Abstract
The meaning of the term prokaryote is critically analyzed. The conclusion reached is that this term does not have a real biological sense, above all because we are not able to link to this term a specific biological characteristic, i.e. the hypothetical evolutionary stage of the prokaryote would seem to have been unable to result in a completed cell, which could possibly be due to the recapitulation of the fundamental characteristics that might have been common to bacteria and archaea. This would define a biological immaturity of this evolutionary stage because otherwise we would have found traits already clearly defined at this level of cellular evolution. Therefore, the lack of well-defined traits characterising the prokaryote would seem to imply an evolutionary stage still in rapid evolution, i.e. with a tempo and a mode of evolution typical of a progenote. This in turn would seem to imply that the last universal common ancestor (LUCA) has been a progenote at least when the domains of life are only two—the bacterial and archaeal domains—because, in this case, the LUCA’s node should coincide with that of prokaryote on the tree of life. Instead, if the root of the tree of life would be placed in the bacterial domain or in the archaeal one, we might again, very likely, have a LUCA with a character of progenote being, under these conditions, the LUCA a prokaryote-like organism.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
References
Becerra A, Delaye L, Islas S, Lazcano A (2007) The very early stages of biological evolution and the nature of the last universal common ancestor of the three major cell domains. Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst 8:361–379
Delaye L, Becerra A, Lazcano A (2002) The nature of the last common ancestor. In: de Pouplana LR (ed) The genetic code and the origin of life. Landes Bioscience, Georgetown
Delaye L, Becerra A, Lazcano A (2005) The universal common ancestor: what’s in a name? Orig Life Evol Biosph 35:537–554
Di Giulio M (2001) The non-universality of the genetic code: the universal ancestor was a progenote. J Theor Biol 209:345–349
Di Giulio M (2011) The Last Universal Common Ancestor (LUCA) and the Ancestors of Archaea and Bacteria were Progenotes. J Mol Evol 72:119–126
Dolan MF, Margulis L (2007) Advances in biology reveal truth about prokaryotes. Nature 445:21
Doolittle WF, Brown JR (1994) Tempo mode the progenote and the universal root. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 91:6721–6728
Doolittle WF, Zhaxybayeva O (2009) On the origin of the prokaryotic species. Genome Res 19:744–756
Doolittle WF, Zhaxybayeva O (2013) What is a prokaryote? E. Rosenberg et al. (eds.), The Prokaryotes—Prokaryotic Biology and Symbiotic Associations, Springer, Berlin Heidelberg pp. 21–37
Forterre P (2013) The common ancestor of archaea and eukarya was not an archaeon. Archaea 2013:372396. doi:10.1155/2013/372396
Fox-Keller E (2010) The mirage of a space between nature and nurture. Duke Univesity Press, Durham
Glansdorff N, Xu Y, Labedan B (2008) The last universal common, ancestor: emergence constitution and genetic legacy of an elusive forerunner. Biol Direct 3:29
Gogarten JP (1995) The early evolution of cellular life. Trends Ecol Evol 10:147–151
Kim KM, Caetano-Anolles G (2011) The proteomic complexity and rise of primordial ancestor of diversified life. BMC Evol Biol 11:140
Lazcano A (1995) Cellular evolution during the early Archean: what happened between the progenote and the cenancestor? Microbiol SEM 11:185–198
Martin W, Koonin EV (2006) A positive definition of prokaryotes. Nature 442:868
Mat WK, Xue H, Wong JT (2008) The genomics of LUCA. Front Biosci 3:5605–5613
Mushegian AR, Koonin EV (1996) A minimal gene set for cellular life derived by comparison of complete bacterial genomes. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 93:10268–10273
Ouzounis C, Kyrpides N (1996) The emergence of major cellular processes in evolution. FEBS Lett 390:119–123
Ouzounis CA, Kunin V, Darzentas N, Goldovsky L (2006) A minimal estimate for the gene content of the last universal common ancestor. Res Microbiol 157(1):57–68
Pace NR (2006) Time for a change. Nature 441:289
Pace NR (2009) Rebuttal: the modern concept of prokaryote. J Bacteriol 191:2006–2007
Spieth J, Brooke G, Kuersten S, Lea K, Blumenthal T (1993) Operons in C. elegans: polycistronic mRNA precursors are processed by trans-splicing of SL2 to downstream coding regions. Cell 73:521–532
Sprinzl M, Vassilenko KS (2005) Compilation of tRNA sequences and sequences of tRNA genes. Nucleic Acid Res 33:D139–D140
Tuller T, Birin H, Gophna U, Kupiec M, Ruppin E (2010) Reconstruction ancestral gene content by coevolution. Genome Res 20:122–132
Whitman WB (2009) The modern concept of the Procaryote. J Bacteriol 191:2000–2005
Williams TA, Foster PG, Nye TM, Cox CJ, Embley TM (2012) A congruent phylogenomic signal places eukaryotes within the Archaea. Proc R Soc Lond B 279:4870–4879
Williams TA, Foster PG, Cox CJ, Embley TM (2013) An archaeal origin of, Eukaryotes supports only two primary domains of life. Nature 504:231–236
Woese CR (1987) Bacterial evolution. Microbiol Res 51:221–271
Woese CR (1998) The universal ancestor. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 95:6854–6859
Woese CR, Fox GE (1977) The concept of cellular evolution. J Mol Evol 10:1–6
Woese CR, Kandler O, Wheelis ML (1990) Towards a natural system of organisms: proposal for the domains Archaea, Bacteria, and Eukarya. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 87:4576–4579
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Di Giulio, M. The Non-Biological Meaning of the Term “Prokaryote” and Its Implications. J Mol Evol 80, 98–101 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00239-014-9662-8
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00239-014-9662-8