| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
|
|
|
|||||||
|
|||||||||
Department of Biochemistry, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada L8N 3Z5
Correspondence
Radhey S. Gupta
gupta{at}mcmaster.ca
 |
ABSTRACT |
|---|
 TOP ABSTRACT INTRODUCTIONMETHODSRESULTSDISCUSSIONREFERENCES |
|---|
Published online ahead of print on 23 May 2003 as DOI 10.1099/ijs.0.02720-0.
Partial sequence alignments of UvrD, EF-Tu, ribosomal S1 protein, inosine-5'-monophosphate dehydrogenase, 
70 and FtsH showing indels characteristic of cyanobacteria are available as supplementary data in IJSEM Online.
|
INTRODUCTION |
|---|
|
TOPABSTRACTINTRODUCTIONMETHODSRESULTSDISCUSSIONREFERENCES |
|---|
; Castenholz, 2001). They comprise the sole prokaryotic group capable of oxygenic photosynthesis, and their emergence was a major evolutionary event that changed the Earth's atmosphere from an anoxygenic one to an oxygenic one (Woese, 1987; Kondratieva et al., 1992; Bryant, 1994; Castenholz, 2001). The cyanobacteria, through endosymbiosis, are also believed to be the progenitors of plastids in eukaryotic cells (Giovannoni et al., 1988; Gray, 1992; Morden et al., 1992; Margulis, 1993; Whatley, 1993).
Cyanobacteria exhibit enormous diversity in terms of their morphology, physiology and differentiation characteristics, which has led to the proposal of their division into five subsections (Rippka et al., 1979; Trüper, 1987; Kondratieva et al., 1992; Bryant, 1994; Castenholz, 2001). However, phylogenetic trees based on 16S rRNA provide the primary means for the identification and assignment of novel species to this group (Woese, 1987; Honda et al., 1999; Turner et al., 1999; Wilmotte & Herdman, 2001). Although cyanobacteria form a monophyletic group in 16S rRNA trees, the branching of different species within this phylum is found to be highly variable, and different subsections identified on the basis of morphological characteristics are generally not distinguished (Honda et al., 1999; Wilmotte & Herdman, 2001). Other than phylogenetic trees based on 16S rRNA or various proteins (Viale et al., 1994; Eisen, 1995; Delwiche et al., 1995; Gupta et al., 1997; Gruber & Bryant, 1997), no unique molecular signatures are presently known that can clearly distinguish cyanobacteria from all other bacteria (Castenholz, 2001).
We have recently described a new approach, based on conserved indels (i.e. inserts or deletions) found in various proteins, for identifying different groups of bacteria and for clarifying their interrelationships (Gupta, 1998). The signatures that have been identified are of two kinds. One type of signature, which we refer to as the ‘main line’ signatures, are shared by several major groups of bacteria but absent from the other bacterial phyla (Gupta, 1998). We have proposed that these signatures were introduced at critical branch points during the course of bacterial evolution, and that they provide useful information for deducing the branching order and interrelationships among different groups of bacteria (Gupta, 1998, 2001). On the basis of different main line signatures, the cyanobacterial phylum is indicated to have evolved after the divergence of various Gram-positive phyla (Firmicutes, Actinobacteria, clostridia and relatives), the Deinococcus–Thermus group and green non-sulfur bacteria, but before the emergence of spirochaetes, the chlamydiae–CFBG (Cytophaga–Flavobacterium–Bacteroides and green sulfur bacteria) group, Aquifex and different divisions of the Proteobacteria (Gupta, 1998, 2001, 2002, 2003; Gupta & Griffiths, 2002). The second type of signature is specific for particular groups of bacteria and was probably introduced when these groups or phyla evolved (Gupta, 1998; Griffiths & Gupta, 2002). Such signatures have been identified for the chlamydiae, Proteobacteria, spirochaetes, Firmicutes and Actinobacteria (Gupta, 1998; Griffiths & Gupta, 2002; Morse et al., 2002; R. S. Gupta, unpublished results) and they should prove very useful in identifying different bacterial groups in clear molecular terms (Gupta, 2002; Griffiths & Gupta, 2002).
