PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
August 1, 1999Genome Research420 citationsOpen Access

Evolution of Aminoacyl-tRNA Synthetases—Analysis of Unique Domain Architectures and Phylogenetic Trees Reveals a Complex History of Horizontal Gene Transfer Events

YWYuri I. WolfLAL. AravindNGNick V. Grishin

Key Points

  • This research aims to analyze the evolutionary history of aminoacyl-tRNA synthetases (aaRSs) through phylogenetic and domain architecture studies.
  • Phylogenetic analysis of aaRSs from sequenced genomes of bacteria, archaea, and eukaryotes.
  • Examination of domain architecture using sequence profile searches to identify conserved domains.
  • Cluster analysis and modification of midpoint-rooting procedures to infer phylogenetic tree roots.
  • Analysis revealed unexpected connections, such as the origin of GlyRS beta-subunit from the HD superfamily.
  • Displacement of ancestral eukaryotic aaRS genes by bacterial counterparts observed in three aaRSs.
  • Frequent displacement of aaRS genes by eukaryotic genes found in spirochaetes, indicating complexity in bacterial evolution.

Abstract

Phylogenetic analysis of aminoacyl-tRNA synthetases (aaRSs) of all 20 specificities from completely sequenced bacterial, archaeal, and eukaryotic genomes reveals a complex evolutionary picture. Detailed examination of the domain architecture of aaRSs using sequence profile searches delineated a network of partially conserved domains that is even more elaborate than previously suspected. Several unexpected evolutionary connections were identified, including the apparent origin of the beta-subunit of bacterial GlyRS from the HD superfamily of hydrolases, a domain shared by bacterial AspRS and the B subunit of archaeal glutamyl-tRNA amidotransferases, and another previously undetected domain that is conserved in a subset of ThrRS, guanosine polyphosphate hydrolases and synthetases, and a family of GTPases. Comparison of domain architectures and multiple alignments resulted in the delineation of synapomorphies-shared derived characters, such as extra domains or inserts-for most of the aaRSs specificities. These synapomorphies partition sets of aaRSs with the same specificity into two or more distinct and apparently monophyletic groups. In conjunction with cluster analysis and a modification of the midpoint-rooting procedure, this partitioning was used to infer the likely root position in phylogenetic trees. The topologies of the resulting rooted trees for most of the aaRSs specificities are compatible with the evolutionary "standard model" whereby the earliest radiation event separated bacteria from the common ancestor of archaea and eukaryotes as opposed to the two other possible evolutionary scenarios for the three major divisions of life. For almost all aaRSs specificities, however, this simple scheme is confounded by displacement of some of the bacterial aaRSs by their eukaryotic or, less frequently, archaeal counterparts. Displacement of ancestral eukaryotic aaRS genes by bacterial ones, presumably of mitochondrial origin, was observed for three aaRSs. In contrast, there was no convincing evidence of displacement of archaeal aaRSs by bacterial ones. Displacement of aaRS genes by eukaryotic counterparts is most common among parasitic and symbiotic bacteria, particularly the spirochaetes, in which 10 of the 19 aaRSs seem to have been displaced by the respective eukaryotic genes and two by the archaeal counterpart. Unlike the primary radiation events between the three main divisions of life, that were readily traceable through the phylogenetic analysis of aaRSs, no consistent large-scale bacterial phylogeny could be established. In part, this may be due to additional gene displacement events among bacterial lineages. Argument is presented that, although lineage-specific gene loss might have contributed to the evolution of some of the aaRSs, this is not a viable alternative to horizontal gene transfer as the principal evolutionary phenomenon in this gene class.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Wolf et al. (1999) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a0f36f5f27f69a1d3426704https://doi.org/10.1101/gr.9.8.689
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper