Cargando…

Elusive data underlying debate at the prokaryote-eukaryote divide

BACKGROUND: The origin of eukaryotic cells was an important transition in evolution. The factors underlying the origin and evolutionary success of the eukaryote lineage are still discussed. One camp argues that mitochondria were essential for eukaryote origin because of the unique configuration of i...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Gerlitz, Marie, Knopp, Michael, Kapust, Nils, Xavier, Joana C., Martin, William F.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6888934/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31196150
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13062-018-0221-x
_version_ 1783475329116930048
author Gerlitz, Marie
Knopp, Michael
Kapust, Nils
Xavier, Joana C.
Martin, William F.
author_facet Gerlitz, Marie
Knopp, Michael
Kapust, Nils
Xavier, Joana C.
Martin, William F.
author_sort Gerlitz, Marie
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The origin of eukaryotic cells was an important transition in evolution. The factors underlying the origin and evolutionary success of the eukaryote lineage are still discussed. One camp argues that mitochondria were essential for eukaryote origin because of the unique configuration of internalized bioenergetic membranes that they conferred to the common ancestor of all known eukaryotic lineages. A recent paper by Lynch and Marinov concluded that mitochondria were energetically irrelevant to eukaryote origin, a conclusion based on analyses of previously published numbers of various molecules and ribosomes per cell and cell volumes as a presumed proxy for the role of mitochondria in evolution. Their numbers were purportedly extracted from the literature. RESULTS: We have examined the numbers upon which the recent study was based. We report that for a sample of 80 numbers that were purportedly extracted from the literature and that underlie key inferences of the recent study, more than 50% of the values do not exist in the cited papers to which the numbers are attributed. The published result cannot be independently reproduced. Other numbers that the recent study reports differ inexplicably from those in the literature to which they are ascribed. We list the discrepancies between the recently published numbers and the purported literature sources of those numbers in a head to head manner so that the discrepancies are readily evident, although the source of error underlying the discrepancies remains obscure. CONCLUSION: The data purportedly supporting the view that mitochondria had no impact upon eukaryotic evolution data exhibits notable irregularities. The paper in question evokes the impression that the published numbers are of up to seven significant digit accuracy, when in fact more than half the numbers are nowhere to be found in the literature to which they are attributed. Though the reasons for the discrepancies are unknown, it is important to air these issues, lest the prominent paper in question become a point source of a snowballing error through the literature or become interpreted as a form of evidence that mitochondria were irrelevant to eukaryote evolution. REVIEWERS: This article was reviewed by Eric Bapteste, Jianzhi Zhang and Martin Lercher.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6888934
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-68889342019-12-11 Elusive data underlying debate at the prokaryote-eukaryote divide Gerlitz, Marie Knopp, Michael Kapust, Nils Xavier, Joana C. Martin, William F. Biol Direct Comment BACKGROUND: The origin of eukaryotic cells was an important transition in evolution. The factors underlying the origin and evolutionary success of the eukaryote lineage are still discussed. One camp argues that mitochondria were essential for eukaryote origin because of the unique configuration of internalized bioenergetic membranes that they conferred to the common ancestor of all known eukaryotic lineages. A recent paper by Lynch and Marinov concluded that mitochondria were energetically irrelevant to eukaryote origin, a conclusion based on analyses of previously published numbers of various molecules and ribosomes per cell and cell volumes as a presumed proxy for the role of mitochondria in evolution. Their numbers were purportedly extracted from the literature. RESULTS: We have examined the numbers upon which the recent study was based. We report that for a sample of 80 numbers that were purportedly extracted from the literature and that underlie key inferences of the recent study, more than 50% of the values do not exist in the cited papers to which the numbers are attributed. The published result cannot be independently reproduced. Other numbers that the recent study reports differ inexplicably from those in the literature to which they are ascribed. We list the discrepancies between the recently published numbers and the purported literature sources of those numbers in a head to head manner so that the discrepancies are readily evident, although the source of error underlying the discrepancies remains obscure. CONCLUSION: The data purportedly supporting the view that mitochondria had no impact upon eukaryotic evolution data exhibits notable irregularities. The paper in question evokes the impression that the published numbers are of up to seven significant digit accuracy, when in fact more than half the numbers are nowhere to be found in the literature to which they are attributed. Though the reasons for the discrepancies are unknown, it is important to air these issues, lest the prominent paper in question become a point source of a snowballing error through the literature or become interpreted as a form of evidence that mitochondria were irrelevant to eukaryote evolution. REVIEWERS: This article was reviewed by Eric Bapteste, Jianzhi Zhang and Martin Lercher. BioMed Central 2018-10-03 /pmc/articles/PMC6888934/ /pubmed/31196150 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13062-018-0221-x Text en © The Author(s). 2018 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Comment
Gerlitz, Marie
Knopp, Michael
Kapust, Nils
Xavier, Joana C.
Martin, William F.
Elusive data underlying debate at the prokaryote-eukaryote divide
title Elusive data underlying debate at the prokaryote-eukaryote divide
title_full Elusive data underlying debate at the prokaryote-eukaryote divide
title_fullStr Elusive data underlying debate at the prokaryote-eukaryote divide
title_full_unstemmed Elusive data underlying debate at the prokaryote-eukaryote divide
title_short Elusive data underlying debate at the prokaryote-eukaryote divide
title_sort elusive data underlying debate at the prokaryote-eukaryote divide
topic Comment
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6888934/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31196150
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13062-018-0221-x
work_keys_str_mv AT gerlitzmarie elusivedataunderlyingdebateattheprokaryoteeukaryotedivide
AT knoppmichael elusivedataunderlyingdebateattheprokaryoteeukaryotedivide
AT kapustnils elusivedataunderlyingdebateattheprokaryoteeukaryotedivide
AT xavierjoanac elusivedataunderlyingdebateattheprokaryoteeukaryotedivide
AT martinwilliamf elusivedataunderlyingdebateattheprokaryoteeukaryotedivide