The emerging view on the origin and early evolution of eukaryotic cells.
Journal
Nature
ISSN: 1476-4687
Titre abrégé: Nature
Pays: England
ID NLM: 0410462
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Sep 2024
Sep 2024
Historique:
received:
02
11
2023
accepted:
05
06
2024
medline:
12
9
2024
pubmed:
12
9
2024
entrez:
11
9
2024
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
The origin of the eukaryotic cell, with its compartmentalized nature and generally large size compared with bacterial and archaeal cells, represents a cornerstone event in the evolution of complex life on Earth. In a process referred to as eukaryogenesis, the eukaryotic cell is believed to have evolved between approximately 1.8 and 2.7 billion years ago from its archaeal ancestors, with a symbiosis with a bacterial (proto-mitochondrial) partner being a key event. In the tree of life, the branch separating the first from the last common ancestor of all eukaryotes is long and lacks evolutionary intermediates. As a result, the timing and driving forces of the emergence of complex eukaryotic features remain poorly understood. During the past decade, environmental and comparative genomic studies have revealed vital details about the identity and nature of the host cell and the proto-mitochondrial endosymbiont, enabling a critical reappraisal of hypotheses underlying the symbiotic origin of the eukaryotic cell. Here we outline our current understanding of the key players and events underlying the emergence of cellular complexity during the prokaryote-to-eukaryote transition and discuss potential avenues of future research that might provide new insights into the enigmatic origin of the eukaryotic cell.
Identifiants
pubmed: 39261613
doi: 10.1038/s41586-024-07677-6
pii: 10.1038/s41586-024-07677-6
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Review
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
295-305Informations de copyright
© 2024. Springer Nature Limited.
Références
Woese, C. R. & Fox, G. E. Phylogenetic structure of the prokaryotic domain: the primary kingdoms. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 74, 5088–5090 (1977). This seminal paper was the first to recognize archaea—then called archaebacteria—as a separate prokaryotic group from bacteria.
pubmed: 270744
pmcid: 432104
doi: 10.1073/pnas.74.11.5088
Woese, C. R. Bacterial evolution. Microbiol. Rev. 51, 221–271 (1987).
pubmed: 2439888
pmcid: 373105
doi: 10.1128/mr.51.2.221-271.1987
Woese, C. R., Kandler, O. & Wheelis, M. L. Towards a natural system of organisms: proposal for the domains archaea, bacteria, and eucarya. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 87, 4576–4579 (1990).
pubmed: 2112744
pmcid: 54159
doi: 10.1073/pnas.87.12.4576
Huet, J., Schnabel, R., Sentenac, A. & Zillig, W. Archaebacteria and eukaryotes possess DNA-dependent RNA polymerases of a common type. EMBO J. 2, 1291–1294 (1983).
pubmed: 10872322
pmcid: 555274
doi: 10.1002/j.1460-2075.1983.tb01583.x
Ouzounis, C. & Sander, C. TFIIB, an evolutionary link between the transcription machineries of archaebacteria and eukaryotes. Cell 71, 189–190 (1992).
pubmed: 1423586
doi: 10.1016/0092-8674(92)90347-F
Myllykallio, H. et al. Bacterial mode of replication with eukaryotic-like machinery in a hyperthermophilic archaeon. Science 288, 2212–2215 (2000).
pubmed: 10864870
doi: 10.1126/science.288.5474.2212
Williams, T. A., Cox, C. J., Foster, P. G., Szöllősi, G. J. & Embley, T. M. Phylogenomics provides robust support for a two-domains tree of life. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 4, 138–147 (2020). Using better-fitting models and additional in-depth analyses, this study scrutinized previous studies that reported 3D trees, resulting in robust 2D trees that show a close relationship between Heimdallarchaeia and eukaryotes.
pubmed: 31819234
doi: 10.1038/s41559-019-1040-x
Eme, L. et al. Inference and reconstruction of the heimdallarchaeial ancestry of eukaryotes. Nature 618, 992–999 (2023). This study presented the expanding diversity of Asgard archaea, the Hodarchaeales–sister relationship of eukaryotes based on elaborate phylogenomics, the presence of additional ESPs in Asgard genomes and the reconstructed gene content of Asgard ancestral nodes.
pubmed: 37316666
pmcid: 10307638
doi: 10.1038/s41586-023-06186-2
Williams, T. A., Foster, P. G., Cox, C. J. & Embley, T. M. An archaeal origin of eukaryotes supports only two primary domains of life. Nature 504, 231–236 (2013).
pubmed: 24336283
doi: 10.1038/nature12779
Betts, H. C. et al. Integrated genomic and fossil evidence illuminates life’s early evolution and eukaryote origin. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 2, 1556–1562 (2018).
pubmed: 30127539
pmcid: 6152910
doi: 10.1038/s41559-018-0644-x
Mahendrarajah, T. A. et al. ATP synthase evolution on a cross-braced dated tree of life. Nat. Commun. 14, 7456 (2023).
pubmed: 37978174
pmcid: 10656485
doi: 10.1038/s41467-023-42924-w
Eme, L., Sharpe, S. C., Brown, M. W. & Roger, A. J. On the age of eukaryotes: evaluating evidence from fossils and molecular clocks. Cold Spring Harb. Perspect. Biol. 6, a016139 (2014).
pubmed: 25085908
pmcid: 4107988
doi: 10.1101/cshperspect.a016139
Cohen, P. A. & Kodner, R. B. The earliest history of eukaryotic life: uncovering an evolutionary story through the integration of biological and geological data. Trends Ecol. Evol. 37, 246–256 (2022).
pubmed: 34949483
doi: 10.1016/j.tree.2021.11.005
Brocks, J. J. et al. Lost world of complex life and the late rise of the eukaryotic crown. Nature 618, 767–773 (2023).
pubmed: 37286610
doi: 10.1038/s41586-023-06170-w
Porter, S. M. & Riedman, L. A. Frameworks for interpreting the early fossil record of eukaryotes. Annu. Rev. Microbiol. 77, 173–191 (2023).
pubmed: 37713454
doi: 10.1146/annurev-micro-032421-113254
Koumandou, V. L. et al. Molecular paleontology and complexity in the last eukaryotic common ancestor. Crit. Rev. Biochem. Mol. Biol. 48, 373–396 (2013).
pubmed: 23895660
pmcid: 3791482
doi: 10.3109/10409238.2013.821444
Donoghue, P. C. J. et al. Defining eukaryotes to dissect eukaryogenesis. Curr. Biol. 33, R919–R929 (2023).
pubmed: 37699353
doi: 10.1016/j.cub.2023.07.048
Makarova, K. S., Wolf, Y. I., Mekhedov, S. L., Mirkin, B. G. & Koonin, E. V. Ancestral paralogs and pseudoparalogs and their role in the emergence of the eukaryotic cell. Nucleic Acids Res. 33, 4626–4638 (2005). This paper provided a first systematic estimate of the number of gene acquisitions, duplications and inventions during eukaryogenesis based on the homology between eukaryotic clusters of orthologues and between eukaryotic and prokaryotic gene clusters.
pubmed: 16106042
pmcid: 1187821
doi: 10.1093/nar/gki775
O’Malley, M. A., Leger, M. M., Wideman, J. G. & Ruiz-Trillo, I. Concepts of the last eukaryotic common ancestor. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 3, 338–344 (2019).
pubmed: 30778187
doi: 10.1038/s41559-019-0796-3
Eme, L., Spang, A., Lombard, J., Stairs, C. W. & Ettema, T. J. G. Archaea and the origin of eukaryotes. Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 15, 711–723 (2017).
pubmed: 29123225
doi: 10.1038/nrmicro.2017.133
Dacks, J. B. et al. The changing view of eukaryogenesis—fossils, cells, lineages and how they all come together. J. Cell Sci. 129, 3695–3703 (2016).
pubmed: 27672020
doi: 10.1242/jcs.178566
Woese, C. R. & Olsen, G. J. Archaebacterial phylogeny: perspectives on the Urkingdoms. Syst. Appl. Microbiol. 7, 161–177 (1986).
pubmed: 11542063
doi: 10.1016/S0723-2020(86)80001-7
Lake, J. A. Origin of the eukaryotic nucleus determined by rate-invariant analysis of rRNA sequences. Nature 331, 184–186 (1988).
pubmed: 3340165
doi: 10.1038/331184a0
Gouy, M. & Li, W.-H. Phylogenetic analysis based on rRNA sequences supports the archaebacterial rather than the eocyte tree. Nature 339, 145–147 (1989).
pubmed: 2497353
doi: 10.1038/339145a0
Iwabe, N., Kuma, K., Hasegawa, M., Osawa, S. & Miyata, T. Evolutionary relationship of archaebacteria, eubacteria, and eukaryotes inferred from phylogenetic trees of duplicated genes. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 86, 9355–9359 (1989).
pubmed: 2531898
pmcid: 298494
doi: 10.1073/pnas.86.23.9355
Baldauf, S. L., Palmer, J. D. & Doolittle, W. F. The root of the universal tree and the origin of eukaryotes based on elongation factor phylogeny. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 93, 7749–7754 (1996).
pubmed: 8755547
pmcid: 38819
doi: 10.1073/pnas.93.15.7749
Lake, J. A., Henderson, E., Oakes, M. & Clark, M. W. Eocytes: a new ribosome structure indicates a kingdom with a close relationship to eukaryotes. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 81, 3786–3790 (1984). On the basis of ribosome structures, the authors of this study postulated the eocyte hypothesis, in which eukaryotes are most closely related to a specific group of archaea (the 2D tree).
pubmed: 6587394
pmcid: 345305
doi: 10.1073/pnas.81.12.3786
Rivera, M. C. & Lake, J. A. Evidence that eukaryotes and eocyte prokaryotes are immediate relatives. Science 257, 74–76 (1992).
pubmed: 1621096
doi: 10.1126/science.1621096
Brown, J. R., Douady, C. J., Italia, M. J., Marshall, W. E. & Stanhope, M. J. Universal trees based on large combined protein sequence data sets. Nat. Genet. 28, 281–285 (2001).
pubmed: 11431701
doi: 10.1038/90129
Ciccarelli, F. D. et al. Toward automatic reconstruction of a highly resolved tree of life. Science 311, 1283–1287 (2006).
pubmed: 16513982
doi: 10.1126/science.1123061
Cox, C. J., Foster, P. G., Hirt, R. P., Harris, S. R. & Embley, T. M. The archaebacterial origin of eukaryotes. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 105, 20356–20361 (2008). Using phylogenetic models that take compositional changes into account, the 2D tree was robustly recovered for the first time in this phylogenomics study.
pubmed: 19073919
pmcid: 2629343
doi: 10.1073/pnas.0810647105
Foster, P. G., Cox, C. J. & Embley, T. M. The primary divisions of life: a phylogenomic approach employing composition-heterogeneous methods. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B 364, 2197–2207 (2009).
pubmed: 19571240
pmcid: 2873002
doi: 10.1098/rstb.2009.0034
Guy, L. & Ettema, T. J. G. The archaeal ‘TACK’ superphylum and the origin of eukaryotes. Trends Microbiol. 19, 580–587 (2011).
pubmed: 22018741
doi: 10.1016/j.tim.2011.09.002
Kelly, S., Wickstead, B. & Gull, K. Archaeal phylogenomics provides evidence in support of a methanogenic origin of the archaea and a thaumarchaeal origin for the eukaryotes. Proc. R. Soc. B 278, 1009–1018 (2011).
pubmed: 20880885
doi: 10.1098/rspb.2010.1427
Lasek-Nesselquist, E. & Gogarten, J. P. The effects of model choice and mitigating bias on the ribosomal tree of life. Mol. Phylogenetics Evol. 69, 17–38 (2013).
