Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Symbiotic Models for Reconstruction of Organellogenesis

  • REVIEWS AND THEORETICAL ARTICLES
  • Published:
Russian Journal of Genetics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Various groups of proteobacteria and cyanobacteria, as well as unicellular algae capable of endosymbioses with eukaryotes, are addressed as the models for reconstruction of organellogenesis (transformation of symbiotic microbes into cellular organelles) as a major result of symbiogenesis—the evolution based on formation of integral hereditary systems by tightly interacting partners. Organellogenesis includes the following transitions: facultative non-inherited intracellular symbionts → obligatory inherited endocytobionts → genome-containing organelles → genome-free organelles. We have demonstrated that organellogenesis is accompanied by the loss of bacterial genetic individuality—the ability to maintain and express their own genomes, including their complete elimination. Comparative analysis of various groups of endosymbiotic bacteria showed that the major prerequisite for their transformation into organelles (primary organellogenesis) is high genomic plasticity expressed at the early stages of organellogenesis, under facultative or obligatory dependences on hosts. It is manifested as a directed change in genome architecture (transitions of unitary-type genomes to multicomponent- and reduced-type genomes), as well as in the export of functionally active genes into nonrelated organisms. These properties are characteristic for α-proteobacteria and cyanobacteria—the ancestors of mitochondria and plastids, but not for β- and γ-proteobacteria, Bacteroidetes and Firmicutes, which, although they include multiple endosymbiotic forms, have not been transformed into organelles. A convenient model for analyzing the secondary organellogenesis implemented by eukaryotic microorganisms is represented by dinoflagellates Symbiodinium (Alveolata), which (1) harbor chloroplasts derived from red algae and (2) develop intracellular symbioses with invertebrates behaving as their plastids. Reconstruction of organellogenesis allows us to address the early stages of organic evolution including the trade-off between metabolism and heredity, as well as between the RNA- or DNA-based genomes.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1.
Fig. 2.

Similar content being viewed by others

REFERENCES

  1. Martin, W., Symbiogenesis, gradualism, and mitochondrial energy in eukaryote origin, Period. Biol., 2017, vol. 119, no. 3, pp. 141—158. https://doi.org/10.18054/pb.v119i3.5694

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Famintsyn, A.S., The role of symbiosis in the evolution of organisms, Zap. Imp. Akad. Nauk, Fiz.-Mat. Otd., Ser. 8, 1907, vol. 20, no. 3, pp. 1—14.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Merezhkovskii, K.S., Teoriya dvukh plazm kak osnova simbiogenezisa, novogo ucheniya o proiskhozhdenii organizmov (The Theory of Two Plasms as the Basis of Symbiogenesis, a New Study or the Origins of Organisms), Kazan: Imp. Univ., 1909.

  4. Margulis, L. and Sagan, D., Acquiring Genomes: A Theory of the Origins of Species, New York: Basic Books, 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Provorov, N.A., Tikhonovich, I.A., and Vorobyov, N.I., Simbioz i simbiogenez (Symbiosis and Symbiogenesis), St.-Petersburg: Inform-Navigator, 2018.

  6. Georgiades, K. and Raoult, D., The rhizome of Reclinomonas americana, Homo sapiens, Pediculus humanus and Saccharomyces cerevisiae mitochondria, Biol. Direct., 2011, vol. 6, p. 55. https://doi.org/10.1186/1745-6150-6-55

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. de la Peña, T.C., Fedorova, E., Pueyo, J.J., and Lucas, M.M., The symbiosome: legume and rhizobia co-evolution toward a nitrogen-fixing organelle?, Front. Plant Sci., 2018. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2017.02229

  8. Provorov, N.A. and Andronov, E.E., Evolution of root nodule bacteria: reconstruction of the speciation processes resulting from genomic rearrangements in a symbiotic system, Microbiology (Moscow), 2016, vol. 85, no. 2, pp. 131—139. https://doi.org/10.1134/S0026261716020156