In this communication, we describe 14 conserved indels in 10 broadly distributed proteins that are specific for cyanobacteria (and, in many cases, also commonly shared by plastid homologues) but not found in any other bacteria. These signatures provide evidence that the cyanobacteria lineage is monophyletic and furnish further evidence for the derivation of plastids from this group of bacteria. Because of their observed specificity, these signatures should prove useful for the identification of cyanobacterial species and for studies on the origin of plastids.
|
METHODS |
|---|
|
TOPABSTRACTINTRODUCTIONMETHODSRESULTSDISCUSSIONREFERENCES |
|---|
; Gupta, 2000; Griffiths & Gupta, 2002). To search for signature sequences that might be specific for cyanobacteria, these alignments were visually examined to identify those indels that were unique to the cyanobacterial homologues and were flanked by conserved sequences. The potential usefulness of any such indel was examined by carrying out additional BLAST searches on short sequence segments (usually between 60 and 100 aa long) containing the indel and the flanking conserved regions. The purpose of these BLAST searches was to obtain sequence information from all available species. In most cases, two different BLAST searches were carried out, one with a sequence containing the indel and the other with a sequence that lacked the indel. Indels that were unique to particular cyanobacterial species were not investigated any further. However, for those indels that were commonly present in various cyanobacteria, sequence information from different species was compiled into signature files such as those shown here.
Phylogenetic analysis.
Phylogenetic analyses of protein sequences were carried out as described previously (Gupta et al., 1997). A multiple alignment of sequences from different groups of bacteria (and also plastid homologues, where found) was created using the ALIGN program. Any sequence region for which the alignment was deemed unreliable was omitted from phylogenetic analysis. The indel regions were also excluded from the alignment for this purpose. Neighbour-joining distance trees showing branch lengths were constructed using the programs PROTDIST, NEIGHBOR and DRAWTREE. The aligned sequences were also bootstrapped 100 times using the SEQBOOT program, and a consensus neighbour-joining tree based on these data was obtained using the programs PROTDIST, NEIGHBOR and CONSENSE. Bootstrap scores for different nodes that were >50 were noted on the trees. All phylogenetic programs used are part of PHYLIP version 3.5 (Felsenstein, 1994).
|
RESULTS |
|---|
|
TOPABSTRACTINTRODUCTIONMETHODSRESULTSDISCUSSIONREFERENCES |
|---|
The SecA protein is found in all sequenced bacterial genomes and is involved in the export of proteins to the periplasmic compartment (Valentin, 1997; Schmidt & Kiser, 1999). In this protein, we have identified a 2 aa insert in a highly conserved region that is specific to cyanobacteria (Fig. 1). Sequence information for SecA is available from a large number of cyanobacteria. The identified insert is present in all known cyanobacterial homologues, but not in any other bacteria. Interestingly, this insert is also present in SecA homologues from different plastids. Plastid lineages from which sequence information is available include the Chlorophyta (land plants), the Rhodophyta (red algae), the Chromophyta (brown algae) and the Cryptomonadida (Guillardia theta). These results indicate that this insert is a distinguishing characteristic of these groups and that they are specifically related to each other.
|
; Barbrook et al., 1998). Fig. 2 shows a neighbour-joining tree with branch lengths for SecA sequences. The bootstrap scores for various nodes that were >50 are also noted. As seen from their bootstrap scores, most of the bacterial groups in this tree are well resolved from each other. However, their relative branching order is not resolved, which is a common problem in phylogenetic trees (Gupta, 1998; Ludwig & Klenk, 2001). In the SecA tree, all cyanobacteria and plastid homologues formed a well-defined clade (100 % bootstrap score), supporting the inference of the identified signature that these groups shared a common ancestor exclusive of other bacteria. Within this clade, the sequences corresponding to cyanobacteria were clearly resolved from those of the Chlorophyta and the Rhodophyta–Chromophyta. An unusual aspect of this tree, which has also been noted in earlier studies (Valentin, 1997; Barbrook et al., 1998), is that the plastid homologues branched more deeply than the cyanobacteria. This is an unexpected result if plastids have been derived from cyanobacteria. However, as seen in Fig. 2, in comparison with cyanobacteria, all of the plastid sequences have much longer branch lengths, indicating that they have been evolving at a faster rate. The deeper branching of the plastid lineages in SecA phylogenetic trees, therefore, is very probably a consequence of the long branch-length effect, which leads to a deeper and abnormal branching of faster-evolving taxa (Felsenstein, 1978; Barbrook et al., 1998).
