Archaea sister group of Bacteria? Indications from tree reconstruction artifacts in ancient phylogenies.

The 54-kDa signal recognition particle and the receptor SR alpha, two proteins involved in the cotranslational translocation of proteins, are paralogs. They originate from a gene duplication that occurred prior to the last universal common ancestor, allowing one to root the universal tree of life. Phylogenetic analysis using standard methods supports the generally accepted cluster of Archaea and Eucarya. However, a new method increasing the signal-to-noise ratio strongly suggests that this result is due to a long-branch attraction artifact, with the Bacteria evolving fastest. In fact, the Archaea/Eucarya sisterhood is recovered only by the fast-evolving positions. In contrast, the most slowly evolving positions, which are the most likely to retain the ancient phylogenetic signal, support the monophyly of prokaryotes. Such a eukaryotic rooting provides a simple explanation for the high similarity of Archaea and Bacteria observed in complete-genome analysis, and should prompt a reconsideration of current views on the origin of eukaryotes.     

Comparative analysis of ribosomal proteins in complete genomes: an example of reductive evolution at the domain scale

A comprehensive investigation of ribosomal genes in complete genomes from 66 different species allows us to address the distribution of r-proteins between and within the three primary domains. Thirty-four r-protein families are represented in all domains but 33 families are specific to Archaea and Eucarya, providing evidence for specialisation at an early stage of evolution between the bacterial lineage and the lineage leading to Archaea and Eukaryotes. With only one specific r-protein, the archaeal ribosome appears to be a small-scale model of the eukaryotic one in terms of protein composition. However, the mechanism of evolution of the protein component of the ribosome appears dramatically different in Archaea. In Bacteria and Eucarya, a restricted number of ribosomal genes can be lost with a bias toward losses in intracellular pathogens. In Archaea, losses implicate 15% of the ribosomal genes revealing an unexpected plasticity of the translation apparatus and the pattern of gene losses indicates a progressive elimination of ribosomal genes in the course of archaeal evolution. This first documented case of reductive evolution at the domain scale provides a new framework for discussing the shape of the universal tree of life and the selective forces directing the evolution of prokaryotes.     

The effects of heavy meteorite bombardment on the early evolution — The emergence of the three Domains of life

A characteristic of many molecular phylogenies is that the three domains of life (Bacteria, Archaea, Eucarya) are clearly separated from each other. The analyses of ancient duplicated genes suggest that the last common ancestor of all presently known life forms already had been a sophisticated cellular prokaryote. These findings are in conflict with theories that have been proposed to explain the absence of deep branching lineages. In this paper we propose an alternative scenario, namely, a large meteorite impact that wiped out almost all life forms present on the early Earth. Following this nearly complete frustation of life on Earth, two surviving extreme thermophilic species gave rise to the now existing major groups of living organisms, the Bacteria and Archaea. [The latter also contributed the major portion to the nucleo-cytoplasmic component of the Eucarya]. An exact calibration of the molecular record with regard to time is not yet possible. The emergence of Eucarya in fossil and molecular records suggests that the proposed late impact should have occurred before 2100 million years before present (BP). If the 3500 million year old microfossils [Schopf, J. W. 1993: Science 260: 640–646] are interpreted as representatives of present day existing groups of bacteria (i.e., as cyanobacteria), then the impact is dated to around 3700 million years BP.The analysis of molecular sequences suggests that the separation between the Eucarya and the two prokaryotic domains is less deep then the separation between Bacteria and Archaea. The fundamental cell biological differences between Archaea and Eucarya were obtained over a comparatively short evolutionary distance (as measured in number of substitution events in biological macromolecules).Our interpretation of the molecular record suggests that life emerged early in Earth's history even before the time of the heavy bombardment was over. Early life forms already had colonized extreme habitats which allowed at least two prokaryotic species to survive a late nearly ocean boiling impact. The distribution of ecotypes on the rooted universal tree of life should not be interpreted as evidence that life originated in extremely hot environments.     