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Prakash, R.K. and Schilperoort, B.A., Relationship between nif-plasmids of fast-growing Rhizobium species and Ti-plasmids of Agrobacterium tumefaciens, J. Bacteriol., 1982, vol. 149, no. 3, pp. 1129—1134.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Tian, C.F., Zhou, Y.L., Zhang, Y.M., et al., Comparative genomics of rhizobia nodulating soybeans suggests extensive recruitment of lineage-specific genes in adaptations, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A., 2012, vol. 109, no. 22, pp. 8629—8634. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1120436109

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Hirsch, A.M., Lum, M.R., and Downie, J.A., What makes the rhizobia—legume symbiosis so special?, Plant Physiol., 2001, vol. 127, no. 4, pp. 1484—1492.https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.010866

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Wisniewski-Dyé, F., Lozano, L., Acosta-Cruz, E., et al., Genome sequence of Azospirillum brasilense CBG497 and comparative analyses of Azospirillum core and accessory genomes provide insight into niche adaptation, Genes, 2012, vol. 3, no. 4, pp. 576—602. https://doi.org/10.3390/genes3040576

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Blaha, D., Sanguin, H., Robe, P., et al., Physical organization of phytobeneficial genes nifH and ipdC in the plant growth-promoting rhizobacterium Azospirillum lipoferum 4VI, FEMS Microbiol. Lett., 2005, vol. 244, no. 1, pp. 157—163. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.femsle.2005.01.034

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Matveeva, T.V. and Lutova, L.A., Horizontal gene transfer from Agrobacterium to plants, Front. Plant Sci., 2014, vol. 5, article 326. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2014.00326

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Wu, M., Sun, L.V., Vamathevan, J., et al., Phylogenomics of the reproductive parasite Wolbachia pipientis wMel: a streamlined genome overrun by mobile genetic elements, PLoS Biol., 2004, vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 327—341. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.0020069

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Nikoh, N., McCutcheon, J.P., Kudo, T., et al., Bacterial genes in the aphid genome: absence of functional gene transfer from Buchnera to its host, PLoS Genet., 2010, vol. 6, no. 2. e1000827. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgen.1000827

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Blanc, G., Ogata, H., Robert, C., et al., Lateral gene transfer between obligate intracellular bacteria: evidence from the Rickettsia massiliae genome, Genome Res., 2007, vol. 17, no. 11, pp. 1657—1664. https://doi.org/10.1101/gr.6742107

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Deusch, O., Landan, G., Roettger, M., et al., Genes of cyanobacterial origin in plant nuclear genomes point to a heterocyst-forming plastid ancestor, Mol. Biol. Evol., 2008, vol. 25, no. 4, pp. 748—761. https://doi.org/10.1093/molbev/msn022

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Meeks, J.C. and Elhai, J., Regulation of cellular differentiation in filamentous cyanobacteria in free-living and plant-associated symbiotic growth states, Microbiol. Mol. Biol. Rev., 2002, vol. 66, no. 1, pp. 94—121. https://doi.org/10.1128/MMBR.66.1.94-121.2002

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Ran, L., Larsson, J., Vigil-Stenman, T., et al., Genome erosion in a nitrogen-fixing vertically transmitted endosymbiotic multicellular cyanobacterium, PLoS One, 2010, vol. 5, no. 9. https://doi.org/10.1371/annotation/835c5766-5128-41c4-b636-adfe0c503103

  21. Nowack, E.C. and Grossman, A.R., Trafficking of protein into the recently established photo-synthetic organelles of Paulinella chromatophora, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A., 2012, vol. 109, no. 14, pp. 5340—5345. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1118800109

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. Ponce–Toledo, R.I., Deschamps, P., López–García, P., et al., An early-branching freshwater cyanobacterium at the origin of plastids, Curr. Biol., 2017, vol. 27, no. 3, pp. 386—391. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2016.11.056

  23. Hata, H., Natori, T., Mizuno, T., et al., Phylogenetics of family Enterobacteriaceae and proposal to reclassify Escherichia hermannii and Salmonella subterranea as Atlantibacter hermannii and Atlantibacter subterranea gen. nov., comb. nov., Microbiol. Immunol., 2016, vol. 60, no. 5, pp. 303—311. https://doi.org/10.1111/1348-0421.12374