|
), we have identified three cyanobacteria-specific indels. These signatures include a large, 28 aa insert (Fig. 3) as well as two inserts of 6 and 7 aa (see Supplementary Fig. A in IJSEM Online) in conserved regions. UvrD is present in all bacterial genomes, but not in the Archaea or plastids. Since the inserts identified are not found in any other bacteria, they are cyanobacteria-specific. In a phylogenetic tree based on UvrD sequences (excluding the indel regions), all cyanobacterial homologues grouped together with a 100 % bootstrap score (Fig. 4). This result supports the monophyletic nature of the cyanobacterial taxa and provides evidence that the indels identified in this protein were introduced in a common ancestor of this group (see the arrowhead in Fig. 4).
|
|
). Similarly to UvrD and SecA, Pol I is found in all sequenced bacterial genomes. The insert identified is present in all known cyanobacterial homologues, but not in any other bacteria (Fig. 5). The length of this conserved insert shows some variation in different species, possibly due to further mutations/changes that have occurred in individual species. In a phylogenetic tree based on Pol I sequences, all cyanobacterial species again formed a well-defined clade (100 % bootstrap score; results not shown), supporting their monophyly as suggested by the shared signature. The Pol I homologues of eukaryotic species do not contain this insert. However, most of the eukaryotic sequences are for polymerase 
, except possibly that from Oryza sativa, which Kimura et al. (2002) have reported corresponds to a Pol I-like protein and is localized in the plastids.
|
. The first of these signatures is in the enzyme ADP-glucose pyrophosphorylase (ADP-Glc-PPase), which is involved in the synthesis of glycogen in bacteria and starch in plants (Preiss, 1996). The cyanobacterial homologues of this protein contain a 14 aa conserved insert that is not found in any other bacteria (Fig. 6a). In bacteria, the ADP-Glc-PPase is a homotetramer, whereas the plastid enzyme is made up of two small (catalytic) and two large (regulatory) subunits (Preiss, 1996). Interestingly, the signature identified is present in both the large and small subunits of the plastid enzyme, providing evidence that both originated from cyanobacteria. The other cyanobacteria–plastid signature, shown in Fig. 6(b), is in the enzyme phytoene synthase, which plays a key role in the biosynthesis of carotenoids (Armstrong, 1997). The carotenoid pigments play important roles as light-harvesting molecules in photosynthetic reaction centres. The phytoene synthase from various cyanobacteria contains an 11–13 aa insert that is not found in any other bacteria. With the exception of Deinococcus–Thermus, all of the bacterial phyla in which this protein is found contain at least some photosynthetic members (Woese, 1987). The plastid homologues of this protein also contain an insert in the same position (Fig. 6b). However, this insert is shorter than that in cyanobacteria (7 aa versus 11 aa), indicating either that it arose independently or that a further deletion occurred in this gene during the evolution of plastids.