doi: 10.1016/j.ympev.2013.05.006
Guy, L., Saw, J. H. & Ettema, T. J. G. The archaeal legacy of eukaryotes: a phylogenomic perspective. Cold Spring Harb. Perspect. Biol. 6, a016022 (2014).
pubmed: 24993577
pmcid: 4176008
doi: 10.1101/cshperspect.a016022
Williams, T. A. & Embley, T. M. Archaeal “dark matter” and the origin of eukaryotes. Genome Biol. Evol. 6, 474–481 (2014).
pubmed: 24532674
pmcid: 3971582
doi: 10.1093/gbe/evu031
Raymann, K., Brochier-Armanet, C. & Gribaldo, S. The two-domain tree of life is linked to a new root for the Archaea. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 112, 6670–6675 (2015).
pubmed: 25964353
pmcid: 4450401
doi: 10.1073/pnas.1420858112
Spang, A. et al. Complex archaea that bridge the gap between prokaryotes and eukaryotes. Nature 521, 173–179 (2015). This paper described the discovery of the first Asgard archaeon, Lokiarchaeum, and showed both its close relationship with eukaryotes and the presence of multiple new ESPs in its genome.
pubmed: 25945739
pmcid: 4444528
doi: 10.1038/nature14447
Seitz, K. W., Lazar, C. S., Hinrichs, K.-U., Teske, A. P. & Baker, B. J. Genomic reconstruction of a novel, deeply branched sediment archaeal phylum with pathways for acetogenesis and sulfur reduction. ISME J. 10, 1696–1705 (2016).
pubmed: 26824177
pmcid: 4918440
doi: 10.1038/ismej.2015.233
Zaremba-Niedzwiedzka, K. et al. Asgard archaea illuminate the origin of eukaryotic cellular complexity. Nature 541, 353–358 (2017).
pubmed: 28077874
doi: 10.1038/nature21031
Spang, A. et al. Proposal of the reverse flow model for the origin of the eukaryotic cell based on comparative analyses of Asgard archaeal metabolism. Nat. Microbiol. 4, 1138–1148 (2019).
pubmed: 30936488
doi: 10.1038/s41564-019-0406-9
Seitz, K. W. et al. Asgard archaea capable of anaerobic hydrocarbon cycling. Nat. Commun. 10, 1822 (2019).
pubmed: 31015394
pmcid: 6478937
doi: 10.1038/s41467-019-09364-x
Imachi, H. et al. Isolation of an archaeon at the prokaryote–eukaryote interface. Nature 577, 519–525 (2020). This study presented the first cultured Asgard archaeon, the lokiarchaeon Candidatus P. syntrophicum, showing remarkable cell physiology (see also ref. 50).
pubmed: 31942073
pmcid: 7015854
doi: 10.1038/s41586-019-1916-6
Liu, Y. et al. Expanded diversity of Asgard archaea and their relationships with eukaryotes. Nature 593, 553–557 (2021).
pubmed: 33911286
pmcid: 11165668
doi: 10.1038/s41586-021-03494-3
Sun, J. et al. Recoding of stop codons expands the metabolic potential of two novel Asgardarchaeota lineages. ISME Commun. 1, 30 (2021).
pubmed: 36739331
pmcid: 9723677
doi: 10.1038/s43705-021-00032-0
Aouad, M. et al. A divide-and-conquer phylogenomic approach based on character supermatrices resolves early steps in the evolution of the archaea. BMC Ecol. Evo. 22, 1 (2022).
doi: 10.1186/s12862-021-01952-0
Wu, F. et al. Unique mobile elements and scalable gene flow at the prokaryote–eukaryote boundary revealed by circularized Asgard archaea genomes. Nat. Microbiol. 7, 200–212 (2022).
pubmed: 35027677
pmcid: 8813620
doi: 10.1038/s41564-021-01039-y
Xie, R. et al. Expanding Asgard members in the domain of archaea sheds new light on the origin of eukaryotes. Sci. China Life Sci. 65, 818–829 (2022).
pubmed: 34378142
doi: 10.1007/s11427-021-1969-6
Rodrigues-Oliveira, T. et al. Actin cytoskeleton and complex cell architecture in an Asgard archaeon. Nature 613, 332–339 (2023).
pubmed: 36544020
doi: 10.1038/s41586-022-05550-y
Da Cunha, V., Gaia, M., Gadelle, D., Nasir, A. & Forterre, P. Lokiarchaea are close relatives of Euryarchaeota, not bridging the gap between prokaryotes and eukaryotes. PLoS Genet. 13, e1006810 (2017).
pubmed: 28604769
pmcid: 5484517
doi: 10.1371/journal.pgen.1006810
Stairs, C. W. & Ettema, T. J. G. The archaeal roots of the eukaryotic dynamic actin cytoskeleton. Curr. Biol. 30, R521–R526 (2020).
pubmed: 32428493
doi: 10.1016/j.cub.2020.02.074
Klinger, C. M., Spang, A., Dacks, J. B. & Ettema, T. J. G. Tracing the archaeal origins of eukaryotic membrane-trafficking system building blocks. Mol. Biol. Evol. 33, 1528–1541 (2016).
pubmed: 26893300
doi: 10.1093/molbev/msw034
Vosseberg, J. et al. Timing the origin of eukaryotic cellular complexity with ancient duplications. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 5, 92–100 (2021). This paper reconstructed the numerous gene duplications that occurred during eukaryogenesis from phylogenetic trees and inferred their relative timing, also in comparison with gene transfer events, using the branch lengths approach adapted from ref. 127.
pubmed: 33106602
doi: 10.1038/s41559-020-01320-z
Szöllősi, G. J., Rosikiewicz, W., Boussau, B., Tannier, E. & Daubin, V. Efficient exploration of the space of reconciled gene trees. Syst. Biol. 62, 901–912 (2013).
pubmed: 23925510
pmcid: 3797637
doi: 10.1093/sysbio/syt054
Williams, T. A. et al. Parameter estimation and species tree rooting using ALE and GeneRax. Genome Biol. Evol. 15, evad134 (2023).
