|
|
HFSP J. 2007 September; 1(3): 156–168. Published online 2007 July 25. doi: 10.2976/1.2759103. | PMCID: PMC2640990 |
The origin of modern terrestrial life Patrick Forterre 1 and Simonetta Gribaldo 21Institut Pasteur, 25 rue du Docteur Roux, 75015 Paris et Université Paris-Sud, CNRS, UMR 8621, 91405, Crsay-Cedex, France 2Institut Pasteur, 25 rue du Docteur Roux, 75015 Paris, France Received June 22, 2007; Accepted June 22, 2007. The study of the origin of life covers many areas of expertise and requires
the input of various scientific communities. In recent years, this research
field has often been viewed as part of a broader agenda under the name of
“exobiology” or “astrobiology.” In this review,
we have somewhat narrowed this agenda, focusing on the origin of modern terrestrial
life. The adjective “modern” here means that we did not speculate
on different forms of life that could have possibly appeared on our planet,
but instead focus on the existing forms (cells and viruses). We try to briefly
present the state of the art about alternative hypotheses discussing not only
the origin of life per se, but also how life evolved
to produce the modern biosphere through a succession of steps that we would
like to characterize as much as possible. Traditionally, two approaches have been employed to understand how terrestrial
life originated (Fig. ). The bottom-up
approach, exemplified by Miller’s experiment, attempts to reconstruct
the conditions of the primitive Earth in order to imagine how the main components
of living organisms came into being. This is the realm of astrophysics, geophysics
and chemists. The top-down approach is favored by biologists, who try finding
in modern organisms the relics of their ancestors in order to reconstruct
ancient metabolic pathways and molecular processes. Neither of these two approaches
can be successful alone, and the final goal of any “origin-of-life”
program should be to bring together all these lines of research to build up
a coherent scenario leading from inorganic chemistry to Darwinian evolution.
In that sense, the quest of our origin is intrinsically interdisciplinary
and should bring together various expertises to deal with the same issues. Despite the difficulty of the topic, great advances have been made during
the last decade in understanding the origin of modern life. A major issue
that remains to be solved is the origin of RNA, since this is where the bottom-up
and top-down approaches meet. We definitely know, from the resolution of the
ribosome structure, that modern proteins were “invented” by
RNA ( Steitz and Moore, 2003). This means
that, once upon a time, RNA was the master of life, covering both the genetic
and catalytic properties today performed by DNA and proteins, respectively.
However, the formation of a bona fide ribonucleotide
has so far never been successfully achieved in the laboratory, and the formation
of oligoribonucleotides from monomers is extremely difficult to achieve. In
this review, keeping in mind that the origin of RNA is the central issue,
we will briefly review the state of the art and the recent controversies in
the fields, and we will try to identify the most promising areas of research
for the next decade. THE BUILDING UP OF A HABITABLE PLANET The formation of the Earth Plausible mechanisms for the formation of the solar system have now been
formulated, especially explaining the accretion mechanism that could have
led to the formation of a terrestrial-like planet ( Montmerle et al.,
2006). The formation of Earth is quite precisely dated at 4 56
Ga ago, based on the dating of a particular type of meteorites called “ordinary
chondrites.” The accretion mechanism was probably rapid (about 100
Myr), leading in a first time to a very hot planet with a magma ocean. The
formation of oceans and continents took place probably more rapidly than previously
thought (between 4.5 and 4.4 Ga) ( Hawkesworth and Kemp,
2006). This is inferred from the study of the oldest rock, a
4.4 Ga old zircon from Australia that gives evidence for an interaction between
water and rock at temperatures below 100 °C ( Wilde et al.,
2001). An atmosphere would also have formed quite early from
volatile elements (such as nitrogen) contributed by extraterrestrial material
on the surface of the Earth. Astrophysics has taught us that life is not alien
to the universe, since its fundamental fabric—organic chemistry—is
a ubiquitous component of the interstellar space. Complex organic molecules,
as well as silicates, hydrocarbons, and various forms of ice have been found
in extrasolar clouds ( Bernstein, 2006).
Therefore, as temperature decreased, organics, either produced on Earth or
coming from meteorites or micrometeorites (cosmic dust), could have started
accumulating on the surface. For some authors, the conditions for the emergence
of life (liquid water, continental crust, atmosphere) were already in place
at 4.4–4.3 Ga. However, the habitability of the early Earth was seriously
compromised by multiple giant impacts. In particular, around 3.9 Ga the Earth
was subjected to an impressive episode of bombardment, called the late heavy
bombardment (LHB) ( Cohen et al., 2000). The Late Heavy Bombardment The craters observed on the surface of the Moon and other planets whose
surface was not remodeled by erosion, sedimentation, and plate tectonics (Mars,
Venus) testify for the diameter of the giant meteorites (more than 100 km
and up to 5000 km) that hit the Earth’s surface during the LHB [for
a recent review, see ( Claeys and Morbidelli, 2006)].
This dramatic event could have been triggered by the migration of giant planets
that took place after the dissipation of the gaseous circumsolar nebula ( Gomes et al., 2005). The LBH may have lasted from
20 to 200 million years, with a frequency of impact that is highly debated
(from one each 10,000 years to one every 20 years). Models predict that such
impacts would have almost completely resurfaced our planet, leading to evaporation
of the oceans, melting of the crust down to at least 1000 ms, and loss of
the atmosphere. It might be significant that the oldest terrestrial continental
crust (Isua, Greenland) dates exactly to the end of the LHB, at 3.8 Ga. In
our opinion, it is unlikely that any forms of life, if already present, would
have survived the devastating impacts of the LHB. If this view is correct,
it implies that the path to modern life would have (re)started after 3.9–3.8
Ga. The presence of sedimentary rocks testifies that oceans had already reformed
by that time. However, putative isotopic traces of life found in these rocks
are now believed to be artifactual (see below), consistent with the idea that
modern life might have indeed originated after the LHB. Primitive atmosphere and oceans It has been accepted for a long time that the atmosphere of the early Archaean
was anoxic and probably weakly reducing, and dominated by oxidative species
such as CO 2, N 2,
CO, and H 2O, with small amounts of H 2,
that would have escaped rapidly to the outer space ( Kasting,
1993). Reduced gases supplied by volcanic outgassing, such as
CH 4 and NH 3, would
have been destroyed by UV (photodissociation), and may have subsisted only
locally around hydrothermal vents. However, a recent theoretical model has
estimated that the hydrogen escape rates were lower than previously assumed
in the early archaean atmosphere, suggesting that hydrogen may have been abundant
( Tian et al., 2005). This would be good
news for models in which life originated at the surface of our planet, since
a reducing atmosphere would have favored “traditional” prebiotic
chemistry. However, these recent estimations have already been criticized
( Catling, 2006), and the debate is ongoing.
It was noticed early on that the early Earth was in danger of freezing due
to the low luminosity of the Sun, which was about 30% less than it is today
(the “faint young Sun” paradox) ( Sagan
and Chyba, 1997). Several authors have suggested that high CO 2 concentrations (or a mixture of CO 2 and
CH 4) in the early atmosphere were required to
prevent (via a greenhouse effect) Earth from freezing ( Pavlov et al.,
2000). Indeed, the presence of 3.5 Ga old sedimentary rocks excludes
a global-scale glaciation of the planet at least by that time. The study of
organic carbon isotopes indicates that oxygen concentrations became significant
(but still very low) only at 2.7 Ga and then started to rise steadily (up
to 1% of the present level) from 2.4 Ga, what is called the great oxidation
Event (GOE) ( Holland, 2006). Interestingly,
this period coincides with two possible snowball Earth episodes around 2.9
and 2.4 Ga, which is assumed to have been triggered by the accumulation of
biologically produced oxygen (and consequently the removal of methane and
its greenhouse effect) following the emergence of oxygenic photosynthesis
( Farquhar et al., 2000; Holland,
2006; Kasting and Ono, 2006).
The isotopic fractionation of elements such as sulfur in archaean deposits
points to an anoxic ocean during the whole archaean period and beyond, up
to 1.8 Gyr. The oceans would have then gone through a euxinic phase (hydrogen-sulfide
rich) and finally become fully oxygenated around 0.75 Gyr ( Kump,
2005). Oxygen and silicon isotope data from archaean cherts indicate
that ancient oceans may have been warmer than today, with temperatures as
high as 70 °C around 3.3 Ga ( Knauth, 1998; Robert and Chaussidon, 2006). However, the interpretation
of isotopic data remains controversial since this would imply that archaean
hot and acidic rainwater would have produced intense weathering that is not
observed in the paleoweathering record. Furthermore, a hot ocean is difficult
to reconcile with a first global glaciation that could have occurred at 2.9
and 2.4 Ga [for a critical review of these data, see ( Kasting
and Howard, 2006)]. The fossil record The first and now popular descriptions of life traces in the Archaean regard
layered structures very similar to present-day stromatolites from a 3.4 Ga
old Australian Apex chert. These structures contain putative microfossils
presenting morphological characteristics resembling present-day filamentous
bacteria [for a review see ( Schopf, 2006)].
However, their biologic nature remains hotly debated. For instance, it was
shown that many of these structures are produced abiogenically in the laboratory
under particular conditions [reviewed in ( Brasier et al.,
2006)]. Organic matter has been detected in these structures
by in situ laser Raman spectroscopy ( Schopf, 2006), although abiogenic structures also
can absorb organic inclusions that give the typical Raman spectrum of a microfossil
( Brasier et al., 2006). The earliest stromatolite
formations of unambiguous biological origin thus remain for the time being
those from around 2.6 Ga ( Schopf, 2006).
