Debating Eukaryogenesis—Part 2: How Anachronistic Reasoning Can Lure Us into Inventing Intermediates

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

5 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Eukaryotic origins are inextricably linked with the arrival of a pre-mitochondrion of alphaproteobacterial-like ancestry. However, the nature of the “host” cell and the mode of entry are subject to heavy debate. It is becoming clear that the mutual adaptation of a relatively simple, archaeal host and the endosymbiont has been the defining influence at the beginning of the eukaryotic lineage; however, many still resist such symbiogenic models. In part 1, it is posited that a symbiotic stage before uptake (“pre-symbiosis”) seems essential to allow further metabolic integration of the two partners ending in endosymbiosis. Thus, the author argued against phagocytic mechanisms (in which the bacterium is prey or parasite) as the mode of entry. Such positions are still broadly unpopular. Here it is explained why. Evolutionary thinking, especially in the case of eukaryogenesis, is still dominated by anachronistic reasoning, in which highly derived protozoan organisms are seen as in some way representative of intermediate steps during eukaryotic evolution, hence poisoning the debate. This reasoning reflects a mind-set that ignores that Darwinian evolution is a fundamentally historic process. Numerous examples of this kind of erroneous reasoning are given, and some basic precautions against its use are formulated. Also see the video abstract here https://youtu.be/ekqtNleVJpU.

Original languageEnglish
Article number1900153
JournalBioEssays
Volume42
Issue number5
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 May 2020

Keywords

  • anachronisms
  • eukaryogenesis
  • mitochondria
  • origin of sex
  • reactive oxygen species
  • symbiogenesis

Cite this