Evolved RNA Secondary Structure and the Rooting of the Universal Tree of Life

The origin and diversification of RNA secondary structure were traced using cladistic methods. Structural components were coded as polarized and ordered multi-state characters, following a model of character state transformation outlined by considerations in statistical mechanics. Several classes of functional RNA were analyzed, including ribosomal RNA (rRNA). Considerable phylogenetic signal was present in their secondary structure. The intrinsically rooted phylogenies reconstructed from evolved RNA structure depicted those derived from nucleic acid sequence at all taxonomical levels, and grouped organisms in concordance with traditional classification, especially in the archaeal and eukaryal domains. Natural selection appears therefore to operate early in the information flow that originates in sequence and ends in an adapted phenotype. When examining the hierarchical classification of the living world, phylogenetic analysis of secondary structure of the small and large rRNA subunits reconstructed a universal tree of life that branched in three monophyletic groups corresponding to Eucarya, Archaea, and Bacteria, and was rooted in the eukaryotic branch. Ribosomal characters involved in the translational cycle could be easily traced and showed that transfer RNA (tRNA) binding domains in the large rRNA subunit evolved concurrently with the rest of the rRNA molecule. Results suggest it is equally parsimonious to consider that ancestral unicellular eukaryotes or prokaryotes gave rise to all extant life forms and provide a rare insight into the early evolution of nucleic acid and protein biosynthesis. Received: 13 September 2000 / Accepted: 27 August 2001     

Was our ancestor a hyperthermophilic procaryote?

In this paper we critically review the 'classical' model for the emergence of the three domains (Archaea, Bacteria, Eucarya), which presents hyperthermophilic procaryotes as the ancestors of all life on this planet. We come to the conclusion that our last common ancestor is likely to have been rather a non-hyperthermophilic protoeucaryote endowed with sn-1,2 glycerol ester lipids (as in modern Bacteria and Eucarya), from which Archaea emerged by streamlining under pressure for adapting to heat, a process which involved an important molecular innovation: the advent of sn-2,3 glycerol ether lipids. The nature of the primeval bacterial lines of descent is less clear; it would appear, nevertheless, that the first extreme- and hyperthermophilic Bacteria emerged by converging mechanisms; lateral gene transfer from Archaea may have played a role in this adaptation.     

The Root of the Universal Tree of Life Inferred from Anciently Duplicated Genes Encoding Components of the Protein-Targeting Machinery

The key protein of the signal recognition particle (termed SRP54 for Eucarya and Ffh for Bacteria) and the protein (termed SRα for Eucarya and Ftsy for bacteria) involved in the recognition and binding of the ribosome SRP nascent polypeptide complex are the products of an ancient gene duplication that appears to predate the divergence of all extant taxa. The paralogy of the genes encoding the two proteins (both of which are GTP triphosphatases) is argued by obvious sequence similarities between the N-terminal half of SRP54(Ffh) and the C-terminal half of SRα(Ftsy). This enables a universal phylogeny based on either protein to be rooted using the second protein as an outgroup. Phylogenetic trees inferred by various methods from an alignment (220 amino acid positions) of the shared SRP54(Ffh) and SRα(Ftsy) regions generate two reciprocally rooted universal trees corresponding to the two genes. The root of both trees is firmly positioned between Bacteria and Archaea/Eucarya, thus providing strong support for the notion (Iwabe et al. 1989; Gogarten et al. 1989) that the first bifurcation in the tree of life separated the lineage leading to Bacteria from a common ancestor to Archaea and Eucarya. None of the gene trees inferred from the two paralogues support a paraphyletic Archaea with the crenarchaeota as a sister group to Eucarya. Received: 19 March 1998 / Accepted: 5 June 1998     