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Merhej, V., Georgiades, K., and Raoult, D., Postgenomic analysis of bacterial pathogens repertoire reveals genome reduction rather than virulence factors, Brief. Fuct. Genom., 2013, vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 291—304. https://doi.org/10.1093/bfgp/elt015

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Rasko, D.A., Rosovitz, M.J., Myers, G.S., et al., The pangenome structure of Escherichia coli: comparative genomic analysis of E. coli commensal and pathogenic isolates, J. Bacteriol., 2008, vol. 190, no. 20, pp. 6881—6893. https://doi.org/10.1128/JB.00619-08

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Call, D.R., Kang, M.-S., Daniels, J., and Besser, T.E., Assessing genetic diversity in plasmids from Escherichia coli and Salmonella enterica using a mixed-plasmid microarray, J. Appl. Microbiol., 2006, vol. 100, no. 1, pp. 15—28. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2672.2005.02775.x

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Shapiro, L.R., Scully, E.D., Straub, T.J., et al., Horizontal gene acquisitions, mobile element proliferation and genome decay in the host-restricted plant pathogen Erwinia tracheiphila, Genome Biol. Evol., 2016, vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 649—664. https://doi.org/10.1093/gbe/evw016

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  28. Dutilh, B.E., Thompson, C.C., Vicente, A.C., et al., Comparative genomics of 274 Vibrio cholerae genomes reveals mobile functions structuring three niche dimensions, BMC Genomics, 2014, vol. 15, p. 654. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2164-15-654

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Ruby, E.G., Urbanowski, M., Campbell, J., et al., Complete genome sequence of Vibrio fischeri: a symbiotic bacterium with pathogenic congeners, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A., 2005, vol. 102, no. 8, pp. 3004—3009. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0409900102

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Lee, H.H., Ostrov, N., Wong, B.G., et al., Vibrio natriegens, a new genomic powerhouse, bioRxiv, preprint, 2016. https://doi.org/10.1101/058487

  31. Douglas, A.E., The molecular basis of bacterial—insect symbiosis, J. Mol. Biol., 2014, vol. 426, no. 10, pp. 3830—3837. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmb.2014.04.005

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Nikoh, N., Hosokawa, T., Oshima, K., et al., Reductive evolution of bacterial genome in insect gut environment, Genome Biol. Evol., 2011, vol. 3, no. 3, pp. 702—714. https://doi.org/10.1093/gbe/evr064

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Moran, N.A., McCutcheon, J.P., and Nakabachi, A., Genomics and evolution of heritable bacterial symbionts, Annu. Rev. Genet., 2008, vol. 42, pp. 165—190. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.genet.41.110306.130119

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Nakabachi, A., Yamashita, A., Toh, H., et al., The 160-kilobase genome of the bacterial endosymbiont Carsonella, Science, 2006, vol. 314, no. 5797, pp. 267—270. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1134196

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Beukes, C.W., Palmer, M., Manyaka, P., et al., Genome data provides high support for generic boundaries in Burkholderia sensu lato, Front Microbiol., 2017, vol. 8, p. 1154. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2017.01154

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  36. Estrada-de los Santos, P., Palmer, M., Chávez-Ramírez, B., et al., Whole genome analyses suggests that Burkholderia sensu lato contains two additional novel genera (Mycetohabitans gen. nov., and Trinickia gen. nov.): implications for the evolution of diazotrophy and nodulation in the Burkholderiaceae, Genes, 2018, vol. 9, no. 8, pp. 389—401. https://doi.org/10.3390/genes9080389

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Johnson, S.L., Bishop-Lilly, K.A., Ladner, J.T., et al., Complete genome sequences for 59 Burkholderia isolates, both pathogenic and near neighbor, Genome Announce, 2015, vol. 3, no. 2. https://doi.org/10.1128/genomeA.00159-15

  38. Coenye, T. and Vandamme, P., Diversity and significance of Burkholderia species occupying diverse ecological niches, Environ. Microbiol., 2003, vol. 5, pp. 719—729. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1462-2920.2003.00471.x

