National Academy of Sciences | 150 Year Anniversary

Questions? Call 800-624-6242

| Items in cart [0]

The National Academies Press

HARDBACK
price:$59.00
add to cart

Rights & Permissions

topleft topright

In the Light of Evolution III: Two Centuries of Darwin (2009)
National Academy of Sciences (NAS)

Citation Manager

. "4 Cascades of Convergent Evolution: The Corresponding Evolutionary Histories of Euglenozoans and Dinoflagellates--Julius Lukeš, Brian S. Leander, and Patrick J. Keeling ." In the Light of Evolution III: Two Centuries of Darwin. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, 2009.

Please select a format:

BibTeX EndNote RefMan


Page
73
bottomleft bottomright

The following HTML text is provided to enhance online readability. Many aspects of typography translate only awkwardly to HTML. Please use the page image as the authoritative form to ensure accuracy.


In the Light of Evolution Volume III: Two Centuries of Darwin

At different points in their evolutionary history, both euglenids and dinoflagellates independently acquired photosynthesis via secondary endosymbiosis. Accordingly, some representatives of both groups contain at least 3 different genomes within 3 different cellular compartments: the nucleus, the plastid, and the mitochondrion. The general organization of the nucleus is a particularly notable feature that is shared by euglenids and dinoflagellates; both groups possess a conspicuous nucleus with a relatively large nucleolus and permanently condensed chromosomes (Fig. 4.2B and G). The plastids in both groups also share the unusual features of 3 envelope membranes and a tendency to have thylacoids in stacks of 3 (Fig. 4.2E and J) (Taylor, 1987). However, the analogous similarities between euglenozoans and dinoflagellates do not end at the ultrastructural level. As described in the next 3 sections, the molecular processes associated with the nucleus, plastid, and mitochondrion also reflect high levels of convergent evolution.

THE NUCLEUS: SPLICED LEADERS AND POLYCISTRONIC mRNA PROCESSING

The nuclear genomes of kinetoplastids and dinoflagellates have both acquired a long list of unusual characteristics. Some of these are unique to one lineage and very different in the other. For example, dinoflagellates have among the largest nuclear genomes known, and these genomes have a very low gene density and permanently condensed chromosomes that lack nucleosomes (McEwan et al., 2008). Kinetoplastid genomes, however, are relatively small, are gene-dense, and remain uncondensed during the cell cycle (Berriman et al., 2005). Both genomes are notorious for their rich representation of modified nucleotides, but the nucleotides themselves are not the same: the hypermodified base J (β-D-glucopyranosyloxymethyluracil) is common in kinetoplastid telomeric regions, whereas dinoflagellates have a high proportion of 5-hydroxymethyluracil and 5-methylcytosine.

However, other dramatic alterations to these genomes have taken place convergently, and interestingly, several characteristics have been altered in the same way in both lineages, in particular relating to how genes are arranged and transcribed, and how transcripts are processed. The canonical, simplified view of eukaryotic gene expression involves a single gene transcribed, capped, polyadenylated, spliced (if introns are present), and exported to the cytosol. Both kinetoplastids and dinoflagellates deviate from this canonical view in 2 significant ways that impact the way expression may be controlled.

The first of these is trans-splicing. The spliceosome is a large multisubunit complex that normally recognizes GT-AG bounded spliceosomal

Page
73
Front Matter (R1-R16)
Part I: NATURAL SELECTION, OR ADAPTATION TO NATURE (1-4)
1 Natural Selection inAction During Speciation--Sara Via (5-26)
2 Adaptive Radiations:From Field to Genomic Studies--Scott A. Hodges and Nathan J. Derieg (27-46)
3 Genetics and Ecological Speciation--Dolph Schluter and Gina L. Conte (47-64)
4 Cascades of Convergent Evolution: The Corresponding Evolutionary Histories of Euglenozoans and Dinoflagellates--Julius Lukeš, Brian S. Leander, and Patrick J. Keeling (65-84)
Part II: ARTIFICIAL SELECTION, OR ADAPTATION TO HUMAN DEMANDS (85-88)
5 From Wild Animals to Domestic Pets, an Evolutionary View of Domestication--Carlos A. Driscoll, David W. Macdonald, and Stephen J. O'Brien (89-110)
6 Tracking Footprints of Maize Domestication and Evidence for a Massive Selective Sweep on Chromosome 10--Feng Tian, Natalie M. Stevens, and Edward S. Buckler IV (111-128)
7 Human-Induced Evolution Caused by Unnatural Selection Through Harvest of Wild Animals--Fred W. Allendorf and Jeffrey J. Hard (129-148)
8 In the Light of Directed Evolution: Pathways of Adaptive Protein Evolution--Jesse D. Bloom and Frances H. Arnold (149-164)
Part III: SEXUAL SELECTION, OR ADAPTATION TO MATING DEMANDS (165-168)
9 Mate Choice and Sexual Selection: What Have We Learned Since Darwin?--Adam G. Jones and Nicholas L. Ratterman (169-190)
10 Sexual Selection and Mating Systems--Stephen M. Shuster (191-212)
11 Reproductive Decisions Under Ecological Constraints: It's About Time--Patricia Adair Gowaty and Stephen P. Hubbell (213-242)
12 Postcopulatory Sexual Selection: Darwin's Omission and Its Consequences--William G. Eberhard (243-262)
Part IV: THE DARWINIAN LEGACY, 150 YEARS LATER (263-266)
13 Darwin and the Scientific Method--Francisco J. Ayala (267-286)
14 The Darwinian Revolution: Rethinking Its Meaningand Significance--Michael Ruse (287-306)
15 Did Darwin Write *the Origin* Backwards?--Elliott Sober (307-328)
16 Darwin's Place in the History of Thought: A Reevaluation--Robert J. Richards (329-342)
17 Darwin's "Strange Inversion of Reasoning"--Daniel Dennett (343-354)
References (355-398)
Index (399-414)