The question of the biogenic or abiogenic nature of earlier Archaean microfossils
will have to await future methodological developments [for recent reviews
see ( Lopez-Garcia et al., 2006; Westall, 2005)]. The isotopic composition of different elements is affected by biological
processes and can thus indicate the presence of particular metabolisms. Isotopic
signatures of different elements (carbon, sulfur, nitrogen, and more recently
iron) have therefore been extensively studied to search for life signatures
in ancient rocks and to identify specific ancient metabolisms ( Tice and Lowe, 2004) ( Ueno et al.,
2006). In particular, the carbon isotope values from apatites
in Isua banded iron formations (3.8 Ga) have often been considered to be the
earliest signatures of life on Earth ( Mojzsis et al.,
1996). However, all the data obtained remain vigorously debated
( Fedo and Whitehouse, 2002; Mojzsis and Harrison, 2002). Some authors have argued,
in particular, that some results are indeed compatible with an abiotic origin
of isotopic composition from hydrothermal activity [for an extensive critical
and well-balanced review on this topic, see Lollar
and McCollom (2006)]. Finally, molecular fossils (kerogens) derived from the transformation of
lipids have also been used to tentatively determine the age for the emergence
of various life forms. However, it is very difficult to extract kerogens from
Archaean rocks, and not all lipids are equally resistant. For example, lipids
from archaea are very fragile and have not been found in rocks older than
1.8 Ga ( Summons et al., 1988). The older
biomarker record regards the presence of hopanes, lipids that today are distinctive
of cyanobacteria, in 2.7 Ga old rocks from Australia ( Brocks et al.,
1999). The presence of eukaryotic-type steranes in the same ancient
rocks ( Brocks et al., 1999) is more controversial
since some bacteria can produce sterols as well ( Pearson et al.,
2003; Tippelt et al., 1998),
although not of the complexity of those found by Brocks et al. ( Summons et al., 2006). In conclusion, the fact that the oldest traces of life that are not controversial
are only those from 2.6 Ga ( Schopf, 2006)
leaves open a wide window for the origin of modern life between 3.9 (end of
the LHB) and 2.7 Ga. The quest for traces of life in this time interval is
a rapidly expanding research field. New drilling projects have now started
in order to obtain novel samples of archaean rocks. Isotopic and chemical
techniques are being improved to detect the presence of organic matter with
less ambiguity, and new in situ techniques start
to be applied to the analysis of putative microfossils. Novel and more performing
techniques of lipid extraction will hopefully push back the limit of detection
of biomarkers to the early Archaean. In parallel, theoretical models for the
early Earth will surely benefit from a better description of known metabolisms
(see below) and metabolic consortia, and their current distribution in a wide
range of environmental settings. THE ORIGIN AND EARLY EVOLUTION OF LIFE Heterotrophic versus autotrophic theories In the traditional “prebiotic soup” scenario, organic molecules
would have first accumulated in the ocean or in smaller water bodies on the
early Earth, either delivered by extraterrestrial sources (micrometeorites,
dust) and/or produced by “Miller’s type experiments”
(especially if the early atmosphere was hydrogen rich, see above) ( Bada and Lazcano, 2003). The first “living systems”
would have then emerged from the gradual complexification of the prebiotic
broth. The authors supporting this “heterotrophic theory” often
argue that prebiotic chemistry is the prolongation on our planet of the cosmic
chemistry, whose products (e.g., amino acids) indeed overlap with the building
blocks of life. For them, the possibility to easily produce in prebiotic conditions
simple amino acids, purines, sugars, fatty acids, and other small organic
molecules essential to modern life is too striking to be fortuitous ( de Duve, 2003). Proponents of the prebiotic soup scenario
(especially the Bada and Miller school) have in general argued in favor of
a slow (gradual accumulation) and cold origin of life (essential to the long-term
stability of organic matter). As an alternative to the heterotrophic theory, 20 years ago Wachtershauser
proposed an autotrophic origin of life, in which an energy flux provided by
chemical reactions at liquid–solid interfaces was used for carbon fixation
( Wachtershauser, 1988) ( Wachtershauser,
2006). A related model was proposed later on by Russell
and Hall (1997). In this view, gradual accumulation and complexification
of organic matter occurred either on mineral surfaces (i.e., a two-dimensional
life) or in networks of mineral pores. Instead of linking cosmic chemistry
with biochemistry, the proponents of an autotrophic origin of life try to
link biochemistry with geochemistry. Wachterhauser specifically suggested
that a primitive metabolism evolved at the surface of pyrite minerals from
the reduction of carbon dioxide using hydrogen sulfide (H 2S)
over ferrous sulfide (FeS) as the reducing agent [“pioneer metabolism
theory” ( Wachtershauser, 1988)
( Wachtershauser, 2006) and references
therein]. The negatively charged organic molecules synthesized by this reaction
would have been stabilized by binding to the positively charged pyrite surface,
thus forming a two-dimensional network. The number and diversity of these
molecules would have thus grown autocatalytically in situ by
carbon fixation, leading to the self-organization of cyclic chemical reactions,
producing more and more elaborated products. Russell
and Hall (1997) suggested that carbon fixation first occurred
inside mineral three-dimensional networks formed by the precipitation of iron
monosulfide from the mixing of sulfide-rich hydrothermal fluid and the iron-containing
water of an acidic ocean, the system being energetically driven by a naturally
occurring geochemical pH gradient. The authors of autotrophic scenarios have
been strongly influenced by the discovery of hydrothermal vents and hyperthermophiles
in the late 1970s and early 1980s. In contrast to the proponents of the heterotrophic
origin, they usually favor a hot origin of life, the initial reaction being
driven by a geothermal energy source. In their models, the stability of organic
molecules is no more an issue, since these would have been short lived. On
the contrary, high temperature is supposed to have increased the rate of reactions
at the surface of the minerals or inside mineral structures. Although the autotrophic models for the origin of life are in theory experimentally
realizable in toto ( Huber
and Wachtershauser, 2006), experimental programs designed to
test these theories have succeeded up to now in producing only simple organic
molecules (from C 2 to C 4).
Furthermore, none of these reactions has been shown to be autocatalytic, a
crucial requirement to start real chemical evolution ( Orgel,
2000). The controversy between the proponents of heterotrophic
and autotrophic theories thus remains lively ( de Duve
and Miller, 1991) ( Bada et al., 2007).
However, there is now a general agreement on the idea that minerals (especially
clays) may have catalyzed prebiotic reactions and that metal sulfides have
been an important source of electrons for the reduction of organic compounds
( Bada and Lazcano, 2002). In particular,
proponents of the heterotrophic theory now often agree that reactions occurring
in a hydrothermal and/or in a volcanic setting may have enriched the
prebiotic arsenal of organic molecules, or else suggest that the first organics
useful for life were concentrated at mineral-water interfaces and/or
into porous minerals. Volcanic activity might have been especially important
for the production of phosphoric compounds that are essential for life ( Yamagata et al., 1991) ( Schwartz,
2006). Indeed, the first source of phosphate may have been polyphosphates,
which are found in volcanic condensates and hydrothermal vents produced by
volcanic activity ( Yamagata et al., 1991).
In order to reconcile the requirements of volcanic activity with an environment
favoring molecular stability, it is tempting to suggest that life originated
in an “Iceland-like” setting mixing ice and fire, in which a
geothermal gradient could provide a stable and continuous energy source over
long periods, whereas a cold environment could provide stability for the accumulation
of organic molecules. Both heterotrophic and autotrophic theories are faced with the problem
of ending up with a robust protometabolism that could provide the energy and
monomers to establish the RNA world ( de Duve, 2003).
In a first step, it is important to consider how to transfer the energy acquired
either from the outside (heterotrophic theory) or from the reactions in hydrothermal
fluids (autotrophic theory) for further elaboration of the system inside protocells. Ferry and House (2006) recently proposed an interesting
model in which the energy obtained from a geothermal energy flux is coupled
to the formation of phosphorylated compounds. This model combines both features
of the autotrophic and heterotrophic theories since the mechanism of energy
conservation resembles those of modern heterotrophs that metabolize reduced
organic compounds for the synthesis of adenosine triphosphate (ATP) by substrate-level
phosphorylation. A major question is indeed whether the protometabolism can
be inferred from the metabolism of modern cells. The proponents of the heterotrophic
scenario have often considered that the first organic molecules were produced
by reactions completely independent from modern metabolism. In particular,
Orgel argued that the metabolisms of the RNA world would have been completely
erased by the emergence of a new metabolism based on proteinenzymes ( Orgel, 2003). On the contrary, the proponents of the
autotrophic theory tend to directly link the protometabolism to modern (hyperthermophilic)
proteins via the coevolution of RNA and peptides. In fact, as suggested by de Duve (2003) a metabolism entirely sustained by
RNA catalysts can also be linked to the modern one, if one reasons in terms
of Darwinian evolution ( de Duve, 2003)
by assuming that a protein enzyme could have initially only replaced the function
of an existing ribozyme (i.e., transformation of a given substrate into a
given product). Similarly, if ribozymes themselves replaced the function of
more ancient catalysts, the metabolism of the RNA cells could have been built
upon the more ancient protometabolism, especially if the RNA world itself
originated in the framework of Darwinian evolution between competing protocells. On the way to proto-cells Some authors have suggested that Darwinian evolution could have already
occurred prior to the existence of cellular entities, through the competition
of isolated supramolecular assemblies concentrated on mineral surfaces or
inside mineral pores ( Wachtershauser, 2006)
( Russell and Hall, 1997). However, compelling
theoretical and experimental arguments suggest that cell formation occurred
early in life evolution [see for instance ( de Duve,
2003; Deamer et al., 2006)
( Muller, 2006) ( Lopez-Garcia et al.,
2006; Forterre, 2005)]. The
formation of “protocells” was probably essential for the evolution
of RNA replicators (see below) and the establishment of any sustained energy-driven
protometabolism by (i) keeping together RNA replicators and their corresponding
genomic RNAs (i.e., only catalysts enclosed by membranes can benefit from
their own reaction), (ii) excluding potentially competing external parasitic
RNAs, and (iii) preventing the dilution of molecules and macromolecules. Furthermore,
a protometabolism able to synthesize nucleotides for RNA production would
have also been able to produce simple (amphiphilic) molecules that are rather
easy to synthesize prebiotically and could have been abundant on early Earth
[see ( Muller, 2006) and references therein].
