The Ionian School, Early Evolution of Life Department, Genetic Code and tRNA Origin Laboratory, Via Roma 19, 67030, Alfedena, L'Aquila, Italy.
Biosystems. 2022 Dec;222:104799. doi: 10.1016/j.biosystems.2022.104799. Epub 2022 Oct 27.
I analyse the consequences that the diversity of cell membranes present in bacteria and archaea would have for the stage reached by the evolution of cellularity in the Last Universal Common Ancestor (LUCA). Regardless of how the bacterial and archaeal membranes were distributed in the LUCA, the conclusion that would seem to emerge is always the same. That is to say, it is more likely that LUCA was a progenote rather than a genote. Indeed, if LUCA hosted both types of membranes then this would have been a transitional condition which would imply, in itself, that LUCA was a progenote. In other words, the two types of membranes evidently had to segregate in that of bacteria and that of archaea, and this segregation would imply enormous changes not expected for a cellular stage but the norm for that of progenote. Instead, in the case in which LUCA hosted only one type of membrane, for example that of archaea, then the evolution of the other type of membrane - presumably in the ancestor of bacteria - would imply a progenotic LUCA precisely because such a late origin would seem be an expression, at that time, of a still rapid and progressive evolution because it involves a fundamental and profound genetic trait, and should therefore reflect the progenotic stage. Finally, in the event that LUCA had been devoid of a membrane, then the late origin of the two types of membranes - in the ancestor of archaea and in that of bacteria - would seem to be a clear expression of a rapid and progressive evolution typical of progenote. Indeed, this would imply, for example, that all mechanisms and functions associated with the two cell membranes still had to evolve which would express the progenotic stage precisely because it would seem to be an evolution still in progress, and therefore typical of the stage of progenote. Therefore, LUCA was most likely a progenote also because there would be no strong arguments in favour of the hypothesis that LUCA had instead reached the evolutionary stage of cellularity.
我分析了细胞膜的多样性在细菌和古菌中存在的后果,以及这些后果对最后普遍共同祖先(LUCA)中细胞发生进化的阶段的影响。无论 LUCA 中的细菌和古菌细胞膜是如何分布的,似乎总是会得出相同的结论。也就是说,LUCA 更有可能是前细胞,而不是真核细胞。事实上,如果 LUCA 同时存在这两种类型的膜,那么这将是一种过渡状态,本身就意味着 LUCA 是前细胞。换句话说,这两种类型的膜显然必须在细菌和古菌中分离,这种分离将带来巨大的变化,而不是细胞阶段所期望的,而是前细胞阶段的常态。相反,如果 LUCA 只存在一种类型的膜,例如古菌的膜,那么另一种类型的膜的进化——大概在细菌的祖先中——将意味着 LUCA 是前细胞,正是因为这种晚期起源似乎是当时仍在快速和持续进化的表现,因为它涉及到一个基本和深刻的遗传特征,因此应该反映出前细胞阶段。最后,如果 LUCA 没有膜,那么两种类型的膜——在古菌的祖先和细菌的祖先中——的晚期起源似乎是前细胞快速和持续进化的明显表现。事实上,这将意味着,例如,与两种细胞膜相关的所有机制和功能仍有待进化,这将准确地反映前细胞阶段,因为它似乎是一个仍在进行中的进化,因此是前细胞阶段的典型特征。因此,LUCA 很可能也是前细胞,因为没有强有力的论据支持 LUCA 已经达到细胞进化阶段的假设。