Journal of Molecular Evolution

, Volume 10, Issue 1, pp 1–6

The concept of cellular evolution

  • Carl R. Woese
  • George E. Fox
Article

Summary

A central evolutionary question is whether the eucaryotic cytoplasm represents a line of descent that is separate from the typical bacterial line. It is argued on the basis of differences between their respective translation mechanisms that the two lines do represent separate phylogenetic trees in the sense that each line of descent independently evolved to a level of organization that could be called procaryotic. The two lines of descent, nevertheless shared a common ancestor, that was far simpler than the procaryote. This primitive entity is called a progenote, to recognize the possibility that it had not yet completed evolving the link between genotype and phenotype. This concept changes considerably the view one takes toward cellular evolution.

Key words

Evolution Ribosomes Genotype-Phenotype Cytoplasm Endosymbiosis Procaryote Eucaryote Progenote 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Bellemare, G., Vigne, R., Jordan, B. (1973). Biochimie55, 29Google Scholar
  2. Bovee, E.C., Jan, T.L. (1973). In: The biology of amoeba, K.W. Jeon, ed., p. 38. New York: Academic PressGoogle Scholar
  3. Broda, E. (1975). The evolution of the bioenergetic process. Oxford: Pergamon PressGoogle Scholar
  4. Burks, A.W. (1970). Essays on Cellular Automata, Univ. of Illinois Press, Urbana, IllinoisGoogle Scholar
  5. Erdmann, V.A. (1976). Progr. Nucl. Acid. Res. Mol. Biol.18, 45Google Scholar
  6. Fox, G.E., Woese, C.R. (1975). J. Mol. Evol.6, 61Google Scholar
  7. Haselkorn, R., Rothman-Denes, L.B. (1973). Ann. Rev. Biochem.42, 397Google Scholar
  8. Hungate, R.E. (1967). The rumen and its microbes. New York: Academic PressGoogle Scholar
  9. Maden, B.E.H., Salim, M. (1974). J. Mol. Biol.88, 133Google Scholar
  10. Margulis, L. (1970). Origin of eucaryotic cells. New Haven: Yale University PressGoogle Scholar
  11. Nass, S. (1969). Inter. Rev. Cytol.25, 55Google Scholar
  12. Pestka, S. (1976). Progr. Nucl. Acid Res. Mol. Biol.17, 217Google Scholar
  13. Sagan, L. (1967). J. Theoret. Biol.14, 225Google Scholar
  14. Schopf, J.W. (1972). In: Exobiology, C. Ponnamperuma, ed., p. 16. Amsterdam: North HollandGoogle Scholar
  15. Sogin, M.L., Pechman, K.J., Zablen, L., Lewis, B.J., Woese, C.R. (1972). J. Bacteriol.112, 13Google Scholar
  16. Stanier, R.Y. (1970). In: Organization and control in prokaryotic and eukaryotic cells, 20th Symposium Society for General Microbiology, H.P. Charles, B.C.J.G. Knight, eds., pp. 1–38. Cambridge: Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar
  17. Wittmann, H.G. (1970). In: Organization and control in prokaryotic and eukaryotic cells, 20th Symposium Society for General Microbiology, H.P. Charles, B.C.J.G. Knight, eds., pp. 55–76. Cambridge: Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar
  18. Woese, C.R., Fox, G.E., Zablen, L., Uchida, T., Bonen, L., Pechman, K., Lewis, B.J., Stahl, D. (1975). Nature254, 83Google Scholar
  19. Woese, C.R. (1970). In: Organization and control in prokaryotic and eukaryotic cells, 20th Symposium Society for General Microbiology, H.P. Charles, B.C.J.G. Knight, eds., pp. 39–54. Cambridge: Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar
  20. Wrede, P., Erdmann, V.A. (1973). FEBS Lett.33, 315Google Scholar
  21. Zuckerkandl, E., Pauling, L. (1965). J. Theoret. Biol.8, 357Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1977

Authors and Affiliations

  • Carl R. Woese
    • 1
  • George E. Fox
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Genetics and DevelopmentUniversity of IllinoisUrbanaUSA

Personalised recommendations