Lipid vesicles can be produced quite easily in vitro from fatty acids or even
better from fatty acid glycerol ester. These vesicles have the ability to
undergo several cycles of growth and division ( Hanczyc et al.,
2003). Mineral surfaces, such as montmorillonite, also stimulate
the formation of lipid vesicles ( Hanczyc et al., 2007).
Interestingly, mineral catalysts are trapped inside vesicles during this process,
suggesting that interactions between fatty acids and minerals on early Earth
may have resulted in the enclosure of diverse arrays of mineral particles
with catalytic properties. Most interestingly, Szostak and co-workers have recently shown that vesicles
encapsulating RNA grow preferentially by lipid capture at the expense of empty
vesicles ( Chen et al., 2004; Chen and Szostak, 2004) (Fig. ).
This is explained by the higher osmotic pressure inside RNA-containing vesicles
due to the counterions screening the negative charges of RNA. This osmotic
pressure is counterbalanced by membrane tension, driving the uptake of fatty
acids. At an early stage, this mechanism could have favored vesicles containing
charged molecules, such as ribose phosphate and/or polyphosphate, over
those containing neutral molecules. Later on, the encapsulation of RNA replicators
would have induced a primitive form of competition between the first RNA cells,
since those containing more efficient replicators would have grown faster
( Chen et al., 2004) (Fig. ).
In these scenarios, natural selection between competing protocells in the
absence of genetic systems could have been originally driven by the physicochemical
features of early systems. Finally, vesicle membrane growth generates a transmembrane
pH gradient ( Chen and Szostak, 2004),
suggesting that some universal features of the living world could have their
origin in fundamental physicochemical features. The perspective now would
be to use such vesicles (with various mixtures of putative catalysts, minerals,
peptides, or ribozymes) to test if they could favor to set up some form of
protometabolism. Origin of ribonucleotides ATP and other NTPs, including many modified bases which were not included
later on in RNA, probably originated first as energy conveyors in the protometabolism
and as coenzymes of peptide catalysts before the origin of RNA itself ( de Duve, 2003). Unfortunately, despite recent progress
(see below) a single consecutive and convincing prebiotic process has not
yet been experimentally demonstrated for their origin [for recent reviews,
see ( Joyce, 2002; Muller,
2006; Orgel, 2004) and references
therein]. The main problem is the formation of ribose and nucleosides. Many
sugars with four to six carbons can be produced at alkaline pH by the so-called
formose reaction from formaldehyde and catalytic amounts of glycoaldehyde,
two simple precursors that are present in interstellar space and were probably
on early Earth as well. However, the products of the formose reaction are
unstable, and ribose accounts for only a minor portion. Moreover, attempts
to combine ribose with bases and/or phosphate in prebiotic conditions
also produces complex mixtures of nonspecific products, generating many parasitic
molecules that compete with the “normal” building blocks of
a nucleotide in the assembly reaction. These observations have led many authors
to conclude that ribose was not a prebiotic compound, but was “invented”
by organisms living in a “pre-RNA world,” where the scaffold
of the genetic material was not ribose but simple sugars [threofuranose nucleic
acids (TNA)] or amino acids [peptide nucleic acids (PNA)] [for reviews see
( Joyce, 2002; Orgel,
2004; Eschenmoser, 1999)].
However, these compounds are also difficult to produce by prebiotic chemistry
and lack some of the interesting properties of RNA. In particular, PNA lacks
the charged groups that allow RNA to favor the growth of RNA-containing vesicles versus RNA free vesicles in Szostak’s experiments,
whereas TNA lacks an activated oxygen (such as the ribose 2 ′OH),
essential for ribozyme activity. Whereas the formation of ribose has never been experimentally investigated
in the framework of autotrophic theories, much effort has been done by proponents
of the heterotrophic theory to increase the yields and specificity of the
formose reaction. It was shown recently that several compounds(Pb++), cyanamide,
or borate preferentially complex and stabilize aldopentose and/or especially
ribose with respect to other sugars ( Ricardo et al.,
2004; Springsteen and Joyce, 2004; Zubay and Mui, 2001). The complex formed between
ribose and boron is especially interesting since borate occupies the 2 ′ and 3 ′ position
of the ribose thus leaving the 5 ′ position
available for reactions such as phosphorylation ( Li et al.,
2005). Borate minerals were probably present in the interstellar
space and on early Earth. It was also suggested that ribose, together with
purine bases, could have been synthesized in hydrothermal environments on
the sea floor (favoring the formose reaction) that could be enriched in borate
( Holm et al., 2006). Another recent finding
that could be of great importance is that ribose permeates both fatty acid
and phospholipid membranes more rapidly than other aldopentoses ( Sacerdote and Szostak, 2005). The formation of nucleosides
(ribose+base) is also very difficult to achieve in any prebiotic condition.
Interestingly, the use of phosphorylated ribose instead of ribose facilitates
the association between the base and the sugar, suggesting that phosphoribose
might have been a major prebiotic intermediate [( Orgel,
2004) and references therein]. Future effort should thus be concentrated
on the search for catalysts (including mixtures of minerals, peptides, and
amino acids) that could produce ribonucleotides (and activated ribonucleotides
such as NTP) from phosphorylated ribose and various bases, possibly inside
lipid vesicles. Origin of ribozymes The polymerization of ribonucleotides in “prebiotic conditions”
has only been achieved using nucleotide monophosphate activated by various
amine compounds and using RNA primers. It has been shown that clays (montmorillonite)
catalyze the condensation of such activated substrates to form RNA oligomers
up to 40–50 nucleotides long [for recent reviews see ( Muller,
2006) ( Ferris, 2006) ( Huang and Ferris, 2003)]. Importantly, the mineral
catalysts increase the ratio of 3 ′ to
5 ′ over 2 ′ to
5 ′ phosphodiester bonds. A major problem
for the establishment of a robust RNA world is the instability of RNA due
to the reactive oxygen in 2 ′ of the ribose
( Forterre et al., 1995; Lazcano
and Miller, 1996). RNA can be stabilized by a high concentration
of monovalent salts ( Hethke et al., 1999)
( Tehei et al., 2002), but most ribozymes
absolutely require millimolar concentrations of divalent salts ( Woodson, 2005) which, in contrast, strongly increase
RNA degradation at high temperatures ( Ginoza et al.,
1964). To solve this problem, Vlassov and co-workers have suggested
that RNA occurred first in cold environments, where synthesis would have been
favored over degradation, an “RNA world on ice” hypothesis ( Vlassov et al., 2005). They reported that polymerization
of nucleotides, ligation of small RNAs, and other critical prebiotic chemical
reactions are indeed stimulated by freezing [( Vlassov et al.,
2004) and references therein]. Interestingly, a 3 ′–5 ′ linkage between nucleotides is the major or
even the only product formed under freezing conditions. Freezing probably
accelerates some chemical reactions in aqueous solution because of the organization
of frozen water and the concentration of reactants. In the RNA world
on ice scenario, early ribozymes might have survived transport to more
warm and wet environments by virtue of their synthetic power outpacing degradation
( Vlassov et al., 2004). The next problem is the production of polymers of sufficient length to
harbor catalytic activity (minimal ribozymes). The smallest known “ribozyme”
is a 7mer olinucleotide that can cleave itself at 37 °C [for reviews,
see ( Muller, 2006; Vlassov et al.,
2005)]. A mini-RNA ligase of 29 nucleotides has also been obtained
by in vitro selection (see below) ( Landweber and Pokrovskaya, 1999). This shows that
small ribozymes may support simple reactions of cleavage and ligation of other
small RNAs. The production of large RNAs by successive ligation of small RNAs
would have opened the way to the emergence of true ribozymes. The repertoire
of catalytic activities accessible to RNA has been systematically explored
in several laboratories using modern enzymes to produce libraries of random
RNA oligomers. Large artificial ribozymes selected in
vitro can catalyze a wide range of reactions such as RNA polymerization,
aminoacylation of transfer RNA, and peptide bond formation [for reviews see
( Brosius, 2005; Joyce,
2002; McGinness and Joyce, 2003; Muller, 2006)]. It has even been recently shown that
RNA can be used to transport tryptophan across a membrane vesicle ( Janas et al., 2004). A major goal of these approaches
is to produce an RNA polymerase able to synthesize itself by carrying its
own template [for reviews see ( Muller, 2006; Orgel, 2004)]. However, whereas the most active RNA
polymerase ribozyme (RPR) is 189 nucleotides long, it can only replicate a
14 nucleotide long template ( Johnston et al., 2001).
The next objectives are to increase the processivity of present RPRs and to
introduce a helicase activity (an essential component of all modern polymerases).
Future work will probably focus on the possibility of combining various RNA
modules with different activities to produce a truly efficient RPR. There
is no a priori obstacle to this, and workers in
the field argue that powerful evolutionary search procedures using high throughput
methodology should allow reaching the goal in the next decade ( Muller, 2006). Emergence of the protein-RNA world At some point, one has to assume that an efficient polymerase was not only
able to replicate itself, but also to replicate templates producing catalysts
(either ribozymes or peptides) useful for the metabolism of the RNA cell [for
reviews and hypotheses on this period see ( Jeffares et al.,
1998; Poole et al., 1998)].
It is likely that many different types of ribozyme-catalyzed peptide synthesis
arose, but that only one survived, leading to the modern translation apparatus
with tRNA and ribosomes. Many authors have suggested that protein synthesis
first appeared as a by-product of RNA replication and was later on selected
based on the expanding chaperone and catalytic activities of longer and longer
peptides (see below). For instance, by analogy with modern RNA viruses that
contain tRNA-like structures at their 3 ′ end
used to initiate the replication of viral genomes, Maizels and Weiner ( Maizels and Weiner, 1994) suggested that the amino-acid
module of tRNA with its CCA end first originated as a tag for genomic RNA
replication (functioning both as a telomer and as a marker for RNA to be replicated).
All modern tRNAs are monophyletic, i.e., they originated from a single ancestral
molecule that would have appeared in a particular RNA-cell lineage. They are
made of two modules, the amino-acid binding module and the module carrying
the anticodon. The amino-acid binding module probably originated first and
was later on duplicated to produce the anticodon module ( Maizels
and Weiner, 1994). From the imagination of scientists, a great
variety of scenarios have been proposed to explain the origin of the translation
machinery ( Schimmel and Henderson, 1994)
( Poole et al., 1998) ( Copley et al.,
2005) ( Taylor, 2006) ( Szathmary, 1999) ( Wolf and
Koonin, 2007). A detailed presentation of these models is beyond
the scope of this review. It is usually assumed that the primitive genetic
code was simpler (for instance with a two-nucleotide codon and less amino
acids) and expanded in the course of evolution. Two main theories have been
proposed, suggesting either that codon choice was initiated by specific interaction
between amino acids and anticodons (stereochemical theories) or that codon
choice was set up parallel with the evolution of the amino acid biosynthetic
pathways (historical theories) [for reviews see ( Di
Giulio, 2005; Ellington et al., 2000; Wong, 2005; Yarus et al.,
2005) ( Knight and Landweber, 2000)].
In any case, the modern genetic code is probably not a “frozen accident,”
but seems to be optimized to minimize the deleterious consequences of mutations
( Vogel, 1998) [for review see ( Freeland et al., 2003)]. This indicates that the
tendency to increase faithful translation was the major selection pressure
that directed the evolution of the genetic code, as suggested early on by Woese (1965). Goldenfeld and co-workers have recently
shown from in silico stimulation that an optimal
code might have become universal in the frame of a communal evolution pervaded
by intense horizontal gene transfer of coding sequences and coding system
components among coevolving communities with different codes ( Vetsigian et al., 2006). If correct, this suggests
that mechanisms of gene transfer were operational very early, allowing genetic
exchange between RNA-protein cells. Theories about the origin of the genetic
code should now also accommodate structural data obtained for modern amino-acyl
tRNA synthetases and ribosomes. For instance, from comparative structural
analysis, it has been suggested that all modern amino-acyl tRNA synthetases
evolved from two proteins whose initial role was to chaperone the tRNA ( Ribas de Pouplana and Schimmel, 2001). The first proteins were indeed probably short chaperonelike proteins that
stabilized ribozymes and increased their catalytic activities. They would
also have facilitated the transport of molecules (including nucleic acids)
through the membranes of the RNA cells, ( Jay and Gilbert,
1987). Longer genes and proteins may have originated by RNA recombination
producing proteins of increasing size via a multistep combinatorial mechanism
under the control of natural selection ( de Duve, 2003).
Starting from a small number of proteins of small size (corresponding to modern
folds), this mechanism would have allowed the extensive exploration of the
space sequence at each size level size. This period ended up with the establishment
of all modern protein superfamilies by the various combinations of protein
folds. Recent advances in comparative and structural genomics have provided
fascinating insights on this process [see for instance many recent papers
by the group of Koonin ( Iyer et al., 2003)
( Iyer et al., 2004)]. Complex protein
enzymes, such as large RNA polymerases, ribonucleotide reductases, and thymydylate
synthases, all required for the origin of DNA, likely only originated at the
end of this process. In the above scenario it is already very clear that DNA probably originated
much later than RNA, i.e., in the ribonucleoprotein world (also called “the
second age of the RNA world ( Forterre, 2005)].
Indeed, it has been convincingly argued that the reduction of ribose is too
complex in terms of chemistry to be catalyzed by a ribozyme ( Freeland et al.,
1999). One can safely assume that the first DNA molecules still
contained uracil, because deoxythymidine triphosphate (dTMP) is produced in
modern organisms by a modification (methylation) of deoxyuridine triphosphate
(dUMP), a reaction catalyzed by thymydylate synthase. Interestingly, recent
work has uncovered the existence of two nonhomologous thymydylate synthases,
ThyA and ThyX, suggesting that modern DNA with thymidine may have been invented
twice, and possibly independently ( Myllykallio et al.,
2002). It is usually assumed that DNA replaced RNA because it is more stable and
can be replicated more faithfully ( Lazcano et al.,
1988; Poole et al., 2001).
As a consequence, DNA genomes would have become larger, allowing the evolution
of complex cells. However, this cannot explain the selection of the first
organisms with DNA because genome stability and fidelity was probably not
a major problem for fast-replicating RNA cells with small genomes, and the
first DNA cells could not have anticipated that their descendents would benefit
from a larger genome. One of us has thus suggested that DNA first originated
in viruses as a modified form of RNA to protect the viral genetic material
against defense mechanisms of the infected cell (a direct selection pressure)
( Forterre, 2002). Cellular RNA genomes
would have then been transformed later on into DNA genomes following the recruitment
by RNA cells of viral enzymes to produce and replicate DNA, or by the takeover
of RNA cells by DNA viruses living in a carrier state ( Forterre,
2005). The introduction of viruses in the early evolutionary scenario implies
that viruses themselves originated at an early stage in life evolution. The
concept of an ancient viral world was indeed first proposed by scientists
who suggested that RNA viruses are relics of the RNA world [see, for instance
( Maizels and Weiner, 1994)], and that
retroviruses, with their RNA–DNA cycles, could give evidence for the
transition from the RNA to the DNA world. This concept is now supported by
the existence of viruses harboring homologous capsid proteins that infect
cells from different domains (Archaea, Bacteria, Eukarya) ( Akita et al.,
2007; Bamford et al., 2005)
suggesting that capsid proteins originated prior to the last universal common
ancestor (LUCA). Several models have thus been recently proposed to explain
the origin of viruses in the RNA world ( Forterre, 2006).
Interestingly, the concept of an ancient viral world implies that both modern
RNA and DNA viruses might have preserved ancient molecular features from the
pre-LUCA era. The study of viruses (especially the extensive exploration of
their diversity) should thus be a major area for research on early life evolution
in the next decade. THE ORIGIN OF MODERN CELLS The last universal common ancestor A major goal of the top-down approaches in the origin-of-life field is
to reconstruct the common ancestor of all extant organisms to reach an intermediary
stage between the origin of life and the present biosphere. The basic principle
of cell division and membrane heredity ( Cavalier-Smith,
2001) implies that all modern cells derive from a single cell.
This historical entity was called the cenancestor (for common ancestor in
Greek), the progenote, or the LUCA. This last term has the advantage to be
both neutral (unlike the term progenote, which
suggests a very primitive organism) and precise. It clearly states that LUCA
should not be confused with the first cell, but was the product of a long
period of evolution. Being the last means that LUCA was preceded by a long
succession of older “ancestors.” In this framework, a plethora
of cellular lineages that have left no descendants today may have existed
before LUCA. It is important to consider that many of these were probably
still present at the time of LUCA, and some have probably even coexisted for
some time with its descendants, possibly contributing via horizontal gene
transfer to some traits present in modern lineages (Fig. ). A consensus on the nature of LUCA is far from reached. For some authors
LUCA was a very simple organism, even possibly acellular ( Woese,
1998) ( Russell and Martin, 2004),
whereas others consider that LUCA was a modern-type bacterium ( Cavalier-Smith, 2002) or even a primitive Eucaryote
with a nucleus ( Fuerst, 2005). Thanks
to the advances of comparative genomics, some aspects of these hypotheses
can now be tested. The identification of a set of genes present in Archaea,
Bacteria, and Eukarya has led to the definition of a minimal gene content
for LUCA ( Delaye et al., 2005; Harris et al., 2003; Koonin,
2003). As expected from the universality of the genetic code,
the minimal protein set includes a core of ribosomal proteins, tRNA synthetases,
and translation factors (for both initiation and elongation) indicating that
the translation apparatus was already well established in LUCA. Importantly,
the minimal set includes the components of machineries that are intimately
associated with the membrane, such as the signal recognition particle (SRP)
and the Sec system—involved in protein secretion—and the complex
ATP synthases—that function with a transmembrane proton gradient. These
observations clearly indicate that LUCA was a cellular organism with a membrane
rather similar to that of modern organisms ( Jekely,
2006; Pereto et al., 2004).
