Adv       Date:  2015-09-25       Impact factor: 14.136

10.  Did Viruses Evolve As a Distinct Supergroup from Common Ancestors of Cells?

Authors:  Ajith Harish; Aare Abroi; Julian Gough; Charles Kurland
Journal:  Genome Biol Evol       Date:  2016-08-27       Impact factor: 3.416

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.