|
have previously described a 5 aa conserved insert in elongation factor-Tu (EF-Tu) that was present in cyanobacterial and plastid homologues. We have updated the sequence information for this signature (Supplementary Fig. B) and have confirmed its specificity for these groups. Phylogenetic trees based on EF-Tu sequences again support the monophyletic nature of the cyanobacterial phylum and the derivation of plastids from this group of bacteria (Delwiche et al., 1995; R. S. Gupta, unpublished results). Ribosomal S1 protein, which is widely distributed among bacteria (Subramanian, 1983), also contains two signatures (2 and 7 aa deletions) that are characteristic of cyanobacteria (Supplementary Fig. C). In contrast to other bacteria, cyanobacteria possess two different S1 protein homologues, both of which contain these signatures, suggesting that they arose from a gene-duplication event that occurred after these signatures were introduced. These deletions are also present in the plastid homologues, supporting their specific relationship to cyanobacteria. Two cyanobacterial signatures (a 5 aa insert and a 1 aa deletion) have been identified in the enzyme inosine-5'-monophosphate dehydrogenase, which is involved in the synthesis of guanine nucleotides (Supplementary Fig. D). These signatures are not found in any of the eukaryotic homologues, indicating that they are probably of either mitochondrial or nuclear–cytosolic origin (Gupta, 1998). A 1 aa cyanobacteria-specific deletion is present in the major sigma factor (70), which is part of the RNA polymerase holoenzyme (Supplementary Fig. E). A divergent form of 70-like protein is found in plastids (Isono et al., 1997); however, the insert is not present in such homologues. The last of the cyanobacterial signatures described here is a 3 aa insert in the enzyme FtsH protease, involved in the degradation of membrane proteins (Akiyama, 2002) (Supplementary Fig. F). Unlike those of other bacteria, the genomes of cyanobacteria have two different homologues of FtsH, only one of which contains this insert. This insert is also present in a number of plastid homologues. |
DISCUSSION |
|---|
|
TOPABSTRACTINTRODUCTIONMETHODSRESULTSDISCUSSIONREFERENCES |
|---|
). Therefore, it is likely that many of these signatures will prove distinctive for the entire cyanobacterial phylum and will provide molecular markers for distinguishing cyanobacteria from all other bacteria. The availability of such markers should facilitate the identification of novel cyanobacterial species simply on the basis of the presence or absence of these markers in corresponding proteins. All of the identified signatures are flanked on both sides by highly conserved sequence regions. This should facilitate the design of PCR primers to amplify the sequence region from other bacteria, which will be carried out in future work.
Cyanobacteria are a very diverse group, exhibiting enormous variation in their cell division and morphological characteristics. However, the taxonomic relationships within this phylum are not understood (Rippka et al., 1979; Trüper, 1987; Kondratieva et al., 1992; Castenholz, 2001; Wilmotte & Herdman, 2001). In phylogenetic trees based on 16S rRNA, 14 major clusters have been identified within this phylum; however, it is unclear whether the placement of species within these clusters is evolutionarily meaningful. Also, how these different clusters relate to the major morphological differences within the cyanobacteria is unclear (Wilmotte & Herdman, 2001). In this context, signature sequences could provide a new and useful means of clarifying taxonomic relationships within this group. In the present work, we have focused mainly on indels that are shared by different cyanobacteria; other indels that were unique to particular cyanobacterial species were not studied further. However, such indels could provide signatures for identifying intermediate-level taxa within the cyanobacterial phylum.
The identification, in the present work, of 14 cyanobacteria-specific indels in 10 essential and widely distributed proteins provides evidence that the cyanobacterial phylum is monophyletic and that these signatures were probably introduced in a common ancestor of this group. The phylogenetic trees based on various genes/proteins also strongly support this inference. These results also provide evidence that the genes for these proteins have not been laterally exchanged between cyanobacteria and other bacteria, as has been suggested for many other genes (Gogarten et al., 2002; Raymond et al., 2002). If these genes were subjects of lateral gene transfers, the presence of these indels would be expected to be more random, which is clearly not the case here. However, we have previously described a few other signatures that are shared by cyanobacteria and the Deinococcus–Thermus group, and these could be a consequence of lateral gene transfers (Gupta & Johari, 1998; Gupta, 1998).
The signatures described here are also of value in clarifying the evolutionary relationship between cyanobacteria and plastids (Whatley, 1993; Delwiche et al., 1995; Stiller & Hall, 1997; Valentin, 1997). For six of these proteins that are also present in plastids (SecA, ADP-Glc-PPase, phytoene synthase, EF-Tu, FtsH and ribosomal S1 protein), the signatures identified are commonly shared by the plastid homologues. Phylogenetic trees based on some of these proteins show a specific grouping of plastid homologues with cyanobacteria. These results provide additional evidence in support of the endosymbiotic origin of plastids from cyanobacteria (Gray, 1992; Margulis, 1993; Delwiche et al., 1995). However, for three of these proteins, Pol I, inosine-5'-monophosphate dehydrogenase and 70, the cyanobacteria-specific indels were not found in eukaryotic homologues. It is possible that these homologues are of either mitochondrial or nuclear–cytosolic origin and would therefore not be expected to contain cyanobacteria-specific signatures (Gupta, 1998). Additional studies are required to clarify this aspect. With the availability of new signatures that allow discrimination between different groups of cyanobacteria, the signature approach could provide important insights into which group of cyanobacteria are the closest relatives of plastid lineages. The functional significance of the identified signatures is not known. Because these indels have not been lost from any cyanobacteria, they are expected to be functionally important. Hence, studies examining their functional effects should be of much interest.
