Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • News & Views
  • Published:

A paradigm gets shifty

Nature volume 392, pages 15–16 (1998)Cite this article

The prevailing view of the origin of complex eukaryotic cells presumes a symbiosis, based on respiration, between a bacterium and a primitive eukaryotic ‘host’. But could the symbiosis have been based instead on hydrogen metabolism, with the host being an archaean?

Not surprisingly, biologists have long assumed that eukaryotes evolved from prokaryotes, and have come up with theories for the origin of the more complex eukaryotic structural components that involve particular selective advantages, mechanisms and histories. The best articulated and most widely accepted of the theories, 30 years old this year, is Lynn Margulis's version of the ‘endosymbiont hypothesis’ — ‘endo-’ for internal, and ‘symbiont’ as in a partner in a mutually beneficial relationship — for the origin of mitochondria and plastids1. Mitochondria are the powerhouses of most eukaryotic cells, generating ATP in respiration; plastids (chloroplasts) are the organelles of photosynthesis in algae and plants.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Figure 1: Typical prokaryotic (left) and eukaryotic (right) cells.
Figure 2: The endosymbiont hypothesis for the origin of mitochondria, as currently construed.

References

  1. Margulis, L. Origin of Eukaryotic Cells (Yale Univ. Press, New Haven, CT, 1970).

  2. Gray, M. W. & Spencer, D. F. Symp. Soc. Gen. Microbiol. 54, 109–126 (1996).

    Google Scholar 

  3. Doolittle, W. F. & Brown, J. R. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 91, 6721–6728 (1994).

    Google Scholar 

  4. Olsen, G. J. & Woese, C. R. Cell 89, 991–994 (1997).

    Google Scholar 

  5. Margulis, L. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 93, 1071–1076 (1996).

    Google Scholar 

  6. Doolittle, W. F. Symp. Soc. Gen. Microbiol. 54, 1–21 (1996).

    Google Scholar 

  7. Martin, W. F. & Müller, M. Nature 392, 37–41 (1998).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Klenk, H.-P.et al. Nature 390, 364–370 (1997).

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Evolutionary Biology, Canadian Institute for Advanced Research, Dalhousie University, Halifax, B3H 4H7, Nova Scotia, Canada

    W. Ford Doolittle

Authors
  1. W. Ford Doolittle
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Doolittle, W. A paradigm gets shifty. Nature 392, 15–16 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1038/32033

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/32033

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing