1982
DOI: 10.1016/s0721-9571(82)80032-x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The Evolution of the Archaebacterial Ribosome

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

2
4
1

Year Published

1985
1985
1988
1988

Publication Types

Select...
4
1

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 7 publications
(7 citation statements)
references
References 25 publications
2
4
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Based on this comparison, the evolutionary tree for the ribosomal protein Sll family ( fig.3) has two main branches: one for eubacterial and chloroplast Sl 1, and another for halophilic and eukaryotic proteins. This relationship is consistent with previous results derived from the comparisons of other ribosomal protein families [4,22,23]. Similar results to those presented in fig.3 have recently been obtained from sequence analyses of ribosomal proteins from the archaebacterium Methanococcus vannielii.…”
Section: Sequence Comparisonsupporting
confidence: 93%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Based on this comparison, the evolutionary tree for the ribosomal protein Sll family ( fig.3) has two main branches: one for eubacterial and chloroplast Sl 1, and another for halophilic and eukaryotic proteins. This relationship is consistent with previous results derived from the comparisons of other ribosomal protein families [4,22,23]. Similar results to those presented in fig.3 have recently been obtained from sequence analyses of ribosomal proteins from the archaebacterium Methanococcus vannielii.…”
Section: Sequence Comparisonsupporting
confidence: 93%
“…the ribosomal protein L12 family, Correspondence address: T. Hatakeyama, Max-Planck-Institut fur Molekulare Genetik, Ihnestrasse 73, D-1000 Berlin 33 (Dahlem), Germany from a wide range of organisms have been determined. The results are consistent with those from the 5 S rRNAs, indicating that the archaebacterial A-proteins are more related to the eukaryotic than to the eubacterial counterparts [4].…”
Section: Introductionsupporting
confidence: 83%
“…Since then much additional evidence has been accumulated confirming the idea that there a re two groups of prokaryotes that are no more related to °ne another than either of them is related to the eucyta (i. e. the nuclear plus the cytoplasmic compartment of the e ukaryotes). This evidence includes comparison of differe nt parts of the translation apparatus (Fox et al, 1982;Matheson and Yaguchi, 1982;Yaguchi et al, 1982;Guptc *, 1984;Kessel and Klink, 1982;Cammarano et al, 1985), of the enzymes involved in replication (Prangishvilli and Zillig, 1984;Forterre et al, 1984;Nakayama et al, 1985;Klimczak et al, 1985) and transcription (Zillig * Paper given at the EMBO Workshop on the Molecular Genetics of Archaebacteria, München-Martinsried, June 23 to 26, 1985Schnabel et al, 1983;Huet et al, 1983;Prangishvilli et al, 1982), of cell wall composition (Kandier, 1982) and membrane structure (review by Langworthy et al, 1982).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…An increasing body of evidence appears to support this view: Ribosomal A proteins (Matheson and Yaguchi, 1982), EFII (Kessel and Klink, 1982), some characteristics of 5 S rRNA (Fox et ai, 1982) and initiator tRNA (Kuchino et ai, 1982), the occurrence of glycoproteins, and the apparent absence of guanosine tetra-and pentaphosphates resemble the corresponding features in eukaryotes rather than eubacteria.…”
Section: B Homologies Among Archaebacterial Rna Polymerasesmentioning
confidence: 99%