Ancient gene duplications and the root(s) of the tree of life

Summary. Tracing organismal histories on the timescale of the tree of life remains one of the challenging tasks in evolutionary biology. The hotly debated questions include the evolutionary relationship between the three domains of life (e.g., which of the three domains are sister domains, are the domains para-, poly-, or monophyletic) and the location of the root within the universal tree of life. For the latter, many different points of view have been considered but so far no consensus has been reached. The only widely accepted rationale to root the universal tree of life is to use anciently duplicated paralogous genes that are present in all three domains of life. To date only few anciently duplicated gene families useful for phylogenetic reconstruction have been identified. Here we present results from a systematic search for ancient gene duplications using twelve representative, completely sequenced, archaeal and bacterial genomes. Phylogenetic analyses of identified cases show that the majority of datasets support a root between Archaea and Bacteria; however, some datasets support alternative hypotheses, and all of them suffer from a lack of strong phylogenetic signal. The results are discussed with respect to the impact of horizontal gene transfer on the ability to reconstruct organismal evolution. The exchange of genetic information between divergent organisms gives rise to mosaic genomes, where different genes in a genome have different histories. Simulations show that even low rates of horizontal gene transfer dramatically complicate the reconstruction of organismal evolution, and that the different most recent common molecular ancestors likely existed at different times and in different lineages. Correspondence and reprints: Department of Molecular and Cell Biology, University of Connecticut, Storrs, CT 06269-3125, U.S.A. Present address: Genome Atlantic, Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada.     

Evidence for the early divergence of tryptophanyl- and tyrosyl-tRNA synthetases

Each amino acid is attached to its cognate tRNA by a distinct aminoacyl-tRNA synthetase (aaRS). The conventional evolutionary view is that the modern complement of synthetases existed prior to the divergence of eubacteria and eukaryotes. Thus comparisons of prokaryotic and eukaryotic aminoacyl-tRNA synthetases of the same type (charging specificity) should show greater sequence similarities than comparisons between synthetases of different types—and this is almost always so. However, a recent study [Ribas de Pouplana L, Furgier M, Quinn CL, Schimmel P (1996) Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 93:166–170] suggested that tryptophanyl- (TrpRS) and tyrosyl-tRNA (TyrRS) synthetases of the Eucarya (eukaryotes) are more similar to each other than either is to counterparts in the Bacteria (eubacteria). Here, we reexamine the evolutionary relationships of TyrRS and TrpRS using a broader range of taxa, including new sequence data from the Archaea (archaebacteria) as well as species of Eucarya and Bacteria. Our results differ from those of Ribas de Pouplana et al.: All phylogenetic methods support the separate monophyly of TrpRS and TyrRS. We attribute this result to the inclusion of the archaeal data which might serve to reduce long branch effects possibly associated with eukaryotic TrpRS and TyrRS sequences. Furthermore, reciprocally rooted phylogenies of TrpRS and TyrRS sequences confirm the closer evolutionary relationship of Archaea to eukaryotes by placing the root of the universal tree in the Bacteria. Received: 7 December 1996 / Accepted: 11 February 1997     

Evolutionary origins of mechanosensitive ion channels

According to the recent revision, the universal phylogenetic tree is composed of three domains: Eukarya (eukaryotes), Bacteria (eubacteria) and Archaea (archaebacteria). Mechanosensitive (MS) ion channels have been documented in cells belonging to all three domains suggesting their very early appearance during evolution of life on Earth. The channels show great diversity in conductance, selectivity and voltage dependence, while sharing the property of being gated by mechanical stimuli exerted on cell membranes. In prokaryotes, MS channels were first documented in Bacteria followed by their discovery in Archaea. The finding of MS channels in archaeal cells helped to recognize and establish the evolutionary relationship between bacterial and archaeal MS channels and to show that this relationship extends to eukaryotic Fungi (Schizosaccharomyces pombe) and Plants (Arabidopsis thaliana). Similar to their bacterial and archaeal homologues, MS channels in eukaryotic cell-walled Fungi and Plants may serve in protecting the cellular plasma membrane from excessive dilation and rupture that may occur during osmotic stress. This review summarizes briefly some of the recent developments in the MS channel research field that may ultimately lead to elucidation of the biophysical and evolutionary principles underlying the mechanosensory transduction in living cells.     

