Lack of phylogenetic support for a supposed actinobacterial origin of peroxisomes

Gabaldón, Toni; Capella-Gutiérrez, Salvador

doi:10.1016/j.gene.2010.06.004

Cited by 11 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Combining all four proteins in one single analysis leads to poor phylogenetic resolution within these two groups, causing discordance from the species tree. In concordance with two previous studies [20,89], our analysis shows strong support for the monophyly of the eukaryotic groups and, therefore, agrees with the hypothesis of a eukaryotic origin of the peroxisomal proteins. The most recent common ancestor of the Cdc48 and Pex1/Pex6 proteins was presumably duplicated and then specialised towards the different functions in the peroxisomal importomer and the ERAD machinery, respectively.…”

Section: Three Eukaryotic Protein Translocation Systems With a Commonsupporting

confidence: 92%

Making new out of old: Recycling and modification of an ancient protein translocation system during eukaryotic evolution

et al. 2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

At first glance the three eukaryotic protein translocation machineries--the ER-associated degradation (ERAD) transport apparatus of the endoplasmic reticulum, the peroxisomal importomer and SELMA, the pre-protein translocator of complex plastids--appear quite different. However, mechanistic comparisons and phylogenetic analyses presented here suggest that all three translocation machineries share a common ancestral origin, which highlights the recycling of pre-existing components as an effective evolutionary driving force. Editor's suggested further reading in BioEssays ERAD ubiquitin ligases Abstract.

show abstract

Section: Three Eukaryotic Protein Translocation Systems With a Commonsupporting

confidence: 92%

Making new out of old: Recycling and modification of an ancient protein translocation system during eukaryotic evolution

et al. 2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The presence of peroxisome-bearing organisms in all major eukaryotic groups, albeit with considerable diversity in likely composition between distinct taxa, indicates that peroxisomes were present in the LECA and it is probable that these organelles functioned in diverse lipid metabolism (Gabaldón et al ., 2006, 2010). The possibility that peroxisomes had endosymbiotic origins has been overturned by recent phylogenetic analysis of the peroxisomal protein import apparatus and proteomes (Bolte et al ., 2011; Gabaldón et al ., 2006; Gabaldón & Capella-Gutiérrez, 2010) together with cytological analysis of trafficking pathways of essential peroxisomal membrane proteins (reviewed in Tabak et al ., 2008). Crucially, de novo peroxisome formation in S. cerevisiae is dependent upon routing of Pex3 and Pex19, also required for peroxisome formation in mammals, to newly forming peroxisomes via the endoplasmic reticulum, suggesting that peroxisomal membranes arise from the ER (Hoepfner et al ., 2005).…”

Section: General Cellular Metabolismmentioning

confidence: 99%

Molecular paleontology and complexity in the last eukaryotic common ancestor

Koumandou

Wickstead

Ginger

et al. 2013

Critical Reviews in Biochemistry and Molecular Biology

183

192

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Eukaryogenesis, the origin of the eukaryotic cell, represents one of the fundamental evolutionary transitions in the history of life on earth. This event, which is estimated to have occurred over one billion years ago, remains rather poorly understood. While some well-validated examples of fossil microbial eukaryotes for this time frame have been described, these can provide only basic morphology and the molecular machinery present in these organisms has remained unknown. Complete and partial genomic information has begun to fill this gap, and is being used to trace proteins and cellular traits to their roots and to provide unprecedented levels of resolution of structures, metabolic pathways and capabilities of organisms at these earliest points within the eukaryotic lineage. This is essentially allowing a molecular paleontology. What has emerged from these studies is spectacular cellular complexity prior to expansion of the eukaryotic lineages. Multiple reconstructed cellular systems indicate a very sophisticated biology, which by implication arose following the initial eukaryogenesis event but prior to eukaryotic radiation and provides a challenge in terms of explaining how these early eukaryotes arose and in understanding how they lived. Here, we provide brief overviews of several cellular systems and the major emerging conclusions, together with predictions for subsequent directions in evolution leading to extant taxa. We also consider what these reconstructions suggest about the life styles and capabilities of these earliest eukaryotes and the period of evolution between the radiation of eukaryotes and the eukaryogenesis event itself.

show abstract

“…The broad acceptance of the endosymbiotic origin of mitochondria and plastids has likely influenced endosymbiotic hypotheses for other ubiquitous eukaryotic organelles, such as the peroxisome . However, nowadays hypotheses purporting symbiotic origins of peroxisomes have been discarded and replaced by alternative ones, involving endogenous scenarios .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Relative timing of mitochondrial endosymbiosis and the “pre‐mitochondrial symbioses” hypothesis

Gabaldón

2018

IUBMB Life

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The origin of eukaryotes stands as a major open question in biology. Central to this question is the nature and timing of the origin of the mitochondrion, an ubiquitous eukaryotic organelle originated by the endosymbiosis of an alphaproteobacterial ancestor. Different hypotheses disagree, among other aspects, on whether mitochondria were acquired early or late during eukaryogenesis. Similarly, the nature and complexity of the receiving host is debated, with models ranging from a simple prokaryotic host to an already complex proto‐eukaryote. Here, I will discuss recent findings from phylogenomics analyses of extant genomes that are shedding light into the evolutionary origins of the eukaryotic ancestor, and which suggest a later acquisition of alpha‐proteobacterial derived proteins as compared to those with different bacterial ancestries. I argue that simple eukaryogenesis models that assume a binary symbiosis between an archaeon host and an alpha‐proteobacterial proto‐mitochondrion cannot explain the complex chimeric nature that is inferred for the eukaryotic ancestor. To reconcile existing hypotheses with the new data, I propose the “pre‐mitochondrial symbioses” hypothesis that provides a framework for eukaryogenesis scenarios involving alternative symbiotic interactions that predate the acquisition of mitochondria. © 2018 The Authors. IUBMB Life published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of International Union of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, 70(12):1188–1196, 2018

show abstract

Lack of phylogenetic support for a supposed actinobacterial origin of peroxisomes

Cited by 11 publications

References 20 publications

Making new out of old: Recycling and modification of an ancient protein translocation system during eukaryotic evolution

Making new out of old: Recycling and modification of an ancient protein translocation system during eukaryotic evolution

Molecular paleontology and complexity in the last eukaryotic common ancestor

Relative timing of mitochondrial endosymbiosis and the “pre‐mitochondrial symbioses” hypothesis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About