pubmed: 37463417
pmcid: 10373948
doi: 10.1093/gbe/evad134
Akıl, C. & Robinson, R. C. Genomes of Asgard archaea encode profilins that regulate actin. Nature 562, 439–443 (2018). This article is the first of a series of biochemical papers investigating the molecular function of Asgard ESPs by expressing them in heterologous systems, in this case focusing on the interaction between Asgard profilin and eukaryotic actin.
pubmed: 30283132
doi: 10.1038/s41586-018-0548-6
Akıl, C. et al. Insights into the evolution of regulated actin dynamics via characterization of primitive gelsolin/cofilin proteins from Asgard archaea. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 117, 19904–19913 (2020).
pubmed: 32747565
pmcid: 7444086
doi: 10.1073/pnas.2009167117
Survery, S. et al. Heimdallarchaea encodes profilin with eukaryotic-like actin regulation and polyproline binding. Commun. Biol. 4, 1024 (2021).
pubmed: 34471213
pmcid: 8410842
doi: 10.1038/s42003-021-02543-x
Akıl, C. et al. Structure and dynamics of Odinarchaeota tubulin and the implications for eukaryotic microtubule evolution. Sci. Adv. 8, eabm2225 (2022).
pubmed: 35333570
pmcid: 8956254
doi: 10.1126/sciadv.abm2225
Leung, K. F., Dacks, J. B. & Field, M. C. Evolution of the multivesicular body ESCRT machinery; retention across the eukaryotic lineage. Traffic 9, 1698–1716 (2008).
pubmed: 18637903
doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0854.2008.00797.x
Hatano, T. et al. Asgard archaea shed light on the evolutionary origins of the eukaryotic ubiquitin–ESCRT machinery. Nat. Commun. 13, 3398 (2022).
pubmed: 35697693
pmcid: 9192718
doi: 10.1038/s41467-022-30656-2
Neveu, E., Khalifeh, D., Salamin, N. & Fasshauer, D. Prototypic SNARE proteins are encoded in the genomes of Heimdallarchaeota, potentially bridging the gap between the prokaryotes and eukaryotes. Curr. Biol. 30, 2468–2480 (2020).
pubmed: 32442459
doi: 10.1016/j.cub.2020.04.060
Avcı, B. et al. Spatial separation of ribosomes and DNA in Asgard archaeal cells. ISME J. 16, 606–610 (2022).
pubmed: 34465898
doi: 10.1038/s41396-021-01098-3
Gray, M. W., Burger, G. & Lang, B. F. Mitochondrial evolution. Science 283, 1476–1481 (1999).
pubmed: 10066161
doi: 10.1126/science.283.5407.1476
Roger, A. J., Muñoz-Gómez, S. A. & Kamikawa, R. The origin and diversification of mitochondria. Curr. Biol. 27, R1177–R1192 (2017).
pubmed: 29112874
doi: 10.1016/j.cub.2017.09.015
Yang, D., Oyaizu, Y., Oyaizu, H., Olsen, G. J. & Woese, C. R. Mitochondrial origins. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 82, 4443–4447 (1985).
pubmed: 3892535
pmcid: 391117
doi: 10.1073/pnas.82.13.4443
Fitzpatrick, D. A., Creevey, C. J. & McInerney, J. O. Genome phylogenies indicate a meaningful α-proteobacterial phylogeny and support a grouping of the mitochondria with the Rickettsiales. Mol. Biol. Evol. 23, 74–85 (2006).
pubmed: 16151187
doi: 10.1093/molbev/msj009
Williams, K. P., Sobral, B. W. & Dickerman, A. W. A robust species tree for the Alphaproteobacteria. J. Bacteriol. 189, 4578–4586 (2007).
pubmed: 17483224
pmcid: 1913456
doi: 10.1128/JB.00269-07
Thrash, J. C. et al. Phylogenomic evidence for a common ancestor of mitochondria and the SAR11 clade. Sci. Rep. 1, 13 (2011).
pubmed: 22355532
pmcid: 3216501
doi: 10.1038/srep00013
Georgiades, K., Madoui, M.-A., Le, P., Robert, C. & Raoult, D. Phylogenomic analysis of Odyssella thessalonicensis fortifies the common origin of Rickettsiales, Pelagibacter ubique and Reclimonas americana mitochondrion. PLoS ONE 6, e24857 (2011).
pubmed: 21957463
pmcid: 3177885
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0024857
Sassera, D. et al. Phylogenomic evidence for the presence of a flagellum and cbb
pubmed: 21690562
doi: 10.1093/molbev/msr159
Rodríguez-Ezpeleta, N. & Embley, T. M. The SAR11 group of alpha-proteobacteria is not related to the origin of mitochondria. PLoS ONE 7, e30520 (2012).
pubmed: 22291975
pmcid: 3264578
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0030520
Viklund, J., Martijn, J., Ettema, T. J. G. & Andersson, S. G. E. Comparative and phylogenomic evidence that the alphaproteobacterium HIMB59 is not a member of the oceanic SAR11 clade. PLoS ONE 8, e78858 (2013).
pubmed: 24223857
pmcid: 3815206
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0078858
Wang, Z. & Wu, M. Phylogenomic reconstruction indicates mitochondrial ancestor was an energy parasite. PLoS ONE 9, e110685 (2014).
pubmed: 25333787
pmcid: 4198247
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0110685
Wang, Z. & Wu, M. An integrated phylogenomic approach toward pinpointing the origin of mitochondria. Sci. Rep. 5, 7949 (2015).
pubmed: 25609566
pmcid: 4302308
doi: 10.1038/srep07949
Martijn, J., Vosseberg, J., Guy, L., Offre, P. & Ettema, T. J. G. Deep mitochondrial origin outside the sampled Alphaproteobacteria. Nature 557, 101–105 (2018). This study recovered several novel marine alphaproteobacterial groups and performed careful phylogenomic analyses to address long-branch and compositional artefacts, revealing the novel Alphaproteobacteria–sister position of mitochondria.