It remains to be explained why modern lipids are so different in Archaea compared
to the “classical” lipids found in Bacteria and Eukaryotes (including
an opposite polarity) [for discussion see ( Pereto et al.,
2004) ( Xu and Glansdorff, 2002)].
Future experimental work should focus on the study of vesicles made of the
two types of lipids and to the expression in bacteria of enzymes involved
in the archaeal lipid pathway and vice versa. Another controversial idea is that modern hyperthermophiles (i.e., organisms
having an optimal growth temperature above 80 °C) could be the direct
descendants of a heat-loving LUCA. Hyperthermophiles indeed appear as early
diverging lineages in the rRNA universal tree and have relatively short branches
( Stetter, 2006). However, this position
might be due to the high guanine–cytosine content of their rRNAs, which
could have reduced their rate of evolution (leading to shorter branches and
artifactual grouping) ( Forterre, 1996).
Several attempts have been made to determine putative compositional biases
in the rRNA, tRNA, or proteins from LUCA in order to determine the temperature
at which these molecules were functional [see, for instance ( Galtier et al.,
1999) ( Di Giulio, 2003)].
However, these approaches led to contradictory results and are hampered by
the difficulty of reconstructing ancient phylogenies and uncertainties concerning
the root of the tree of life (see below). In our opinion, a mesophilic LUCA
fits better with the observation that hyperthermophiles are sophisticated
organisms that have evolved specific mechanisms to thrive at very high temperatures
[for a review see ( Forterre and Philippe, 1999a; Xu and Glansdorff, 2002)]. In particular, phylogenomics
analyses indeed suggest that reverse gyrase, an atypical DNA topoisomerase
present in all hyperthermophiles, was absent in LUCA ( Brochier-Armanet
and Forterre, 2006; Forterre et al.,
2000) whereas hot-temperature-adapted lipids are not homologous
in Archaea and Bacteria, suggesting a secondary adaptation that occurred independently
in each of these domains ( Forterre and Philippe, 1999a; Xu and Glansdorff, 2002). The minimal set of universal proteins includes a surprisingly small number
of proteins that function in DNA replication, lacking in particular a DNA
replicase, a primase, and a helicase. This is not due to unrecognized homology
since the proteins performing these functions in Bacteria on one side, and
Archea–Eukaryotes on the other, belong to different protein superfamilies
( Bailey et al., 2006; Leipe et al.,
1999). To explain this observation, Koonin and colleagues have
suggested that LUCA had an RNA genome, but used DNA as a replication intermediate
(much like a retrovirus) ( Leipe et al., 1999).
Alternatively, if LUCA had a DNA genome, the ancestral system might have been
replaced in one lineage (probably in Bacteria) by a new system of viral origin
( Forterre, 1999). Finally, if LUCA still
had a bona fide RNA genome, Forterre suggested
that the few universal proteins involved in DNA metabolism were independently
introduced by DNA viruses in the three cellular domains ( Forterre,
2006). The idea that LUCA still had a RNA genome has been recently
boosted by the discovery of mechanisms for the repair of RNA damages and for
enhancing the fidelity of RNA transcription and replication. These findings
have suggested that RNA–protein cells may have reached a level of sophistication
much more important than previously thought ( Forterre,
2005; Poole and Logan, 2005). Most authors assume that LUCA was identical to the last common ancestor
of Archaea and Bacteria, either because it is commonly believed that the tree
of life is rooted between the Archaea–Eukaryotes on one side and Bacteria
on the other, or because of models where Eukaryotes originated from some kind
of association between Archaea and Bacteria ( Lopez-Garcia
and Moreira, 1999; Martin and Muller,
1998; Rivera and Lake, 2004; Wachtershauser, 2006). However, the root of the bacterial
tree and the origin of Eukaryotes remain highly controversial ( Forterre and Philippe, 1999b; Gribaldo
and Philippe, 2002), ( Poole and Penny,
2007). If the root turned out to be in the eucaryotic branch
( Philippe and Forterre, 1999), several
features now exclusively present in Eukaryotes could already have been present
in LUCA, whereas features common to Archaea and Bacteria might have originated
in a common lineage to these two domains. At the moment, there is no definitive
argument to conclude if the archaeal–eukaryal or even the unique eucaryotic
features (e.g., the spliceosome and spliceosomal introns) are ancestral or
derived. The same can be said for the features that are common to Bacteria
and Archaea, such as the superoperons encoding ribosomal proteins. In any
case, many puzzling observations that are difficult to fit in a single coherent
scenario remain to be explained. The question of the topology of the universal
tree of life is intimately linked to the problem of the origin of the three
domains. The main questions to be solved are (i) why three canonical versions
of the ribosome (or other universal traits) exist and (ii) how they are now
so different from each other, but so similar inside each domain ( Woese, 1987). Many contradictory scenarios have been
proposed and are still actively debated ( Lopez-Garcia
and Moreira, 1999; Martin and Muller,
1998; Martin and Russell, 2003; Rivera and Lake, 2004; Woese,
2002) ( Cavalier-Smith, 2002)
( Forterre, 2006). Much more work has to
be done in comparative biochemistry and molecular biology to test various
evolutionary scenarios for all possible molecular machines present in modern
organisms. In particular, it will be critical to analyze in depth the history
of all universal molecular machines (especially the translation apparatus). Although dramatic progress has been made these last 20 years concerning
all aspects of research on the origin of life, there are still critical gaps,
especially in the RNA world theory, and no experimental evidence for a consensus
scenario. We still do not know how life originated on our planet, and we will
possibly never know, since we address here a historical problem for which
critical records may have completely disappeared. Furthermore, although the
study of the origin of life is a popular subject, the number of laboratories
truly working on the subject is extremely small. On the other hand, considering
recent trends, we should be able in the near future to understand the physicochemical
principles that supported the early emergence of life, and the particular
path of evolution of the matter that produced life on our planet could be
at least partly revealed by studying modern cells. A major bottleneck for
further advances is that scientists working in the various origin of life
fields are often isolated from each other either by the borders of their disciplines
or by their own theoretical preferences. Research on the origin of life will
thus surely benefit from interdisciplinary projects gathering all relevant
disciplines to dive into our most distant past. Work in our laboratory on DNA replication was funded by a HFSP grant. - Akita F, et al. (2007. ).
“The crystal structure of a virus-like particle from the hyperthermophilic
archaeon pyrococcus furiosus provides insight into the evolution of viruses.” J. Mol. Biol. doi: 10.1016/j.jmb.2007.02.075. 368, 1469–83. [PubMed]
- Bada J L, Fegley B, Miller S L, Lazcano A, Cleaves H J, Hazen R M, and Chalmers J (2007. ).
“Debating evidence for the origin of life on Earth.” Science doi: 10.1126/science.315.5814.937c. 315, 937–939; [PubMed]author reply 937–939. [PubMed]
- Bada J L,
and Lazcano A (2002. ).
“Origin of life. Some like it hot, but not the first biomolecules.” Science doi: 10.1126/science.1069487. 296, 1982–1983. [PubMed]
- Bada J L,
and Lazcano A (2003. ).
“Perceptions of science. Prebiotic soup—revisiting the
Miller experiment.” Science doi: 10.1126/science.1085145. 300, 745–746. [PubMed]
- Bailey S, Wing R A, and Steitz T A (2006. ).
“The structure of T. aquaticus DNA
polymerase III is distinct from eukaryotic replicative DNA polymerases.” Cell doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2006.07.027. 126, 893–904. [PubMed]
- Bamford D H, Grimes J M, and Stuart D I (2005. ). “What does structure tell us about virus evolution?” Curr. Opin. Struct. Biol. doi: 10.1016/j.sbi.2005.10.012. 15, 655–663. [PubMed]
- Bernstein M (2006. ).
“Prebiotic materials from on and off the early Earth.” Philos. Trans. R. Soc. London, Ser. B doi: 10.1098/rstb.2006.1913.361, 1689–1700; [PubMed]“Discussion.” 1700–1682. [PubMed]
- Brasier M, McLoughlin N, Green O, and Wacey D (2006. ).
“A fresh look at the fossil evidence for early Archaean cellular
life.” Philos. Trans. R. Soc. London, Ser.
B doi: 10.1098/rstb.2006.1835.361, 887–902.
- Brochier-Armanet C,
and Forterre P (2006. ).
“Widespread distribution of archaeal reverse gyrase in thermophilic
bacteria suggests a complex history of vertical inheritance and lateral gene
transfers.” Archaea 2, 83–93. [PubMed]
- Brocks J J, Logan G A, Buick R,
and Summons R E (1999. ).
“Archean molecular fossils and the early rise of eukaryotes.” Science doi: 10.1126/science.285.5430.1033. 285, 1033–1036. [PubMed]
- Brosius J (2005. ).
“Echoes from the past—are we still in an RNP world?” Cytogenet
Genome Res 110, 8–24. [PubMed]
- Catling D C (2006. ).
“Comment on ‘A hydrogen-rich early Earth atmosphere.’” Science doi: 10.1126/science.1117827. 311, 38; [PubMed]author reply . [PubMed]
- Cavalier-Smith T (2001. ).
“Obcells as proto-organisms: membrane heredity, lithophosphorylation,
and the origins of the genetic code, the first cells, and photosynthesis.” J. Mol. Evol. 53, 555–595. [PubMed]
- Cavalier-Smith T (2002. ).
“The neomuran origin of archaebacteria, the negibacterial root
of the universal tree and bacterial megaclassification.” Int
J Syst Evol Microbiol 52, 7–76. [PubMed]
- Chen I A (2006. ).
“GE prize-winning essay. The emergence of cells during the origin
of life.” Science doi: 10.1126/science.1137541. 314, 1558–1559. [PubMed]
- Chen I A, Roberts R W, and Szostak J W (2004. ). “The emergence of competition between model protocells.” Science doi: 10.1126/science.1100757. 305, 1474–1476. [PubMed]
- Chen I A,
and Szostak J W (2004. ).
“Membrane growth can generate a transmembrane pH gradient in
fatty acid vesicles,” Proc. Natl. Acad.
Sci. U.S.A. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0308045101. 101, 7965–7970. [PubMed]
- Claeys P, and Morbidelli A (2006. ). “Solar system formation and early evolution:
the first 100 million years.” Earth, Moon,
Planets 98, 137–145.
- Cohen B A, Swindle T D, and Kring D A (2000. ). “Support for the lunar cataclysm hypothesis from lunar meteorite
impact melt ages.” Science doi: 10.1126/science.290.5497.1754. 290, 1754–1756. [PubMed]
- Copley S D, Smith E, and Morowitz H J (2005. ).
“A mechanism for the association of amino acids with their codons
and the origin of the genetic code.” Proc.
Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0501049102. 102, 4442–4447. [PubMed]
- Deamer D, Singaram S, Rajamani S, Kompanichenko V,
and Guggenheim S (2006. ).
“Self-assembly processes in the prebiotic environment.” Philos. Trans. R. Soc. London, Ser. B doi: 10.1098/rstb.2006.1905. 361, 1809–1818. [PubMed]
- de Duve C (2003. ).
“A research proposal on the origin of life.” Orig
Life Evol Biosph 33, 559–574. [PubMed]
- de Duve C, and Miller S L (1991. ). “Two-dimensional life?” Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. doi: 10.1073/pnas.88.22.10014. 88, 10014–10017. [PubMed]
- Delaye L, Becerra A,
and Lazcano A (2005. ).
“The last common ancestor: what’s in a name?” Orig
Life Evol Biosph 35, 537–554. [PubMed]
- Di Giulio M (2003. ).
“The universal ancestor and the ancestor of bacteria were hyperthermophiles.” J. Mol. Evol. 57, 721–730. [PubMed]
- Di Giulio M (2005. ).
“The origin of the genetic code: theories and their relationships,
a review.” BioSystems doi: 10.1016/j.biosystems.2004.11.005. 80, 175–184. [PubMed]
- Ellington A D, Khrapov M, and Shaw C A (2000. ).
“The scene of a frozen accident.” RNA doi: 10.1017/S1355838200000224. 6, 485–498. [PubMed]
- Eschenmoser A (1999. ).
“Chemical etiology of nucleic acid structure.” Science doi: 10.1126/science.284.5423.2118. 284, 2118–2124. [PubMed]
- Farquhar J, Bao H,
and Thiemens M (2000. ).
“Atmospheric influence of Earth’s earliest sulfur cycle.” Science doi: 10.1126/science.289.5480.756. 289, 756–759. [PubMed]
- Fedo C M,
and Whitehouse M J (2002. ).
“Metasomatic origin of quartz-pyroxene rock, Akilia, Greenland,
and implications for Earth’s earliest life.” Science doi: 10.1126/science.1070336. 296, 1448–1452. [PubMed]
- Ferris J P (2006. ).
“Montmorillonite-catalysed formation of RNA oligomers: the possible
role of catalysis in the origins of life.” Philos.
Trans. R. Soc. London, Ser. B doi: 10.1098/rstb.2006.1903. 361, 1777–1786;discussion .
- Ferry J G,
and House C H (2006. ).
“The stepwise evolution of early life driven by energy conservation.” Mol. Biol. Evol. doi: 10.1093/molbev/msk014. 23, 1286–1292. [PubMed]
- Forterre P (1996. ).
“A hot topic: the origin of hyperthermophiles.” Cell doi: 10.1016/S0092-8674(00)81262-3. 85, 789–792. [PubMed]
- Forterre P (1999. ).
“Displacement of cellular proteins by functional analogues from
plasmids or viruses could explain puzzling phylogenies of many DNA informational
proteins.” Mol. Microbiol. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2958.1999.01497.x. 33, 457–465. [PubMed]
- Forterre P (2002. ).
“The origin of DNA genomes and DNA replication proteins.” Curr. Opin. Microbiol. doi: 10.1016/S1369-5274(02)00360-0. 5, 525–532. [PubMed]
- Forterre P (2005. ).
“The two ages of the RNA world, and the transition to the DNA
world: a story of viruses and cells.” Biochimie doi: 10.1016/j.biochi.2005.03.015. 87, 793–803. [PubMed]
- Forterre P (2006. ).
“Three RNA cells for ribosomal lineages and three DNA viruses
to replicate their genomes: a hypothesis for the origin of cellular domain.” Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0510333103. 103, 3669–3674. [PubMed]
- Forterre P, Bouthier
De La Tour C, Philippe H,
and Duguet M (2000. ).
“Reverse gyrase from hyperthermophiles: probable transfer of
a thermoadaptation trait from archaea to bacteria.” Trends Genet. doi: 10.1016/S0168-9525(00)01980-6. 16, 152–154. [PubMed]
- Forterre P, Confalonieri F, Charbonnier F, and Duguet M (1995. ). “Speculations on the origin of life and thermophily: review
of available information on reverse gyrase suggests that hyperthermophilic
procaryotes are not so primitive.” Orig Life Evol Biosph 25, 235–249. [PubMed]
- Forterre P, and Philippe H (1999a. ). “The last universal common ancestor (LUCA),
simple or complex?” Biol. Bull. 196, 373–375; [PubMed]discussion 375–377. [PubMed]
- Forterre P, and Philippe H (1999b. ). “Where is the root of the universal tree of
life?” BioEssays doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1521-1878(199910)21:10<871::AID-BIES10>3.0.CO;2-Q. 21, 871–879. [PubMed]
- Freeland S J, Knight R D, and Landweber L F (1999. ). “Do proteins predate DNA?” Science doi: 10.1126/science.286.5440.690. 286, 690–692. [PubMed]
- Freeland S J, Wu T, and Keulmann N (2003. ).
“The case for an error minimizing standard genetic code.” Orig
Life Evol Biosph 33, 457–477. [PubMed]
- Fuerst J A (2005. ).
“Intracellular compartmentation in planctomycetes.” Annu. Rev. Microbiol. 59, 299–328. [PubMed]
- Galtier N, Tourasse N,
and Gouy M (1999. ).
“A nonhyperthermophilic common ancestor to extant life forms.” Science doi: 10.1126/science.283.5399.220. 283, 220–221. [PubMed]
- Ginoza W, Hoelle C J, Vessey K B,
and Carmack C (1964. ).
“Mechanisms of inactivation of single-stranded virus nucleic
acids by heat.” Nature (London) doi: 10.1038/203606a0. 203, 606–609. [PubMed]
- Gomes R, Levison H F, Tsiganis K,
and Morbidelli A (2005. ).
“Origin of the cataclysmic late heavy bombardment period of
the terrestrial planets.” Nature (London) doi: 10.1038/nature03676. 435, 466–469. [PubMed]
- Gribaldo S, and Philippe H (2002. ). “Ancient phylogenetic relationships.” Theor
Popul Biol 61, 391–408. [PubMed]
- Hanczyc M M, Fujikawa S M, and Szostak J W (2003. ). “Experimental models of primitive cellular compartments:
encapsulation, growth, and division.” Science doi: 10.1126/science.1089904. 302, 618–622. [PubMed]
- Hanczyc M M, Mansy S S, and Szostak J W (2007. ). “Mineral surface directed membrane assembly.” Orig
Life Evol Biosph 37, 67–82. [PubMed]
- Harris J K, Kelley S T, Spiegelman G B,
and Pace N R (2003. ).
“The genetic core of the universal ancestor.” Genome Res. doi: 10.1101/gr.652803. 13, 407–412. [PubMed]
- Hawkesworth C J,
and Kemp A I (2006. ).
“Evolution of the continental crust.” Nature (London) doi: 10.1038/nature05191. 443, 811–817. [PubMed]
- Hethke C, Bergerat A, Hausner W, Forterre P,
and Thomm M (1999. ).
“Cell-free transcription at 95 degrees: thermostability of transcriptional
components and DNA topology requirements of Pyrococcus transcription.” Genetics 152, 1325–1333. [PubMed]
- Holland H D (2006. ).
“The oxygenation of the atmosphere and oceans.” Philos. Trans. R. Soc. London, Ser. B doi: 10.1098/rstb.2006.1838. 361, 903–915. [PubMed]
- Holm N G, Dumont M, Ivarsson M,
and Konn C (2006. ).
“Alkaline fluid circulation in ultramafic rocks and formation
of nucleotide constituents: a hypothesis,” Geochem.
Trans. 7, 7. [PubMed]
- Huang W, and Ferris J P (2003. ). “Synthesis of 35–40
mers of RNA oligomers from unblocked monomers. A simple approach to the RNA
world.” Chem. Commun. (Cambridge) doi: 10.1039/b303134a. 12, 1458–1459. [PubMed]
- Huber C, and Wachtershauser G (2006. ). “Alpha-hydroxy and alpha-amino acids under possible
Hadean, volcanic origin-of-life conditions.” Science doi: 10.1126/science.1130895. 314, 630–632. [PubMed]
- Iyer L M, Koonin E V, and Aravind L (2003. ).
