ArticleJournal of molecular evolution2014
On how many fundamental kinds of cells are present on Earth: looking for phylogenetic traits that would allow the identification of the primary lines of descent.
Article in Journal of molecular evolution, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The phylogenetic analyses as far as the identification of the number of domains of life is concerned have not reached a clear conclusion. In the attempt to improve this circumstance, I introduce the concept that the amino acids codified in the genetic code might be of markers with outstanding phylogenetic power. In particular, I hypothesise the existence of a biosphere populated, for instance, by three groups of organisms having different genetic codes because codifying at least a different amino acid. Evidently, these amino acids would mark the proteins that are present in the three groups of organisms in an unambiguous way. Therefore, in essence, this mark would not be other than the one that we usually try to make in the phylogenetic analyses in which we transform the protein sequences in phylogenetic trees, for the purpose to identify, for example, the domains of life. Indeed, this mark would allow to classify proteins without performing phylogenetic analyses because proteins belonging to a group of organisms would be recognisable as marked in a natural way by at least a different amino acid among the diverse groups of organisms. This conceptualisation answers the question of how many fundamental kinds of cells have evolved from the Last Universal Common Ancestor (LUCA), as the genetic code has unique proprieties that make the codified amino acids excellent phylogenetic markers. The presence of the formyl-methionine only in proteins of bacteria would mark them and would identify these as domain of life. On the other hand, the presence of pyrrolysine in the genetic code of the euryarchaeota would identify them such as another fundamental kind of cell evolved from the LUCA. Overall, the phylogenetic distribution of formyl-methionine and pyrrolysine would identify at least two domains of life--Bacteria and Archaea--but their number might be actually four; that is to say, Bacteria, Euryarchaeota, archeobacteria that are not euryarchaeota and Eukarya. The usually accepted domains of life represented by Bacteria, Archaea and Eukarya are not compatible with the phylogenetic distribution of these two amino acids and therefore this last classification might be mistaken.
Indexed as
Identifiers
24916656What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.