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Karg, T. and Reinhold-Hurek, B., Global changes in protein composition of N2-fixing Azoarcus sp. strain BH72 upon diazosome formation, J. Bacteriol., 1996, vol. 178, no. 11, pp. 5748—5754. https://doi.org/10.1128/jb.178.19.5748-5754.1996

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Krause, A., Ramakumar, A., Bartels, D., et al., Complete genome of the mutualistic, N2-fixing grass endophyte Azoarcus sp. strain BH72, Nat. Biotechnol., 2006, vol. 24, no. 11, pp. 1385—1391. https://doi.org/10.1038/nbt1243

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. Miché, L., Battistoni, F., Gemmer, S., et al., Upregulation of jasmonate-inducible defense proteins and differential colonization of roots of Oryza sativa cultivars with the endophyte Azoarcus sp., Mol. Plant—Microbe Interact., 2006, vol. 19, no. 5, pp. 502—511. https://doi.org/10.1094/MPMI-19-0502

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  42. Egener, T., Hurek, T., and Reinhold-Hurek, B., Endophytic expression of nif genes of Azoarcus strain BH72 in rice roots, Mol. Plant—Microbe Interact., 1999, vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 813—819. https://doi.org/10.1094/MPMI.1999.12.9.813

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. Bennett, G.M. and Moran, N.A., Small, smaller, smallest: the origins and evolution of ancient dual symbioses in a phloem-feeding insect, Genome Biol. Evol., 2013, vol. 5, no. 9, pp. 1675—1688. https://doi.org/10.1093/gbe/evt118

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  44. Cavalier-Smith, T., Kingdom Protozoa and its 18 phyla, Microbiol. Rev., 1993, vol. 57, no. 4, pp. 953—994.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  45. Barbrook, A.C., Voolstra, C.R., and Howe, C.J., The chloroplast genome of a Symbiodinium sp. clade C3 isolate, Protist, 2014, vol. 165, no. 1, pp. 1—13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.protis.2013.09.006

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  46. Mungpakdee, S., Shinzato, C., Takeuchi, T., et al., Massive gene transfer and extensive RNA editing of a symbiotic dinoflagellate plastid genome, Genome Biol. Evol., 2014, vol. 6, no. 6, pp. 1408—1422. https://doi.org/10.1093/gbe/evu109

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  47. Pochon, X., Putnam, H.M., and Gates, R.D., Multi-gene analysis of Symbiodinium dinoflagellates: a perspective on rarity, symbiosis and evolution, Peer J., 2014, vol. 2. e394. https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.394

  48. Pochon, X. and Pawlowski, J., Evolution of the soritids—Symbiodinium symbiosis, Symbiosis, 2006, vol. 42, no. 2, pp. 77—88.

    Google Scholar 

  49. Shoguchi, E., Beedessee, G., Tada, I., et al., Two divergent Symbiodinium genomes reveal conservation of a gene cluster for sunscreen biosynthesis and recently lost genes, BMC Genomics, 2018, vol. 19, p. 458. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12864-018-4857-9

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  50. Shinzato, C., Mungpakdee, S., Satoh, N., and Shoguchi, E., A genomic approach to coral—dinoflagellate symbiosis: studies of Acropora digitifera and Symbiodinium minutum, Front. Microbiol., 2014, vol. 5, p. 336. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2014.00336

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  51. Waller, R.F. and Koreny, L., Plastid complexity in dinoflagellates: a picture of gains, losses, replacements and revisions, Adv. Bot. Res., 2017. https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.abr.2017.06.004

  52. Kodama, Y. and Fujishima, M., Infection of Paramecium bursaria by symbiotic Chlorella species, in Endosymbionts in Paramecium, vol. 12 of Microbiology Monographs, Fujishima, M., Ed., Berlin: Springer-Verlag, 2009, pp. 31—55. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-92677-1_2

  53. Rumpho, M.E., Worful, J.M., Lee, J., et al., Horizontal gene transfer of the algal nuclear gene psbO to the photosynthetic sea slug Elysia chlorotica, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A., 2008, vol. 105, no. 46, pp. 17867—17871. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0804968105