pubmed: 29695865
doi: 10.1038/s41586-018-0059-5
Fan, L. et al. Phylogenetic analyses with systematic taxon sampling show that mitochondria branch within Alphaproteobacteria. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 4, 1213–1219 (2020).
pubmed: 32661403
doi: 10.1038/s41559-020-1239-x
Wang, S. & Luo, H. Dating Alphaproteobacteria evolution with eukaryotic fossils. Nat. Commun. 12, 3324 (2021).
pubmed: 34083540
pmcid: 8175736
doi: 10.1038/s41467-021-23645-4
Muñoz-Gómez, S. A. et al. Site-and-branch-heterogeneous analyses of an expanded dataset favour mitochondria as sister to known Alphaproteobacteria. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 6, 253–262 (2022). This study corroborated the Alphaproteobacteria–sister relationship of mitochondria using a newly developed model that accounts for compositional heterogeneity across sites and branches.
pubmed: 35027725
doi: 10.1038/s41559-021-01638-2
Martijn, J., Vosseberg, J., Guy, L., Offre, P. & Ettema, T. J. G. Phylogenetic affiliation of mitochondria with Alpha-II and Rickettsiales is an artefact. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 6, 1829–1831 (2022).
pubmed: 36280780
doi: 10.1038/s41559-022-01871-3
Fan, L. et al. Reply to: Phylogenetic affiliation of mitochondria with Alpha-II and Rickettsiales is an artefact. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 6, 1832–1835 (2022).
pubmed: 36280779
doi: 10.1038/s41559-022-01896-8
Ettema, T. J. G. & Andersson, S. G. E. The α-proteobacteria: the Darwin finches of the bacterial world. Biol. Lett. 5, 429–432 (2009).
pubmed: 19324639
pmcid: 2679921
doi: 10.1098/rsbl.2008.0793
Martin, W. F., Garg, S. & Zimorski, V. Endosymbiotic theories for eukaryote origin. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B 370, 20140330 (2015).
pubmed: 26323761
pmcid: 4571569
doi: 10.1098/rstb.2014.0330
Martin, W. & Müller, M. The hydrogen hypothesis for the first eukaryote. Nature 392, 37–41 (1998).
pubmed: 9510246
doi: 10.1038/32096
Sousa, F. L., Neukirchen, S., Allen, J. F., Lane, N. & Martin, W. F. Lokiarchaeon is hydrogen dependent. Nat. Microbiol. 1, 16034 (2016).
pubmed: 27572645
doi: 10.1038/nmicrobiol.2016.34
Moreira, D. & López-García, P. Symbiosis between methanogenic archaea and δ-proteobacteria as the origin of eukaryotes: the syntrophic hypothesis. J. Mol. Evol. 47, 517–530 (1998).
pubmed: 9797402
doi: 10.1007/PL00006408
López-García, P. & Moreira, D. The syntrophy hypothesis for the origin of eukaryotes revisited. Nat. Microbiol. 5, 655–667 (2020).
pubmed: 32341569
doi: 10.1038/s41564-020-0710-4
Bulzu, P.-A. et al. Casting light on Asgardarchaeota metabolism in a sunlit microoxic niche. Nat. Microbiol. 4, 1129–1137 (2019).
pubmed: 30936485
doi: 10.1038/s41564-019-0404-y
Mills, D. B. et al. Eukaryogenesis and oxygen in Earth history. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 6, 520–532 (2022).
pubmed: 35449457
doi: 10.1038/s41559-022-01733-y
Muñoz-Gómez, S. A., Wideman, J. G., Roger, A. J. & Slamovits, C. H. The origin of mitochondrial cristae from Alphaproteobacteria. Mol. Biol. Evol. 34, 943–956 (2017).
pubmed: 28087774
Gabaldón, T. & Huynen, M. A. Reconstruction of the proto-mitochondrial metabolism. Science 301, 609–609 (2003).
pubmed: 12893934
doi: 10.1126/science.1085463
Gabaldón, T. & Huynen, M. A. From endosymbiont to host-controlled organelle: the hijacking of mitochondrial protein synthesis and metabolism. PLoS Comput. Biol. 3, e219 (2007).
pubmed: 17983265
pmcid: 2062474
doi: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.0030219
Stairs, C. W., Leger, M. M. & Roger, A. J. Diversity and origins of anaerobic metabolism in mitochondria and related organelles. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B 370, 20140326 (2015).
pubmed: 26323757
pmcid: 4571565
doi: 10.1098/rstb.2014.0326
Stairs, C. W. et al. Chlamydial contribution to anaerobic metabolism during eukaryotic evolution. Sci. Adv. 6, eabb7258 (2020).
pubmed: 32923644
pmcid: 7449678
doi: 10.1126/sciadv.abb7258
Speijer, D. Alternating terminal electron-acceptors at the basis of symbiogenesis: How oxygen ignited eukaryotic evolution. BioEssays 39, 1600174 (2017).
doi: 10.1002/bies.201600174
Cavalier-Smith, T. The phagotrophic origin of eukaryotes and phylogenetic classification of Protozoa. Int. J. Syst. Evol. Microbiol. 52, 297–354 (2002).
pubmed: 11931142
doi: 10.1099/00207713-52-2-297
Martijn, J. & Ettema, T. J. G. From archaeon to eukaryote: the evolutionary dark ages of the eukaryotic cell. Biochem. Soc. Trans. 41, 451–457 (2013).
pubmed: 23356327
doi: 10.1042/BST20120292
Zachar, I., Szilágyi, A., Számadó, S. & Szathmáry, E. Farming the mitochondrial ancestor as a model of endosymbiotic establishment by natural selection. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 115, E1504–E1510 (2018).
pubmed: 29382768
pmcid: 5816194
doi: 10.1073/pnas.1718707115
Baum, D. A. & Baum, B. An inside-out origin for the eukaryotic cell. BMC Biol. 12, 76 (2014).
pubmed: 25350791
pmcid: 4210606
doi: 10.1186/s12915-014-0076-2
Mills, D. B. The origin of phagocytosis in Earth history. Interface Focus 10, 20200019 (2020).
pubmed: 32642057
pmcid: 7333901
doi: 10.1098/rsfs.2020.0019
Bremer, N., Tria, F. D. K., Skejo, J., Garg, S. G. & Martin, W. F. Ancestral state reconstructions trace mitochondria but not phagocytosis to the last eukaryotic common ancestor. Genome Biol. Evol. 14, evac079 (2022).
pubmed: 35642316
pmcid: 9185374
doi: 10.1093/gbe/evac079
Yutin, N., Wolf, M. Y., Wolf, Y. I. & Koonin, E. V. The origins of phagocytosis and eukaryogenesis. Biol. Direct 4, 9 (2009).
pubmed: 19245710
pmcid: 2651865
doi: 10.1186/1745-6150-4-9
Hugoson, E., Guliaev, A., Ammunét, T. & Guy, L. Host adaptation in Legionellales Is 1.9 Ga, coincident with eukaryogenesis. Mol. Biol. Evol. 39, msac037 (2022).
pubmed: 35167692
pmcid: 8896642
doi: 10.1093/molbev/msac037
Martin, W. F., Tielens, A. G. M., Mentel, M., Garg, S. G. & Gould, S. B. The physiology of phagocytosis in the context of mitochondrial origin. Microbiol. Mol. Biol. Rev. 81, e00008–e00017 (2017).
pubmed: 28615286
pmcid: 5584316
doi: 10.1128/MMBR.00008-17
Hampl, V., Čepička, I. & Eliáš, M. Was the mitochondrion necessary to start eukaryogenesis? Trends Microbiol. 27, 96–104 (2019).
pubmed: 30466901
doi: 10.1016/j.tim.2018.10.005
Shiratori, T., Suzuki, S., Kakizawa, Y. & Ishida, K. Phagocytosis-like cell engulfment by a planctomycete bacterium. Nat. Commun. 10, 5529 (2019).
pubmed: 31827088
pmcid: 6906331
doi: 10.1038/s41467-019-13499-2
Burns, J. A., Pittis, A. A. & Kim, E. Gene-based predictive models of trophic modes suggest Asgard archaea are not phagocytotic. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 2, 697–704 (2018).
pubmed: 29459706
doi: 10.1038/s41559-018-0477-7
Cavalier-Smith, T. Archaebacteria and archezoa. Nature 339, 100–101 (1989).
doi: 10.1038/339100a0
Embley, T. M. & Hirt, R. P. Early branching eukaryotes? Curr. Opin. Genet. Dev. 8, 624–629 (1998).
pubmed: 9914207
doi: 10.1016/S0959-437X(98)80029-4
Ettema, T. J. G. Evolution: mitochondria in the second act. Nature 531, 39–40 (2016).
pubmed: 26840482
doi: 10.1038/nature16876
Lane, N. & Martin, W. The energetics of genome complexity. Nature 467, 929–934 (2010).
pubmed: 20962839
doi: 10.1038/nature09486
Lane, N. Energetics and genetics across the prokaryote–eukaryote divide. Biol. Direct 6, 35 (2011).
pubmed: 21714941
pmcid: 3152533
doi: 10.1186/1745-6150-6-35
Booth, A. & Doolittle, W. F. Eukaryogenesis, how special really? Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 112, 10278–10285 (2015).
pubmed: 25883267
pmcid: 4547297
doi: 10.1073/pnas.1421376112
Lynch, M. & Marinov, G. K. The bioenergetic costs of a gene. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 112, 15690–15695 (2015).
pubmed: 26575626
pmcid: 4697398
doi: 10.1073/pnas.1514974112
Koonin, E. V. Energetics and population genetics at the root of eukaryotic cellular and genomic complexity. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 112, 15777–15778 (2015).
pubmed: 26699503
pmcid: 4703004
doi: 10.1073/pnas.1520869112
Lynch, M. & Marinov, G. K. Membranes, energetics, and evolution across the prokaryote–eukaryote divide. eLife 6, e20437 (2017).
pubmed: 28300533
pmcid: 5354521
doi: 10.7554/eLife.20437
Lane, N. Serial endosymbiosis or singular event at the origin of eukaryotes? J. Theor. Biol. 434, 58–67 (2017).
pubmed: 28501637
doi: 10.1016/j.jtbi.2017.04.031
Chiyomaru, K. & Takemoto, K. Revisiting the hypothesis of an energetic barrier to genome complexity between eukaryotes and prokaryotes. R. Soc. Open Sci. 7, 191859 (2020).
pubmed: 32257343
pmcid: 7062059
doi: 10.1098/rsos.191859
Lane, N. How energy flow shapes cell evolution. Curr. Biol. 30, R471–R476 (2020).
pubmed: 32428484
doi: 10.1016/j.cub.2020.03.055
Schavemaker, P. E. & Muñoz-Gómez, S. A. The role of mitochondrial energetics in the origin and diversification of eukaryotes. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 6, 1307–1317 (2022).
pubmed: 35915152
pmcid: 9575660
doi: 10.1038/s41559-022-01833-9
Volland, J.-M. et al. A centimeter-long bacterium with DNA contained in metabolically active, membrane-bound organelles. Science 376, 1453–1458 (2022).
pubmed: 35737788
doi: 10.1126/science.abb3634
Greening, C. & Lithgow, T. Formation and function of bacterial organelles. Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 18, 677–689 (2020).
pubmed: 32710089
doi: 10.1038/s41579-020-0413-0
Küper, U., Meyer, C., Müller, V., Rachel, R. & Huber, H. Energized outer membrane and spatial separation of metabolic processes in the hyperthermophilic Archaeon Ignicoccus hospitalis. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 107, 3152–3156 (2010).