|
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS |
|---|
|
REFERENCES |
|---|
|
TOPABSTRACTINTRODUCTIONMETHODSRESULTSDISCUSSIONREFERENCES |
|---|
Armstrong, G. A. (1997). Genetics of eubacterial carotenoid biosynthesis: a colorful tale. Annu Rev Microbiol 51, 629–659.[CrossRef][Medline]
Barbrook, A. C., Lockhart, P. J. & Howe, C. J. (1998). Phylogenetic analysis of plastid origins based on secA sequences. Curr Genet 34, 336–341.[CrossRef][Medline]
Bryant, D. A. (1994). The Molecular Biology of Cyanobacteria. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Castenholz, R. W. (2001). Phylum BX. Cyanobacteria. Oxygenic photosynthetic bacteria. In Bergey's Manual of Systematic Bacteriology, 2nd edn, vol. 1, pp. 474–487. Edited by D. R. Boone, R. W. Castenholz & G. M. Garrity. New York: Springer.
Delwiche, C. F., Kuhsel, M. & Palmer, J. D. (1995). Phylogenetic analysis of tufA sequences indicates a cyanobacterial origin of all plastids. Mol Phylogenet Evol 4, 110–128.[CrossRef][Medline]
Eisen, J. A. (1995). The RecA protein as a model molecule for molecular systematic studies of bacteria: comparison of trees of RecAs and 16S rRNAs from the same species. J Mol Evol 41, 1105–1123.[Medline]
Eisen, J. A. & Hanawalt, P. C. (1999). A phylogenomic study of DNA repair genes, proteins, and processes. Mutat Res 435, 171–213.[Medline]
Felsenstein, J. (1978). Cases in which parsimony and compatibility methods will be positively misleading. Syst Zool 27, 401–410.[CrossRef]
Felsenstein, J. (1994). PHYLIP, version 3.5. Distributed by the author. Department of Genetics, University of Washington, Seattle, USA.
Giovannoni, S. J., Turner, S., Olsen, G. J., Barns, S., Lane, D. J. & Pace, N. R. (1988). Evolutionary relationships among cyanobacteria and green chloroplasts. J Bacteriol 170, 3584–3592.
Gogarten, J. P., Doolittle, W. F. & Lawrence, J. G. (2002). Prokaryotic evolution in light of gene transfer. Mol Biol Evol 19, 2226–2238.
Gray, M. W. (1992). The endosymbiont hypothesis revisited. Int Rev Cytol 141, 233–357.[Medline]
Griffiths, E. & Gupta, R. S. (2001). The use of signature sequences in different proteins to determine the relative branching order of bacterial divisions: evidence that Fibrobacter diverged at a similar time to Chlamydia and the Cytophaga–Flavobacterium–Bacteroides division. Microbiology 147, 2611–2622.
Griffiths, E. & Gupta, R. S. (2002). Protein signatures distinctive of chlamydial species: horizontal transfer of cell wall biosynthesis genes glmU from archaea to chlamydiae and murA between chlamydiae and Streptomyces. Microbiology 148, 2541–2549.
Gruber, T. M. & Bryant, D. A. (1997). Molecular systematic studies of eubacteria, using 70-type sigma factors of group 1 and group 2. J Bacteriol 179, 1734–1747.
Gupta, R. S. (1998). Protein phylogenies and signature sequences: a reappraisal of evolutionary relationships among archaebacteria, eubacteria, and eukaryotes. Microbiol Mol Biol Rev 62, 1435–1491.
