Andrew J. Roger

Phylogenomic analyses support the monophyly of Excavata and resolve relationships among eukaryotic “supergroups”

Nearly all of eukaryotic diversity has been classified into 6 suprakingdom-level groups (supergroups) based on molecular and morphological/cell-biological evidence; these are Opisthokonta, Amoebozoa, Archaeplastida, Rhizaria, Chromalveolata, and Excavata. However, molecular phylogeny has not provided clear evidence that either Chromalveolata or Excavata is monophyletic, nor has it resolved the relationships among the supergroups. To establish the affinities of Excavata, which contains parasites of global importance and organisms regarded previously as primitive eukaryotes, we conducted a phylogenomic analysis of a dataset of 143 proteins and 48 taxa, including 19 excavates. Previous phylogenomic studies have not included all major subgroups of Excavata, and thus have not definitively addressed their interrelationships. The enigmatic flagellate Andalucia is sister to typical jakobids. Jakobids (including Andalucia), Euglenozoa and Heterolobosea form a major clade that we name Discoba. Analyses of the complete dataset group Discoba with the mitochondrion-lacking excavates or “metamonads” (diplomonads, parabasalids, and Preaxostyla), but not with the final excavate group, Malawimonas. This separation likely results from a long-branch attraction artifact. Gradual removal of rapidly-evolving taxa from the dataset leads to moderate bootstrap support (69%) for the monophyly of all Excavata, and 90% support once all metamonads are removed. Most importantly, Excavata robustly emerges between unikonts (Amoebozoa + Opisthokonta) and “megagrouping” of Archaeplastida, Rhizaria, and chromalveolates. Our analyses indicate that Excavata forms a monophyletic suprakingdom-level group that is one of the 3 primary divisions within eukaryotes, along with unikonts and a megagroup of Archaeplastida, Rhizaria, and the chromalveolate lineages.

The real 'kingdoms' of eukaryotes.

We thank John Archibald, Tom Cavalier-Smith, Mark Farmer, Patrick Keeling, Herve Philippe and Susannah Porter for helpful discussions, and the Canadian Institute for Advanced Research for fellowship support.

Reconstructing Early Events in Eukaryotic Evolution

Resolving the order of events that occurred during the transition from prokaryotic to eukaryotic cells remains one of the greatest problems in cell evolution. One view, the Archezoa hypothesis, proposes that the endosymbiotic origin of mitochondria occurred relatively late in eukaryotic evolution and that several mitochondrion‐lacking protist groups diverged before the establishment of the organelle. Phylogenies based on small subunit ribosomal RNA and several protein‐coding genes supported this proposal, placing amitochondriate protists such as diplomonads, parabasalids, and Microsporidia as the earliest diverging eukaryotic lineages. However, trees of other molecules, such as tubulins, heat shock protein 70, TATA box‐binding protein, and the largest subunit of RNA polymerase II, indicate that Microsporidia are not deeply branching eukaryotes but instead are close relatives of the Fungi. Furthermore, recent discoveries of mitochondrion‐derived genes in the nuclear genomes of entamoebae, Microsporidia, parabasalids, and diplomonads suggest that these organisms likely descend from mitochondrion‐bearing ancestors. Although several protist lineages formally remain as candidates for Archezoa, most evidence suggests that the mitochondrial endosymbiosis took place prior to the divergence of all extant eukaryotes. In addition, discoveries of proteobacterial‐like nuclear genes coding for cytoplasmic proteins indicate that the mitochondrial symbiont may have contributed more to the eukaryotic lineage than previously thought. As genome sequence data from parabasalids and diplomonads accumulate, it is becoming clear that the last common ancestor of these protist taxa and other extant eukaryotic groups already possessed many of the complex features found in most eukaryotes but lacking in prokaryotes. However, our confidence in the deeply branching position of diplomonads and parabasalids among eukaryotes is weakened by conflicting phylogenies and potential sources of artifact. Our current picture of early eukaryotic evolution is in a state of flux.