pubmed: 20133662
pmcid: 2840320
doi: 10.1073/pnas.0911711107
Wiegand, S., Jogler, M. & Jogler, C. On the maverick planctomycetes. FEMS Microbiol. Rev. 42, 739–760 (2018).
pubmed: 30052954
doi: 10.1093/femsre/fuy029
Katayama, T. et al. Isolation of a member of the candidate phylum ‘Atribacteria’ reveals a unique cell membrane structure. Nat. Commun. 11, 6381 (2020).
pubmed: 33318506
pmcid: 7736352
doi: 10.1038/s41467-020-20149-5
Pittis, A. A. & Gabaldón, T. Late acquisition of mitochondria by a host with chimaeric prokaryotic ancestry. Nature 531, 101–104 (2016). This study presented a novel approach to use phylogenetic branch lengths to infer the relative timing of gene acquisitions during eukaryogenesis, pointing to rampant bacterial gene flow to stem eukaryotes prior to the proto-mitochondrial acquisition.
pubmed: 26840490
pmcid: 4780264
doi: 10.1038/nature16941
Gabaldón, T. Relative timing of mitochondrial endosymbiosis and the “pre-mitochondrial symbioses” hypothesis. IUBMB Life 70, 1188–1196 (2018).
pubmed: 30358047
pmcid: 6282991
doi: 10.1002/iub.1950
Vosseberg, J., Schinkel, M., Gremmen, S. & Snel, B. The spread of the first introns in proto-eukaryotic paralogs. Commun. Biol. 5, 476 (2022).
pubmed: 35589959
pmcid: 9120149
doi: 10.1038/s42003-022-03426-5
Susko, E., Steel, M. & Roger, A. J. Conditions under which distributions of edge length ratios on phylogenetic trees can be used to order evolutionary events. J. Theor. Biol. 526, 110788 (2021).
pubmed: 34097914
doi: 10.1016/j.jtbi.2021.110788
Tricou, T., Tannier, E. & de Vienne, D. M. Ghost lineages can invalidate or even reverse findings regarding gene flow. PLoS Biol. 20, e3001776 (2022).
pubmed: 36103518
pmcid: 9473628
doi: 10.1371/journal.pbio.3001776
Fritz-Laylin, L. K. et al. The genome of Naegleria gruberi illuminates early eukaryotic versatility. Cell 140, 631–642 (2010).
pubmed: 20211133
doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2010.01.032
Huynen, M. A., Duarte, I. & Szklarczyk, R. Loss, replacement and gain of proteins at the origin of the mitochondria. Biochim. Biophys. Acta 1827, 224–231 (2013).
pubmed: 22902511
doi: 10.1016/j.bbabio.2012.08.001
Timmis, J. N., Ayliffe, M. A., Huang, C. Y. & Martin, W. Endosymbiotic gene transfer: organelle genomes forge eukaryotic chromosomes. Nat. Rev. Genet. 5, 123–135 (2004).
pubmed: 14735123
doi: 10.1038/nrg1271
Karnkowska, A. et al. A eukaryote without a mitochondrial organelle. Curr. Biol. 26, 1274–1284 (2016).
pubmed: 27185558
doi: 10.1016/j.cub.2016.03.053
Gabaldón, T. et al. Origin and evolution of the peroxisomal proteome. Biol. Direct 1, 8 (2006).
pubmed: 16556314
pmcid: 1472686
doi: 10.1186/1745-6150-1-8
Rochette, N. C., Brochier-Armanet, C. & Gouy, M. Phylogenomic test of the hypotheses for the evolutionary origin of eukaryotes. Mol. Biol. Evol. 31, 832–845 (2014).
pubmed: 24398320
pmcid: 3969559
doi: 10.1093/molbev/mst272
Irwin, N. A. T., Pittis, A. A., Richards, T. A. & Keeling, P. J. Systematic evaluation of horizontal gene transfer between eukaryotes and viruses. Nat. Microbiol. 7, 327–336 (2022).
pubmed: 34972821
doi: 10.1038/s41564-021-01026-3
Ku, C. et al. Endosymbiotic origin and differential loss of eukaryotic genes. Nature 524, 427–432 (2015).
pubmed: 26287458
doi: 10.1038/nature14963
Gould, S. B., Garg, S. G. & Martin, W. F. Bacterial vesicle secretion and the evolutionary origin of the eukaryotic endomembrane system. Trends Microbiol. 24, 525–534 (2016).
pubmed: 27040918
doi: 10.1016/j.tim.2016.03.005
Coleman, G. A., Pancost, R. D. & Williams, T. A. Investigating the origins of membrane phospholipid biosynthesis genes using outgroup-free rooting. Genome Biol. Evol. 11, 883–898 (2019).
pubmed: 30753429
pmcid: 6431249
doi: 10.1093/gbe/evz034
Volker, C. & Lupas, A. N. in The Proteasome–Ubiquitin Protein Degradation Pathway (eds Zwickl, P. & Baumeister, W.) 1–22 (Springer, 2002).
Vosseberg, J., Stolker, D., von der Dunk, S. H. A. & Snel, B. Integrating phylogenetics with intron positions illuminates the origin of the complex spliceosome. Mol. Biol. Evol. 40, msad011 (2023).
pubmed: 36631250
pmcid: 9887622
doi: 10.1093/molbev/msad011
Tromer, E. C., Hooff, J. J. E., van, Kops, G. J. P. L. & Snel, B. Mosaic origin of the eukaryotic kinetochore. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 116, 12873–12882 (2019).
pubmed: 31127038
pmcid: 6601020
doi: 10.1073/pnas.1821945116
Findeisen, P. et al. Six subgroups and extensive recent duplications characterize the evolution of the eukaryotic tubulin protein family. Genome Biol. Evol. 6, 2274–2288 (2014).
pubmed: 25169981
pmcid: 4202323
doi: 10.1093/gbe/evu187
Muñoz-Gómez, S. A., Bilolikar, G., Wideman, J. G. & Geiler-Samerotte, K. Constructive neutral evolution 20 years later. J. Mol. Evol. 89, 172–182 (2021).
pubmed: 33604782
pmcid: 7982386
doi: 10.1007/s00239-021-09996-y
Dacks, J. B. & Field, M. C. Evolution of the eukaryotic membrane-trafficking system: origin, tempo and mode. J. Cell Sci. 120, 2977–2985 (2007).
pubmed: 17715154
doi: 10.1242/jcs.013250
Dacks, J. B. & Field, M. C. Evolutionary origins and specialisation of membrane transport. Curr. Opin. Cell Biol. 53, 70–76 (2018).
pubmed: 29929066
pmcid: 6141808
doi: 10.1016/j.ceb.2018.06.001
Jumper, J. et al. Highly accurate protein structure prediction with AlphaFold. Nature 596, 583–589 (2021).
pubmed: 34265844
pmcid: 8371605
doi: 10.1038/s41586-021-03819-2
Baek, M. et al. Accurate prediction of protein structures and interactions using a three-track neural network. Science 373, 871–876 (2021).
pubmed: 34282049
pmcid: 7612213
doi: 10.1126/science.abj8754
Ekman, D., Björklund, Å. K., Frey-Skött, J. & Elofsson, A. Multi-domain proteins in the three kingdoms of life: orphan domains and other unassigned regions. J. Mol. Biol. 348, 231–243 (2005).
pubmed: 15808866
doi: 10.1016/j.jmb.2005.02.007
Liu, J. & Rost, B. Comparing function and structure between entire proteomes. Protein Sci. 10, 1970–1979 (2001).
pubmed: 11567088
pmcid: 2374214
doi: 10.1110/ps.10101
Xue, B., Dunker, A. K. & Uversky, V. N. Orderly order in protein intrinsic disorder distribution: disorder in 3500 proteomes from viruses and the three domains of life. J. Biomol. Struct. Dyn. 30, 137–149 (2012).
pubmed: 22702725
doi: 10.1080/07391102.2012.675145
Colnaghi, M., Lane, N. & Pomiankowski, A. Genome expansion in early eukaryotes drove the transition from lateral gene transfer to meiotic sex. eLife 9, e58873 (2020).
pubmed: 32990598
pmcid: 7524546
doi: 10.7554/eLife.58873
van Dijk, B., Bertels, F., Stolk, L., Takeuchi, N. & Rainey, P. B. Transposable elements promote the evolution of genome streamlining. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B 377, 20200477 (2022).
pubmed: 34839699
doi: 10.1098/rstb.2020.0477
Colnaghi, M., Lane, N. & Pomiankowski, A. Repeat sequences limit the effectiveness of lateral gene transfer and favored the evolution of meiotic sex in early eukaryotes. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 119, e2205041119 (2022).
pubmed: 35994648
pmcid: 9436333
doi: 10.1073/pnas.2205041119
Gilbert, W. Why genes in pieces? Nature 271, 501–501 (1978).
pubmed: 622185
doi: 10.1038/271501a0
Liu, M. & Grigoriev, A. Protein domains correlate strongly with exons in multiple eukaryotic genomes – evidence of exon shuffling? Trends Genet. 20, 399–403 (2004).
pubmed: 15313546
doi: 10.1016/j.tig.2004.06.013
Grau-Bové, X. et al. Dynamics of genomic innovation in the unicellular ancestry of animals. eLife 6, e26036 (2017).
pubmed: 28726632
pmcid: 5560861
doi: 10.7554/eLife.26036
Ocaña-Pallarès, E. et al. Divergent genomic trajectories predate the origin of animals and fungi. Nature 609, 747–753 (2022).
pubmed: 36002568
pmcid: 9492541
doi: 10.1038/s41586-022-05110-4
Méheust, R. et al. Formation of chimeric genes with essential functions at the origin of eukaryotes. BMC Biol. 16, 30 (2018).
pubmed: 29534719
pmcid: 5851275
doi: 10.1186/s12915-018-0500-0
Tamarit, D. et al. Description of Asgardarchaeum abyssi gen. nov. spec. nov., a novel species within the class Asgardarchaeia and phylum Asgardarchaeota in accordance with the SeqCode. Syst. Appl. Microbiol. 47, 126525 (2024).
Delsuc, F., Brinkmann, H. & Philippe, H. Phylogenomics and the reconstruction of the tree of life. Nat. Rev. Genet. 6, 361–375 (2005).
pubmed: 15861208
doi: 10.1038/nrg1603
Kapli, P., Yang, Z. & Telford, M. J. Phylogenetic tree building in the genomic age. Nat. Rev. Genet. 21, 428–444 (2020).
pubmed: 32424311
doi: 10.1038/s41576-020-0233-0
Steenwyk, J. L., Li, Y., Zhou, X., Shen, X.-X. & Rokas, A. Incongruence in the phylogenomics era. Nat. Rev. Genet. 24, 834–850 (2023).
pubmed: 37369847
doi: 10.1038/s41576-023-00620-x
Fleming, J. F., Valero-Gracia, A. & Struck, T. H. Identifying and addressing methodological incongruence in phylogenomics: a review. Evol. Appl. 16, 1087–1104 (2023).
pubmed: 37360032
pmcid: 10286231
doi: 10.1111/eva.13565
Foster, P. G. et al. Recoding amino acids to a reduced alphabet may increase or decrease phylogenetic accuracy. Syst. Biol. 72, 723–737 (2023).
pubmed: 35713492
doi: 10.1093/sysbio/syac042
Susko, E. & Roger, A. J. On reduced amino acid alphabets for phylogenetic inference. Mol. Biol. Evol. 24, 2139–2150 (2007).
pubmed: 17652333
doi: 10.1093/molbev/msm144
Viklund, J., Ettema, T. J. G. & Andersson, S. G. E. Independent genome reduction and phylogenetic reclassification of the oceanic SAR11 clade. Mol. Biol. Evol. 29, 599–615 (2012).
pubmed: 21900598
doi: 10.1093/molbev/msr203