Gupta, R. S. (2000). The phylogeny of Proteobacteria: relationships to other eubacterial phyla and eukaryotes. FEMS Microbiol Rev 24, 367–402.[CrossRef][Medline]
Gupta, R. S. (2001). The branching order and phylogenetic placement of species from completed bacterial genomes, based on conserved indels found in various proteins. Int Microbiol 4, 187–202.[CrossRef][Medline]
Gupta, R. S. (2002). Phylogeny of bacteria: are we now close to understanding it? ASM News 68, 284–291.
Gupta, R. S. (2003). Evolutionary relationships among photosynthetic bacteria. Photosynth Res 76, 173–183.[CrossRef][Medline]
Gupta, R. S. & Griffiths, E. (2002). Critical issues in bacterial phylogenies. Theor Popul Biol 61, 423–434.[CrossRef][Medline]
Gupta, R. S. & Johari, V. (1998). Signature sequences in diverse proteins provide evidence of a close evolutionary relationship between the Deinococcus–Thermus group and cyanobacteria. J Mol Evol 46, 716–720.[CrossRef][Medline]
Gupta, R. S., Bustard, K., Falah, M. & Singh, D. (1997). Sequencing of heat shock protein 70 (DnaK) homologs from Deinococcus proteolyticus and Thermomicrobium roseum and their integration in a protein-based phylogeny of prokaryotes. J Bacteriol 179, 345–357.
Honda, D., Yokota, A. & Sugiyama, J. (1999). Detection of seven major evolutionary lineages in cyanobacteria based on the 16S rRNA gene sequence analysis with new sequences of five marine Synechococcus strains. J Mol Evol 48, 723–739.[CrossRef][Medline]
Isono, K., Shimizu, M., Yoshimoto, K., Niwa, Y., Satoh, K., Yokota, A. & Kobayashi, H. (1997). Leaf-specifically expressed genes for polypeptides destined for chloroplasts with domains of 70 factors of bacterial RNA polymerases in Arabidopsis thaliana. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 94, 14948–14953.
Kimura, S., Uchiyama, Y., Kasai, N. & 10 other authors (2002). A novel DNA polymerase homologous to Escherichia coli DNA polymerase I from a higher plant, rice (Oryza sativa L.). Nucleic Acids Res 30, 1585–1592.
Kondratieva, E. N., Pfennig, N. & Trüper, H. G. (1992). The phototrophic prokaryotes. In The Prokaryotes, pp. 312–330. Edited by A. Balows, H. G. Trüper, M. Dworkin, W. Harder & K. H. Schleifer. New York: Springer.
Ludwig, W. & Klenk, H.-P. (2001). Overview: a phylogenetic backbone and taxonomic framework for procaryotic systematics. In Bergey's Manual of Systematic Bacteriology, 2nd edn, vol. 1, pp. 49–65. Edited by D. R. Boone, R. W. Castenholz & G. M. Garrity. Berlin: Springer.
Margulis, L. (1993). Symbiosis in Cell Evolution. New York: W. H. Freeman.
Morden, C. W., Delwiche, C. F., Kuhsel, M. & Palmer, J. D. (1992). Gene phylogenies and the endosymbiotic origin of plastids. Biosystems 28, 75–90.[CrossRef][Medline]
Morse, R., O'Hanlon, K. & Collins, M. D. (2002). Phylogenetic, amino acid content and indel analyses of the 
subunit of DNA-dependent RNA polymerase of Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 52, 1477–1484.[Abstract]
Preiss, J. (1996). ADPglucose pyrophosphorylase: basic science and applications in biotechnology. Biotechnol Annu Rev 2, 259–279.[Medline]
Raymond, J., Zhaxybayeva, O., Gogarten, J. P., Gerdes, S. Y. & Blankenship, R. E. (2002). Whole-genome analysis of photosynthetic prokaryotes. Science 298, 1616–1620.
Rippka, R., Deruelles, J., Waterbury, J. B., Herdman, M. & Stanier, R. Y. (1979). Generic assignments, strain histories and properties of pure cultures of cyanobacteria. J Gen Microbiol 111, 1–61.