Gene Descent, Duplication, and Horizontal Transfer in the Evolution of Glutamyl- and Glutaminyl-tRNA Synthetases

In translation, separate aminoacyl-tRNA synthetases attach the 20 different amino acids to their cognate tRNAs, with the exception of glutamine. Eukaryotes and some bacteria employ a specific glutaminyl-tRNA synthetase (GlnRS) which other Bacteria, the Archaea (archaebacteria), and organelles apparently lack. Instead, tRNA^Gln is initially acylated with glutamate by glutamyl-tRNA synthetase (GluRS), then the glutamate moiety is transamidated to glutamine. Lamour et al. [(1994) Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 91:8670–8674] suggested that an early duplication of the GluRS gene in eukaryotes gave rise to the gene for GlnRS—a copy of which was subsequently transferred to proteobacteria. However, questions remain about the occurrence of GlnRS genes among the Eucarya (eukaryotes) outside of the ``crown' taxa (animals, fungi, and plants), the distribution of GlnRS genes in the Bacteria, and their evolutionary relationships to genes from the Archaea. Here, we show that GlnRS occurs in the most deeply branching eukaryotes and that putative GluRS genes from the Archaea are more closely related to GlnRS and GluRS genes of the Eucarya than to those of Bacteria. There is still no evidence for the existence of GlnRS in the Archaea. We propose that the last common ancestor to contemporary cells, or cenancestor, used transamidation to synthesize Gln-tRNA^Gln and that both the Bacteria and the Archaea retained this pathway, while eukaryotes developed a specific GlnRS gene through the duplication of an existing GluRS gene. In the Bacteria, GlnRS genes have been identified in a total of 10 species from three highly diverse taxonomic groups: Thermus/Deinococcus, Proteobacteria γ/β subdivision, and Bacteroides/Cytophaga/Flexibacter. Although all bacterial GlnRS form a monophyletic group, the broad phyletic distribution of this tRNA synthetase suggests that multiple gene transfers from eukaryotes to bacteria occurred shortly after the Archaea–eukaryote divergence.     

Giant viruses,giant chimeras: The multiple evolutionary histories of Mimivirus genes

Background  

Although capable to evolve, viruses are generally considered non-living entities because they are acellular and devoid of metabolism. However, the recent publication of the genome sequence of the Mimivirus, a giant virus that parasitises amoebas, strengthened the idea that viruses should be included in the tree of life. In fact, the first phylogenetic analyses of a few Mimivirus genes that are also present in cellular lineages suggested that it could define an independent branch in the tree of life in addition to the three domains, Bacteria, Archaea and Eucarya.     

About the last common ancestor, the universal life-tree and lateral gene transfer: a reappraisal

An organismal tree rooted in the bacterial branch and derived from a hyperthermophilic last common ancestor (LCA) is still widely assumed to represent the path followed by evolution from the most primeval cells to the three domains recognized among contemporary organisms: Bacteria, Archaea and Eucarya. In the past few years, however, more and more discrepancies between this pattern and individual protein trees have been brought to light. There has been an overall tendency to attribute these incongruities to widespread lateral gene transfer. However, recent developments, a reappraisal of earlier evidence and considerations of our own lead us to a quite different view. It would appear (i) that the role of lateral gene transfer was overemphasized in recent discussions of molecular phylogenies; (ii) that the LCA was probably a non-thermophilic protoeukaryote from which both Archaea and Bacteria emerged by reductive evolution but not as sister groups, in keeping with a current evolutionary scheme for the biosynthesis of membrane lipids; and (iii) that thermophilic Archaea may have been the first branch to diverge from the ancestral line.     

Evolution of viruses and cells: do we need a fourth domain of life to explain the origin of eukaryotes?

The recent discovery of diverse very large viruses, such as the mimivirus, has fostered a profusion of hypotheses positing that these viruses define a new domain of life together with the three cellular ones (Archaea, Bacteria and Eucarya). It has also been speculated that they have played a key role in the origin of eukaryotes as donors of important genes or even as the structures at the origin of the nucleus. Thanks to the increasing availability of genome sequences for these giant viruses, those hypotheses are amenable to testing via comparative genomic and phylogenetic analyses. This task is made very difficult by the high evolutionary rate of viruses, which induces phylogenetic artefacts, such as long branch attraction, when inadequate methods are applied. It can be demonstrated that phylogenetic trees supporting viruses as a fourth domain of life are artefactual. In most cases, the presence of homologues of cellular genes in viruses is best explained by recurrent horizontal gene transfer from cellular hosts to their infecting viruses and not the opposite. Today, there is no solid evidence for the existence of a viral domain of life or for a significant implication of viruses in the origin of the cellular domains.     

Genomics and early cellular evolution. The origin of the DNA world.

The sequencing of several genomes from each of the three domains of life (Archaea, Bacteria and Eukarya) has provided a huge amount of data that can be used to gain insight about early cellular evolution. Some features of the universal tree of life based on rRNA polygenies have been confirmed, such as the division of the cellular living world into three domains. The monophyly of each domain is supported by comparative genomics. However, the hyperthermophilic nature of the 'last universal common ancestor' (LUCA) is not confirmed. Comparative genomics has revealed that gene transfers have been (and still are) very frequent in genome evolution. Nevertheless, a core of informational genes appears more resistant to transfer, testifying for a close relationship between archaeal and eukaryal informational processes. This observation can be explained either by a common unique history between Archaea and Eukarya or by an atypical evolution of these systems in Bacteria. At the moment, comparative genomics still does not allow to choose between a simple LUCA, possibly with an RNA genome, or a complex LUCA, with a DNA genome and informational mechanisms similar to those of Archaea and Eukarya. Further comparative studies on informational mechanisms in the three domains should help to resolve this critical question. The role of viruses in the origin and evolution of DNA genomes also appears an area worth of active investigations. I suggest here that DNA and DNA replication mechanisms appeared first in the virus world before being transferred into cellular organisms.     

Horizontal Gene Transfer in Aminoacyl-tRNA Synthetases Including Leucine-Specific Subtypes

Aminoacyl-tRNA synthetases catalyze a fundamental reaction for the flow of genetic information from RNA to protein. Their presence in all organisms known today highlights their important role in the early evolution of life. We investigated the evolutionary history of aminoacyl-tRNA synthetases on the basis of sequence data from more than 200 Archaea, Bacteria, and Eukaryota. Phylogenetic profiles are in agreement with previous observations that many genes for aminoacyl-tRNA synthetases were transferred horizontally between species from all domains of life. We extended these findings by a detailed analysis of the history of leucyl-tRNA synthetases. Thereby, we identified a previously undetected case of horizontal gene transfer from Bacteria to Archaea based on phylogenetic profiles, trees, and networks. This means that, finally, the last subfamily of aminoacyl-tRNA synthetases has lost its exceptional position as the sole subfamily that is devoid of horizontal gene transfer. Furthermore, the leucyl-tRNA synthetase phylogenetic tree suggests a dichotomy of the archaeal/eukaryotic-cytosolic and bacterial/eukaryotic-mitochondrial proteins. We argue that the traditional division of life into Prokaryota (non-chimeric) and Eukaryota (chimeric) is favorable compared to Woese’s trichotomy into Archaea/Bacteria/Eukaryota. Electronic Supplementary Material Electronic Supplementary material is available for this article at and accessible for authorised users. [Reviewing Editor: Dr. Yves Van de Peer]     

Accounting for evolutionary rate variation among sequence sites consistently changes universal phylogenies deduced from rRNA and protein-coding genes.

Phylogenetic analyses of gene and protein sequences have led to two major competing views of the universal phylogeny, the evolutionary tree relating the three kinds of living organisms, Bacteria, Archaea, and Eukarya. In the first scheme, called "the archaebacterial tree, " organisms of the same type are clustered together. In the second scenario, called "the eocyte tree," the archaeal phylum of Crenarchaeota is more closely related to eukaryotes than are other Archaea. A major property of the evolution of functional ribosomal and protein-encoding genes is that the rate of nucleotide and amino acid substitution varies across sequence sites. Here, using distance-based and maximum-likelihood methods, we show that universal phylogenies of ribosomal RNAs and RNA polymerases built by ignoring this variation are biased toward the archaebacterial tree because of attraction between long branches. In contrast, taking among-site rate variability into account gives support for the eocyte tree.     

Bayesian phylogenetic analysis reveals two-domain topology of S-adenosylhomocysteine hydrolase protein sequences

S-Adenosylhomocysteine hydrolase (SahH) is involved in the degradation of the compound which inhibits methylation reactions. Using a Bayesian approach and other methods, we reconstructed a phylogenetic tree of amino acid sequences of this protein originating from all three major domains of living organisms. The SahH sequences formed two major branches: one composed mainly of Archaea and the other of eukaryotes and majority of bacteria, clearly contradicting the three-domain topology shown by small subunit rRNA gene. This topology suggests the occurrence of lateral transfer of this gene between the domains. Poor resolution of eukaryotes and bacteria excluded an ultimate conclusion in which out of the two domains this gene appeared first, however, the congruence of the secondary branches with SS rRNA and/or concatenated ribosomal protein datasets phylogenies suggested an "early" acquisition by some bacterial and eukaryotic phyla. Similarly, the branching pattern of Archaea reflected the phylogenies shown by SS rRNA and ribosomal proteins. SahH is widespread in Eucarya, albeit, due to reductive evolution, it is missing in the intracellular parasite Encephalitozoon cuniculi. On the other hand, the lack of affinity to the sequences from the alpha-Proteobacteria and cyanobacteria excludes a possibility of its acquisition in the course of mitochondrial or chloroplast endosymbioses. Unlike Archaea, most bacteria carry MTA/SAH nucleosidase, an enzyme involved also in metabolism of methylthioadenosine. However, the double function of MTA/SAH nucleosidase may be a barrier to ensure the efficient degradation of S-adenosylhomocysteine, specially when the intensity of methylation processes is high. This would explain the presence of S-adenosylhomocysteine hydrolase in the bacteria that have more complex metabolism. On the other hand, majority of obligate pathogenic bacteria due to simpler metabolism rely entirely on MTA/SAH nucleosidase. This could explain the observed phenetic pattern in which bacteria with larger (>6 Mb-million base pairs) genomes carry SAH hydrolase, whereas bacteria that have undergone reductive evolution usually carry MTA/SAH nucleosidase. This suggests that the presence or acquisition of S-adenosylhomocysteine hydrolase in bacteria may predispose towards higher metabolic, and in consequence, higher genomic complexity. The good examples are the phototrophic bacteria all of which carry this gene, however, the SahH phylogeny shows lack of congruence with SSU rRNA and photosyntethic genes, implying that the acquisition was independent and presumably preceded the acquisition of photosyntethic genes. The majority of cyanobacteria acquired this gene from Archaea, however, in some species the sahH gene was replaced by a copy from the beta- or gamma-Proteobacteria.     

Eukaryotes first: how could that be?

In the half century since the formulation of the prokaryote : eukaryote dichotomy, many authors have proposed that the former evolved from something resembling the latter, in defiance of common (and possibly common sense) views. In such ‘eukaryotes first’ (EF) scenarios, the last universal common ancestor is imagined to have possessed significantly many of the complex characteristics of contemporary eukaryotes, as relics of an earlier ‘progenotic’ period or RNA world. Bacteria and Archaea thus must have lost these complex features secondarily, through ‘streamlining’. If the canonical three-domain tree in which Archaea and Eukarya are sisters is accepted, EF entails that Bacteria and Archaea are convergently prokaryotic. We ask what this means and how it might be tested.