“Evolutionary connection between the catalytic subunits of DNA-dependent
RNA polymerases and eukaryotic RNA-dependent RNA polymerases and the origin
of RNA polymerases.” BMC Struct Biol 3, 1. [PubMed]
- Iyer L M, Leipe D D, Koonin E V,
and Aravind L (2004. ).
“Evolutionary history and higher order classification of AAA+ATPases.” J. Struct. Biol. doi: 10.1016/j.jsb.2003.10.010. 146, 11–31. [PubMed]
- Janas T, Janas T,
and Yarus M (2004. ).
“A membrane transporter for tryptophan composed of RNA.” RNA doi: 10.1261/rna.7112704. 10, 1541–1549. [PubMed]
- Jay D G,
and Gilbert W (1987. ).
“Basic protein enhances the incorporation of DNA into lipid
vesicles: model for the formation of primordial cells.” Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. doi: 10.1073/pnas.84.7.1978. 84, 1978–1980. [PubMed]
- Jeffares D C, Poole A M, and Penny D (1998. ).
“Relics from the RNA world.” J.
Mol. Evol. 46, 18–36. [PubMed]
- Jekely G (2006. ).
“Did the last common ancestor have a biological membrane?” Biol
Direct 1, 35. [PubMed]
- Johnston W K, Unrau P J, Lawrence M S, Glasner M E,
and Bartel D P (2001. ).
“RNA-catalyzed RNA polymerization: accurate and general RNA-templated
primer extension.” Science doi: 10.1126/science.1060786. 292, 1319–1325. [PubMed]
- Joyce G F (2002. ).
“The antiquity of RNA-based evolution.” Nature (London) doi: 10.1038/418214a. 418, 214–221. [PubMed]
- Kasting J F (1993. ).
“Earth’s early atmosphere.” Science doi: 10.1126/science.11536547. 259, 920–926. [PubMed]
- Kasting J F,
and Howard M T (2006. ).
“Atmospheric composition and climate on the early Earth.” Philos. Trans. R. Soc. London, Ser. B doi: 10.1098/rstb.2006.1902. 361, 1733–1741; [PubMed]discussion 1741–1732. [PubMed]
- Kasting J F,
and Ono S (2006. ).
“Palaeoclimates: the first two billion years.” Philos. Trans. R. Soc. London, Ser. B doi: 10.1098/rstb.2006.1839. 361, 917–929. [PubMed]
- Knauth L P (1998. ).
“Salinity history of the Earth’s early ocean [letter].” Nature (London) doi: 10.1038/26879. 395, 554–555. [PubMed]
- Knight R D,
and Landweber L F (2000. ).
“The early evolution of the genetic code.” Cell doi: 10.1016/S0092-8674(00)80866-1. 101, 569–572. [PubMed]
- Koonin E V (2003. ).
“Comparative genomics, minimal gene-sets and the last universal
common ancestor.” Nat. Rev. Microbiol. doi: 10.1038/nrmicro751. 1, 127–136. [PubMed]
- Kump L (2005. ).
“Ocean science. Ironing out biosphere oxidation.” Science doi: 10.1126/science.1107482. 307, 1058–1059. [PubMed]
- Landweber L F,
and Pokrovskaya I D (1999. ).
“Emergence of a dual-catalytic RNA with metal-specific cleavage
and ligase activities: the spandrels of RNA evolution.” Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. doi: 10.1073/pnas.96.1.173. 96, 173–178. [PubMed]
- Lazcano A, Guerrero R, Margulis L, and Oro J (1988. ).
“The evolutionary transition from RNA to DNA in early cells.” J. Mol. Evol. 27, 283–290. [PubMed]
- Lazcano A, and Miller S L (1996. ). “The origin and early evolution
of life: prebiotic chemistry, the pre-RNA world, and time.” Cell doi: 10.1016/S0092-8674(00)81263-5. 85, 793–798. [PubMed]
- Leipe D D, Aravind L, and Koonin E V (1999. ).
“Did DNA replication evolve twice independently?” Nucleic Acids Res. doi: 10.1093/nar/27.17.3389. 27, 3389–3401. [PubMed]
- Li Q, Ricardo A, Benner S A, Winefordner J D, and Powell D H (2005. ).
“Desorption/ionization on porous silicon mass spectrometry
studies on pentose-borate complexes.” Anal.
Chem. doi: 10.1021/ac050258d. 77, 4503–4508. [PubMed]
- Lollar B S,
and McCollom T M (2006. ).
“Geochemistry: biosignatures and abiotic constraints on early
life.” Nature (London) doi: 10.1038/nature05499. 444, E18; [PubMed]discussion E18–E19. [PubMed]
- Lopez-Garcia P, Claeys P, Douzery E, Forterre P, Moreira D, Prieur D,
and Van Zuilen M, (2006. ).
“Ancient fossil record and early evolution (ca. 3.8 to 0.5 Ga).” Earth, Moon, Planets 98, 247–290.
- Lopez-Garcia P,
and Moreira D (1999. ).
“Metabolic symbiosis at the origin of eukaryotes.” Trends Biochem. Sci. doi: 10.1016/S0968-0004(98)01342-5. 24, 88–93. [PubMed]
- Maizels N, and Weiner A M (1994. ). “Phylogeny from function: evidence
from the molecular fossil record that tRNA originated in replication, not
translation.” Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. doi: 10.1073/pnas.91.15.6729. 91, 6729–6734. [PubMed]
- Martin W, and Muller M (1998. ). “The hydrogen hypothesis for the first eukaryote.” Nature (London) doi: 10.1038/32096. 392, 37–41. [PubMed]
- Martin W, and Russell M J (2003. ). “On the origins of cells: a
hypothesis for the evolutionary transitions from abiotic geochemistry to chemoautotrophic
prokaryotes, and from prokaryotes to nucleated cells.” Philos. Trans. R. Soc. London, Ser. B doi: 10.1098/rstb.2002.1183. 358, 59–83; [PubMed]discussion 83–85. [PubMed]
- McGinness K E,
and Joyce G F (2003. ).
“In search of an RNA replicase ribozyme.” Chem. Biol. doi: 10.1016/S1074-5521(03)00003-6. 10, 5–14. [PubMed]
- Mojzsis S J, Arrhenius G, McKeegan K D, Harrison T M, Nutman A P,
and Friend C R (1996. ).
“Evidence for life on Earth before 3,800 million years ago.” Nature (London) doi: 10.1038/384055a0. 384, 55–59. [PubMed]
- Mojzsis S J,
and Harrison T M (2002. ).
“Origin and significance of Archean quartzose rocks at Akilia,
Greenland.” Science doi: 10.1126/science.298.5595.917a. 298, 917; [PubMed]discussion . [PubMed]
- Montmerle T, Augereau J C, Chaussidon M, Gounelle M, Marty B, and Morbidelli A (2006. ).
“Solar system formation and early evolution: the first 100 million
years.” Earth, Moon, Planets 98, 39–95.
- Muller U F (2006. ).
“Re-creating an RNA world.” Cell.
Mol. Life Sci. doi: 10.1007/s00018-006-6047-1. 63, 1278–1293. [PubMed]
- Myllykallio H, Lipowski G, Leduc D, Filee J, Forterre P, and Liebl U (2002. ).
“An alternative flavin-dependent mechanism for thymidylate synthesis.” Science doi: 10.1126/science.1072113. 297, 105–107. [PubMed]
- Orgel L E (2000. ).
“Self-organizing biochemical cycles.” Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. doi: 10.1073/pnas.220406697. 97, 12503–12507. [PubMed]
- Orgel L E (2003. ).
“Some consequences of the RNA world hypothesis.” Origins Life Evol. Biosphere doi: 10.1023/A:1024616317965. 33, 211–218.
- Orgel L E (2004. ).
“Prebiotic chemistry and the origin of the RNA world.” Crit. Rev. Biochem. Mol. Biol. 39, 99–123. [PubMed]
- Pavlov A A, Kasting J F, Brown L L, Rages K A, and Freedman R (2000. ). “Greenhouse warming by CH4 in
the atmosphere of early Earth.” J. Geophys.
Res. doi: 10.1029/1999JE001134. 105, 11981–11990. [PubMed]
- Pearson A, Budin M,
and Brocks J J (2003. ).
“Phylogenetic and biochemical evidence for sterol synthesis
in the bacterium Gemmata obscuriglobus.” Proc.
Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. doi: 10.1073/pnas.2536559100. 100, 15352–15357. [PubMed]
- Pereto J, Lopez-Garcia P,
and Moreira D (2004. ).
“Ancestral lipid biosynthesis and early membrane evolution.” Trends Biochem. Sci. doi: 10.1016/j.tibs.2004.07.002. 29, 469–477. [PubMed]
- Philippe H, and Forterre P (1999. ). “The rooting of the universal tree of life is
not reliable.” J. Mol. Evol. 49, 509–523. [PubMed]
- Poole A, Penny D,
and Sjoberg B M (2001. ).
“Confounded cytosine! Tinkering and the evolution of DNA.” Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 2, 147–151. [PubMed]
- Poole A M, Jeffares D C, and Penny D (1998. ).
“The path from the RNA world.” J.
Mol. Evol. 46, 1–17. [PubMed]
- Poole A M,
and Logan D T (2005. ).
“Modern mRNA proofreading and repair: clues that the last universal
common ancestor possessed an RNA genome?.” Mol.
Biol. Evol. doi: 10.1093/molbev/msi132. 22, 1444–1455. [PubMed]
- Poole A M,
and Penny D (2007. ).
