What type of bacteria evolved into mitochondria?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the evolutionary origins of mitochondria, particularly the type of bacteria that may have evolved into these organelles. Participants explore theories related to eukaryogenesis, the role of alphaproteobacteria, and the implications of recent research findings that challenge previous hypotheses regarding mitochondrial ancestry.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants discuss the significance of eukaryogenesis and the role of the Asgard superphylum in the evolution of eukaryotes.
  • There is mention of a recent study suggesting that mitochondria may not be directly descended from alphaproteobacteria, but rather from a more distantly related group of bacteria.
  • One participant expresses interest in the origin of life and the evolution of eukaryotes, noting the advancements in understanding due to new sequencing techniques.
  • Another participant raises questions about the origins of viruses and their evolutionary pathways, linking this to the broader discussion of cellular evolution.
  • A hypothesis is proposed regarding the evolution of viruses from bacterial conjugation and plasmid transfer mechanisms.
  • The theory of symbiogenesis is mentioned, suggesting that mitochondria are the result of endosymbiosis, but questions arise about the survival of any independent descendants of the ancestral bacteria.
  • Some participants speculate on whether Rickettsia could be a descendant of the common ancestor that also became mitochondria.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of views regarding the origins of mitochondria, with no consensus reached. Some agree on the significance of endosymbiosis, while others question the relationship between mitochondria and known bacterial lineages, indicating ongoing debate and uncertainty.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights limitations in current understanding, including the potential extinction of ancestral bacteria and the complexity of tracing evolutionary lineages. There are unresolved questions about the exact nature of the relationship between mitochondria and their proposed bacterial ancestors.

Ygggdrasil
Science Advisor
Insights Author
Gold Member
Messages
3,753
Reaction score
4,198
An important step in the evolution of plants, animals, and other complex, multicellular forms of life was eukaryogenesis, the evolution of eukaryotes. Eukaryotes are one of the three major classifications of life (alongside single-celled bacteria and archaea) and are characterized by cellular compartmentalization, an extensive membrane network inside of the cells, and the presence of mitochondria. A lot of recent work has focused on refining the origins of eukaryotes, which are thought to have evolved from the fusion between an archaeon and a bacterium (which became the mitochondria). Recent work has narrowed down the origin of our archaeal ancestor to among a newly discovered group of archaea dubbed the Asgard superphylum.

Scientists have also been working toward pinning down the https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/when-did-origin of our mitochondria. Because scientists had thought mitochondria evolved from a group of bacteria known as the alphaproteobacteria (specifically a bacterium closely related to the present day Rickettsiales group), a research team led by Thijs Ettema (the scientist who discovered the Asgard archaea described above) set out to collect a diverse set of alphaproteobacteria from across the world to narrow down the origins of mitochondria. Instead of finding a close relative of the mitochondria, however, they instead found something even more surprising:
Since the 1970s, when researchers turned up similarities between DNA in eukaryotes’ mitochondria and bacterial genomes, scientists have suspected that the organelles descended from symbionts that took up residence within larger cells. A diverse class of bacteria called Alphaproteobacteria soon emerged as a likely candidate for the evolutionary origins of mitochondria. But a new analysis, published today (April 25) in Nature, suggests that mitochondria are at best distant cousins to known alphaproteobacteria lineages, and not descendents as previously thought.

“We are still left hungry for the ancestor of mitochondria,” says http://www.ese.u-psud.fr/rubrique7.html?lang=en, a biologist at the University of Paris-South who was not involved in the study.
https://www.the-scientist.com/?arti...tle/Mitochondria-s-Bacterial-Origins-Upended/

A wider sampling of alphaproteobacteria and improved techniques for analyzing DNA sequences seemed to suggest that our previous hypotheses about the origin of mitochondria were wrong. Instead of residing within alphaproteobacteria, the ancestor of the mitochondria may have been part of a more distantly related group of bacteria that remains to be defined. Discovering the exact origins of the mitochondria (and even identifying extant relatives of that ancestor) will be an exciting challenge for the researchers going forward.

Citation to the study discussed:
Martijn et al. (2018) Deep mitochondrial origin outside the sampled alphaproteobacteria. Nature Published online 25 April 2018
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41586-018-0059-5
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: laymanB, Drakkith, Greg Bernhardt and 9 others
Biology news on Phys.org
It times like this when I wish I had a subscription to Nature or still worked in academia where Nature is easily available. :cry:

I think the origin of life/origin of eukaryotes is one of the most interesting subjects in biology these days.
Nature seems to get a lot of these kinds of articles.
Our understanding of the deepest of evolution slowly being better refined by finding new sequences, and the ability to perform analyses on larger data sets (needing greater computer power). :smile:
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: pinball1970
Viruses are a similar mystery, who asked for them?
A virus is some DNA which has evolved to be able to reproduce by hijacking eukaryotes
 
Last edited:
rootone said:
A virus is some DNA which has evolved to be able to reproduce by hijacking eukaryotes
That's getting into the grey area. What did they evolve from? They couldn't have survived without a complete tool set to start from, could they?
Ygggdrasil said:
A wider sampling of alphaproteobacteria and improved techniques for analyzing DNA sequences seemed to suggest that our previous hypotheses about the origin of mitochondria were wrong. Instead of residing within alphaproteobacteria, the ancestor of the mitochondria may have been part of a more distantly related group of bacteria that remains to be defined.
It's not really rocket science for life to adapt to what is most easily attained. If something does it one specific way why isn't it enough for something else to gain the same ability simultaneously?
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: rootone
jerromyjon said:
That's getting into the grey area. What did they evolve from? They couldn't have survived without a complete tool set to start from, could they?
I would hypothesize that they evolved from bacterial/plasmid conjugation. Bacterial transfer of DNA. Leading to encapsulized transfer. Leading to capsule protein attachment evolution.

Bacterial conjugation allows horizontal gene transfers. Plasmids are a frequent gene transfer vehicle. The initial virus was probably a plasmid that contained a gene for overdriving conjugation. And once you've hijacked the system, adding genes for DNA binding proteins that have conjugation-like attachment and transfer could be sequentially added.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: jerromyjon and rootone
I'm not sure if there have been any new theories and discoveries, but I recall the theory of symbiogenesis. It suggests that mitochondria along with the organelles of eukaryotic cells are the result of endosymbiosis.
 
marthasimons2 said:
I'm not sure if there have been any new theories and discoveries, but I recall the theory of symbiogenesis. It suggests that mitochondria along with the organelles of eukaryotic cells are the result of endosymbiosis.
RIght. The question is if a bacteria became endosymbiotic, and evolved into the non-independent mitochondria, did any of that endosymbiotic ancestral bacteria survive as an independent bacteria? Is Rickettsia a descendant from the common ancestor that also became mitochondria? Or is there even an independent bacterial descendant?

The referred to article indicates that the ancestral bacteria to mitochindria is not so cleanly related to Rickettsia. It may ultimately be the case that those mitochondial ancestor bacteria are extinct, and their evolved descendants are also extinct. I think that is the most likely situation, based on the current information.
 
That sounds logical, thanks for explaining that for me. I got a bit confused. :rolleyes:
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
5K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
6K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
5K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
11K
Replies
6
Views
4K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
14K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K