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  54. Spang, A., Saw, J.H., Jørgensen, S.L., et al., Complex archaea that bridge the gap between prokaryotes and eukaryotes, Nature, 2015, vol. 521, no. 7551, pp. 173—179. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature14447

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  55. Provorov, N.A., K.S. Merezhkovskii and the origin of eukaryotic cell: 111 years of symbiogenesis theory, S.-kh. Biol., 2016, vol. 51, no. 5, pp. 746—758. https://doi.org/10.15389/agrobiology.2016.5.746rus

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Cavalier-Smith, T., The origin of nuclei and of eukaryotic cells// Nature, 1975, vol. 256, no. 5517, pp. 463—468.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Franke, J.D., Blomberg, W.R., Todd, R.T., et al., Assembly of a complete genome sequence for Gemmata obscuriglobus reveals a novel prokaryotic rRNA operon gene architecture, Antonie van Leeuwenhoek, 2018, vol. 111, no. 11, pp. 2095—2105. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10482-018-1102-0

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  58. Sagulenko, E., Nouwens, A., Webb, R.I., et al., Nuclear pore-like structures in a compartmentalized bacterium, PLoS One, 2017, vol. 12, no. 2. e0169432. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0169432

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  59. Claverie, J.M., Viruses take center stage in cellular evolution, Genome Biol., 2006, vol. 7, p. 110. https://doi.org/10.1186/gb-2006-7-6-110

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  60. Martin, W., Roettger, M., Kloesges, T., et al., Modern endosymbiotic theory: getting lateral gene transfer into the equation, J. Endocyt. Cell Res., 2012, vol. 23, pp. 1—5.

    Google Scholar 

  61. Husnik, F., Nikoh, N., Koga, R., et al., Horizontal gene transfer from diverse bacteria to an insect genome enables a tripartite nested mealybug symbiosis, Cell, 2013, vol. 153, no. 5, pp. 1567—1578. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2013.05.040

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  62. Aanen, D.K. and Eggleton, P., Symbiogenesis: beyond the endosymbiosis theory?, J. Theor. Biol., 2017, vol. 434, no. 1, pp. 99—103. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtbi.2017.08.001

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. Ku, C., Nelson-Sathi, S., Roettger, M., et al., Endosymbiotic gene transfer from prokaryotic pangenomes: inherited chimerism in eukaryotes, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A., 2015, vol. 112, no. 33, pp. 10139—10146. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1421385112

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  64. Provorov, N.A., Tikhonovich, I.A., and Vorobyov, N.I., Symbiogenesis as a model for reconstructing the early stages of genome evolution, Russ. J. Genet., 2016, vol. 52, no. 2, pp. 117—124. https://doi.org/10.1134/S1022795416020101

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  65. Provorov, N.A. and Onishchuk, O.P., Ecological and genetic bases for construction of highly effective nitrogen-fixing microbe-plant symbioses, Ekol. Genet., 2019, vol. 17, no. 1, pp. 11—18. https://doi.org/10.17816/ecogen17111-18

    Article  Google Scholar 

  66. Kneip, C., Lockhart, P., Voss, C., and Maier, U.G., Nitrogen fixation in eukaryotes—new models for symbiosis, BMC Evol. Biol., 2007, vol. 7, p. 55. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2148-7-55

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  67. akagawa, S. and Takai, K., Deep-sea vent chemoautotrophs: diversity, biochemistry and ecological significance, FEMS Microbiol. Ecol., 2008, vol. 65, no. 1, pp. 1—14. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1574-6941.2008.00502

Download references

Funding

The work was supported by the Russian Science Foundation, project no. 19-16-00081.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. All-Russia Research Institute for Agricultural Microbiology, 196602, St. Petersburg, Russia

    N. A. Provorov

Authors
  1. N. A. Provorov
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to N. A. Provorov.

Ethics declarations

The author declares that he has no conflict of interest. This article does not contain any studies involving animals or human participants performed by the author.

Additional information

Translated by E. Makeeva

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Provorov, N.A. Symbiotic Models for Reconstruction of Organellogenesis. Russ J Genet 57, 10–22 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1134/S1022795421010117

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1134/S1022795421010117

Keywords:

Search

Navigation