Schmidt, M. G. & Kiser, K. B. (1999). SecA: the ubiquitous component of preprotein translocase in prokaryotes. Microbes Infect 1, 993–1004.[CrossRef][Medline]
Stiller, J. W. & Hall, B. D. (1997). The origin of red algae: implications for plastid evolution. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 94, 4520–4525.
Subramanian, A. R. (1983). Structure and functions of ribosomal protein S1. Prog Nucleic Acid Res Mol Biol 28, 101–142.[Medline]
Trüper, H. G. (1987). Phototrophic bacteria (an incoherent group of prokaryotes). A taxonomic versus phylogenetic survey. Microbiologia 3, 71–89.[Medline]
Turner, S., Pryer, K. M., Miao, V. P. & Palmer, J. D. (1999). Investigating deep phylogenetic relationships among cyanobacteria and plastids by small subunit rRNA sequence analysis. J Eukaryot Microbiol 46, 327–338.[Medline]
Valentin, K. (1997). Phylogeny and expression of the secA gene from a chromophytic alga – implications for the evolution of plastids and sec-dependent protein translocation. Curr Genet 32, 300–307.[CrossRef][Medline]
Viale, A. M., Arakaki, A. K., Soncini, F. C. & Ferreyra, R. G. (1994). Evolutionary relationships among eubacterial groups as inferred from GroEL (chaperonin) sequence comparisons. Int J Syst Bacteriol 44, 527–533.
Whatley, J. M. (1993). The endosymbiotic origin of chloroplasts. Int Rev Cytol 144, 259–299.
Wilmotte, A. & Herdman, M. (2001). Phylogenetic relationships among the cyanobacteria based on 16S rRNA sequences. In Bergey's Manual of Systematic Bacteriology, 2nd edn, vol. 1, pp. 487–493. Edited by D. R. Boone, R. W. Castenholz & G. M. Garrity. New York: Springer.
Woese, C. R. (1987). Bacterial evolution. Microbiol Rev 51, 221–271.
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  M. Ventura, C. Canchaya, A. Tauch, G. Chandra, G. F. Fitzgerald, K. F. Chater, and D. van Sinderen Genomics of Actinobacteria: Tracing the Evolutionary History of an Ancient Phylum Microbiol. Mol. Biol. Rev., September 1, 2007; 71(3): 495 - 548. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 O. Zhaxybayeva, J. P. Gogarten, R. L. Charlebois, W. F. Doolittle, and R. T. Papke Phylogenetic analyses of cyanobacterial genomes: Quantification of horizontal gene transfer events Genome Res., September 1, 2006; 16(9): 1099 - 1108. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 E. Lebrun, J. M. Santini, M. Brugna, A.-L. Ducluzeau, S. Ouchane, B. Schoepp-Cothenet, F. Baymann, and W. Nitschke The Rieske Protein: A Case Study on the Pitfalls of Multiple Sequence Alignments and Phylogenetic Reconstruction Mol. Biol. Evol., June 1, 2006; 23(6): 1180 - 1191. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 E. Griffiths and R. S. Gupta Molecular signatures in protein sequences that are characteristics of the phylum Aquificae Int J Syst Evol Microbiol, January 1, 2006; 56(1): 99 - 107. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
B. Gao and R. S. Gupta Conserved indels in protein sequences that are characteristic of the phylum Actinobacteria Int J Syst Evol Microbiol, November 1, 2005; 55(6): 2401 - 2412. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 E. Griffiths, A. K. Petrich, and R. S. Gupta Conserved indels in essential proteins that are distinctive characteristics of Chlamydiales and provide novel means for their identification Microbiology, August 1, 2005; 151(8): 2647 - 2657. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 E. Griffiths and R. S. Gupta Distinctive Protein Signatures Provide Molecular Markers and Evidence for the Monophyletic Nature of the Deinococcus-Thermus Phylum J. Bacteriol., May 15, 2004; 186(10): 3097 - 3107. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
| INT J SYST EVOL MICROBIOL | MICROBIOLOGY | J GEN VIROL |
| J MED MICROBIOL | ALL SGM JOURNALS | |