Phylogenomic Evidence for Separate Acquisition of Plastids in Cryptophytes, Haptophytes, and Stramenopiles

According to the chromalveolate hypothesis (Cavalier-Smith T. 1999. Principles of protein and lipid targeting in secondary symbiogenesis: euglenoid, dinoflagellate, and sporozoan plastid origins and the eukaryote family tree. J Eukaryot Microbiol 46:347-366), the four eukaryotic groups with chlorophyll c-containing plastids originate from a single photosynthetic ancestor, which acquired its plastids by secondary endosymbiosis with a red alga. So far, molecular phylogenies have failed to either support or disprove this view. Here, we devise a phylogenomic falsification of the chromalveolate hypothesis that estimates signal strength across the three genomic compartments: If the four chlorophyll c-containing lineages indeed derive from a single photosynthetic ancestor, then similar amounts of plastid, mitochondrial, and nuclear sequences should allow to recover their monophyly. Our results refute this prediction, with statistical support levels too different to be explained by evolutionary rate variation, phylogenetic artifacts, or endosymbiotic gene transfer. Therefore, we reject the chromalveolate hypothesis as falsified in favor of more complex evolutionary scenarios involving multiple higher order eukaryote-eukaryote endosymbioses.

Ancient origin of the integrin-mediated adhesion and signaling machinery

The evolution of animals (metazoans) from their unicellular ancestors required the emergence of novel mechanisms for cell adhesion and cell–cell communication. One of the most important cell adhesion mechanisms for metazoan development is integrin-mediated adhesion and signaling. The integrin adhesion complex mediates critical interactions between cells and the extracellular matrix, modulating several aspects of cell physiology. To date this machinery has been considered strictly metazoan specific. Here we report the results of a comparative genomic analysis of the integrin adhesion machinery, using genomic data from several unicellular relatives of Metazoa and Fungi. Unexpectedly, we found that core components of the integrin adhesion complex are encoded in the genome of the apusozoan protist Amastigomonas sp., and therefore their origins predate the divergence of Opisthokonta, the clade that includes metazoans and fungi. Furthermore, our analyses suggest that key components of this apparatus have been lost independently in fungi and choanoflagellates. Our data highlight the fact that many of the key genes that had formerly been cited as crucial for metazoan origins have a much earlier origin. This underscores the importance of gene cooption in the unicellular-to-multicellular transition that led to the emergence of the Metazoa.

Testing congruence in phylogenomic analysis

Phylogenomic analyses of large sets of genes or proteins have the potential to revolutionize our understanding of the tree of life. However, problems arise because estimated phylogenies from individual loci often differ because of different histories, systematic bias, or stochastic error. We have developed Concaterpillar, a hierarchical clustering method based on likelihood-ratio testing that identifies congruent loci for phylogenomic analysis. Concaterpillar also includes a test for shared relative evolutionary rates between genes indicating whether they should be analyzed separately or by concatenation. In simulation studies, the performance of this method is excellent when a multiple comparison correction is applied. We analyzed a phylogenomic data set of 60 translational protein sequences from the major supergroups of eukaryotes and identified three congruent subsets of proteins. Analysis of the largest set indicates improved congruence relative to the full data set and produced a phylogeny with stronger support for five eukaryote supergroups including the Opisthokonts, the Plantae, the stramenopiles + Apicomplexa (chromalveolates), the Amoebozoa, and the Excavata. In contrast, the phylogeny of the second largest set indicates a close relationship between stramenopiles and red algae, to the exclusion of alveolates, suggesting gene transfer from the red algal secondary symbiont to the ancestral stramenopile host nucleus during the origin of their chloroplast. Investigating phylogenomic data sets for conflicting signals has the potential to both improve phylogenetic accuracy and inform our understanding of genome evolution.

The Capsaspora genome reveals a complex unicellular prehistory of animals

To reconstruct the evolutionary origin of multicellular animals from their unicellular ancestors, the genome sequences of diverse unicellular relatives are essential. However, only the genome of the choanoflagellate Monosiga brevicollis has been reported to date. Here we completely sequence the genome of the filasterean Capsaspora owczarzaki, the closest known unicellular relative of metazoans besides choanoflagellates. Analyses of this genome alter our understanding of the molecular complexity of metazoans’ unicellular ancestors showing that they had a richer repertoire of proteins involved in cell adhesion and transcriptional regulation than previously inferred only with the choanoflagellate genome. Some of these proteins were secondarily lost in choanoflagellates. In contrast, most intercellular signalling systems controlling development evolved later concomitant with the emergence of the first metazoans. We propose that the acquisition of these metazoan-specific developmental systems and the co-option of pre-existing genes drove the evolutionary transition from unicellular protists to metazoans.