“Evaluating hypotheses for the origin of eukaryotes.” BioEssays doi: 10.1002/bies.20516. 29, 74–84. [PubMed]
- Ribas de Pouplana L,
and Schimmel P (2001. ).
“Aminoacyl-tRNA synthetases: potential markers of genetic code
development.” Trends Biochem. Sci. doi: 10.1016/S0968-0004(01)01932-6. 26, 591–596. [PubMed]
- Ricardo A, Carrigan M A, Olcott A N,
and Benner S A (2004. ).
“Borate minerals stabilize ribose.” Science doi: 10.1126/science.1092464. 303, 196. [PubMed]
- Rivera M C,
and Lake J A (2004. ).
“The ring of life provides evidence for a genome fusion origin
of eukaryotes.” Nature (London) doi: 10.1038/nature02848. 431, 152–155. [PubMed]
- Robert F, and Chaussidon M (2006. ). “A palaeotemperature curve for the Precambrian
oceans based on silicon isotopes in cherts.” Nature
(London) doi: 10.1038/nature05239. 443, 969–972. [PubMed]
- Russell M J,
and Hall A J (1997. ).
“The emergence of life from iron monosulphide bubbles at a submarine
hydrothermal redox and pH front.” J. Geol.
Soc. (London) 154, 377–402.
- Russell M J,
and Martin W (2004. ).
“The rocky roots of the acetyl-CoA pathway.” Trends Biochem. Sci. doi: 10.1016/j.tibs.2004.05.007. 29, 358–363. [PubMed]
- Sacerdote M G,
and Szostak J W (2005. ).
“Semipermeable lipid bilayers exhibit diastereoselectivity favoring
ribose.” Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0408440102. 102, 6004–6008. [PubMed]
- Sagan C, and Chyba C (1997. ). “The early faint sun paradox: organic shielding of ultraviolet-labile
greenhouse gases.” Science doi: 10.1126/science.276.5316.1217. 276, 1217–1221. [PubMed]
- Schimmel P, and Henderson B (1994. ). “Possible role of aminoacyl-RNA complexes in
noncoded peptide synthesis and origin of coded synthesis.” Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. doi: 10.1073/pnas.91.24.11283. 91, 11283–11286. [PubMed]
- Schopf J W (2006. ).
“Fossil evidence of Archaean life.” Philos.
Trans. R. Soc. London, Ser. B doi: 10.1098/rstb.2006.1834. 361, 869–885.
- Schwartz A W (2006. ).
“Phosphorus in prebiotic chemistry.” Philos. Trans. R. Soc. London, Ser. B doi: 10.1098/rstb.2006.1901. 361, 1743–1749; [PubMed]discussion . [PubMed]
- Springsteen G,
and Joyce G F (2004. ).
“Selective derivatization and sequestration of ribose from a
prebiotic mix.” J. Am. Chem. Soc. doi: 10.1021/ja0483692. 126, 9578–9583. [PubMed]
- Steitz T A,
and Moore P B (2003. ).
“RNA, the first macromolecular catalyst: the ribosome is a ribozyme.” Trends Biochem. Sci. doi: 10.1016/S0968-0004(03)00169-5. 28, 411–418. [PubMed]
- Stetter K O (2006. ).
“Hyperthermophiles in the history of life.” Philos. Trans. R. Soc. London, Ser. B doi: 10.1098/rstb.2006.1907. 361, 1837–1842; discussion 1842–1843. [PubMed]
- Summons R E, Bradley A S, Jahnke L L,
and Waldbauer J R (2006. ).
“Steroids, triterpenoids and molecular oxygen.” Philos. Trans. R. Soc. London, Ser. B doi: 10.1098/rstb.2006.1837. 361, 951–968. [PubMed]
- Summons R E, Powell T G, and Boreham C J (1988. ). “Petroleum geology and geochemistry of the Middle Proterozoic
McArthur Basin, northern Australia.” Geochim.
Cosmochim. Acta doi: 10.1016/0016-7037(88)90001-4. 52, 1747–1763.
- Szathmary E (1999. ).
“The origin of the genetic code: amino acids as cofactors in
an RNA world.” Trends Genet. doi: 10.1016/S0168-9525(99)01730-8. 15, 223–229. [PubMed]
- Taylor W R (2006. ).
“Transcription and translation in an RNA world.” Philos. Trans. R. Soc. London, Ser. B doi: 10.1098/rstb.2006.1910. 361, 1751–1760. [PubMed]
- Tehei M, Franzetti B, Maurel M C, Vergne J, Hountondji C, and Zaccai G (2002. ).
“The search for traces of life: the protective effect of salt
on biological macromolecules.” Extremophiles 6, 427–430. [PubMed]
- Tian F, Toon O B, Pavlov A A,
and De Sterck H (2005. ).
“A hydrogen-rich early Earth atmosphere.” Science doi: 10.1126/science.1106983. 308, 1014–1017. [PubMed]
- Tice M M,
and Lowe D R,
(2004. ). “Photosynthetic microbial mats in the 3,416-Myr-old
ocean.” Nature (London) doi: 10.1038/nature02888. 431, 549–552. [PubMed]
- Tippelt A, Jahnke L,
and Poralla K (1998. ).
“Squalene-hopene cyclase from Methylococcus capsulatus (Bath):
a bacterium producing hopanoids and steroids.” Biochim.
Biophys. Acta 1391, 223–232. [PubMed]
- Ueno Y, Yamada K, Yoshida N, Maruyama S,
and Isozaki Y (2006. ).
“Evidence from fluid inclusions for microbial methanogenesis
in the early Archaean era.” Nature (London) doi: 10.1038/nature04584. 440, 516–519. [PubMed]
- Vetsigian K, Woese C,
and Goldenfeld N (2006. ).
“Collective evolution and the genetic code.” Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0603780103. 103, 10696–10701. [PubMed]
- Vlassov A V, Johnston B H, Landweber L F,
and Kazakov S A (2004. ).
“Ligation activity of fragmented ribozymes in frozen solution:
implications for the RNA world.” Nucleic
Acids Res. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkh601. 32, 2966–2974. [PubMed]
- Vlassov A V, Kazakov S A, Johnston B H,
and Landweber L F (2005. ).
“The RNA world on ice: a new scenario for the emergence of RNA
information.” J. Mol. Evol. doi: 10.1007/s00239-004-0362-7. 61, 264–273. [PubMed]
- Vogel G (1998. ).
“Tracking the history of the genetic code.” Science doi: 10.1126/science.281.5375.329. 281, 329–331. [PubMed]
- Wachtershauser G (1988. ).
“Before enzymes and templates: theory of surface metabolism.” Microbiol. Rev. 52, 452–484. [PubMed]
- Wachtershauser G (2006. ).
“From volcanic origins of chemoautotrophic life to Bacteria,
Archaea and Eukarya.” Philos. Trans. R.
Soc. London, Ser. B doi: 10.1098/rstb.2006.1904. 361, 1787–1806;discussion 1806–1808.
- Westall F (2005. ).
“Evolution. Life on the early Earth: a sedimentary view.” Science doi: 10.1126/science.1107227. 308, 366–367. [PubMed]
- Wilde S A, Valley J W, Peck W H,
and Graham C M (2001. ).
“Evidence from detrital zircons for the existence of continental
crust and oceans on the Earth 4.4 Gyr ago.” Nature
(London) doi: 10.1038/35051550. 409, 175–178. [PubMed]
- Woese C (1998. ).
“The universal ancestor.” Proc.
Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. doi: 10.1073/pnas.95.12.6854. 95, 6854–6859. [PubMed]
- Woese C R (1965. ).
“On the evolution of the genetic code.” Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. doi: 10.1073/pnas.54.6.1546. 54, 1546–1552. [PubMed]
- Woese C R (1987. ).
“Bacterial evolution.” Microbiol.
Rev. 51, 221–271. [PubMed]
- Woese C R (2002. ).
“On the evolution of cells.” Proc.
Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. doi: 10.1073/pnas.132266999. 99, 8742–8747. [PubMed]
- Wolf Y I,
and Koonin E V (2007. ).
“On the origin of the translation system and the genetic code
in the RNA world by means of natural selection, exaptation, and subfunctionalization.” Biol
Direct 2, 14. [PubMed]
- Wong J T (2005. ).
“Coevolution theory of the genetic code at age thirty.” BioEssays doi: 10.1002/bies.20208. 27, 416–425. [PubMed]
- Woodson S A (2005. ).
“Metal ions and RNA folding: a highly charged topic with a dynamic
future.” Curr. Opin. Chem. Biol. doi: 10.1016/j.cbpa.2005.02.004. 9, 104–109. [PubMed]
- Xu Y, and Glansdorff N (2002. ). “Was our ancestor a hyperthermophilic procaryote?.” Comp. Biochem. Physiol., Part A: Mol. Integr. Physiol. 133, 677–688.
- Yamagata Y, Watanabe H, Saitoh M, and Namba T (1991. ).
“Volcanic production of polyphosphates and its relevance to
prebiotic evolution.” Nature (London) doi: 10.1038/352516a0. 352, 516–519. [PubMed]
- Yarus M, Caporaso J G, and Knight R (2005. ).
“Origins of the genetic code: the escaped triplet theory.” Annu. Rev. Biochem. doi: 10.1146/annurev.biochem.74.082803.133119. 74, 179–198. [PubMed]
- Zubay G, and Mui T (2001. ). “Prebiotic synthesis of nucleotides.” Origins Life Evol. Biosphere doi: 10.1023/A:1006722423070. 31, 87–102.
|
This article has been corrected. See 