The origin and diversification of eukaryotes: problems with molecular phylogenetics and molecular clock estimation

Determining the relationships among and divergence times for the major eukaryotic lineages remains one of the most important and controversial outstanding problems in evolutionary biology. The sequencing and phylogenetic analyses of ribosomal RNA (rRNA) genes led to the first nearly comprehensive phylogenies of eukaryotes in the late 1980s, and supported a view where cellular complexity was acquired during the divergence of extant unicellular eukaryote lineages. More recently, however, refinements in analytical methods coupled with the availability of many additional genes for phylogenetic analysis showed that much of the deep structure of early rRNA trees was artefactual. Recent phylogenetic analyses of a multiple genes and the discovery of important molecular and ultrastructural phylogenetic characters have resolved eukaryotic diversity into six major hypothetical groups. Yet relationships among these groups remain poorly understood because of saturation of sequence changes on the billion-year time-scale, possible rapid radiations of major lineages, phylogenetic artefacts and endosymbiotic or lateral gene transfer among eukaryotes. Estimating the divergence dates between the major eukaryote lineages using molecular analyses is even more difficult than phylogenetic estimation. Error in such analyses comes from a myriad of sources including: (i) calibration fossil dates, (ii) the assumed phylogenetic tree, (iii) the nucleotide or amino acid substitution model, (iv) substitution number (branch length) estimates, (v) the model of how rates of evolution change over the tree, (vi) error inherent in the time estimates for a given model and (vii) how multiple gene data are treated. By reanalysing datasets from recently published molecular clock studies, we show that when errors from these various sources are properly accounted for, the confidence intervals on inferred dates can be very large. Furthermore, estimated dates of divergence vary hugely depending on the methods used and their assumptions. Accurate dating of divergence times among the major eukaryote lineages will require a robust tree of eukaryotes, a much richer Proterozoic fossil record of microbial eukaryotes assignable to extant groups for calibration, more sophisticated relaxed molecular clock methods and many more genes sampled from the full diversity of microbial eukaryotes.

Evolution: Revisiting the Root of the Eukaryote Tree

A recent phylogenomic investigation shows that the enigmatic flagellate Breviata is a distinct anaerobic lineage within the eukaryote super-group Amoebozoa and challenges the unikont-bikont rooting of the tree of eukaryotes.

Organelles in Blastocystis that Blur the Distinction between Mitochondria and Hydrogenosomes

Summary Blastocystis is a unicellular stramenopile of controversial pathogenicity in humans [1, 2]. Although it is a strict anaerobe, Blastocystis has mitochondrion-like organelles with cristae, a transmembrane potential and DNA [2–4]. An apparent lack of several typical mitochondrial pathways has led some to suggest that these organelles might be hydrogenosomes, anaerobic organelles related to mitochondria [5, 6]. We generated 12,767 expressed sequence tags (ESTs) from Blastocystis and identified 115 clusters that encode putative mitochondrial and hydrogenosomal proteins. Among these is the canonical hydrogenosomal protein iron-only [FeFe] hydrogenase that we show localizes to the organelles. The organelles also have mitochondrial characteristics, including pathways for amino acid metabolism, iron-sulfur cluster biogenesis, and an incomplete tricarboxylic acid cycle as well as a mitochondrial genome. Although complexes I and II of the electron transport chain (ETC) are present, we found no evidence for complexes III and IV or F1Fo ATPases. The Blastocystis organelles have metabolic properties of aerobic and anaerobic mitochondria and of hydrogenosomes [7, 8]. They are convergently similar to organelles recently described in the unrelated ciliate Nyctotherus ovalis[9]. These findings blur the boundaries between mitochondria, hydrogenosomes, and mitosomes, as currently defined, underscoring the disparate selective forces that shape these organelles in eukaryotes.