Origin and Evolution of Eukaryotic Chaperonins: Phylogenetic Evidence for Ancient Duplications in CCT Genes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Chaperonins are oligomeric protein-folding complexes which are divided into two distantly related structural classes. Group I chaperonins (called GroEL/cpn60/hsp60) are found in bacteria and eukaryotic organelles, while group II chaperonins are present in archaea and the cytoplasm of eukaryotes (called CCT/TriC). While archaea possess one to three chaperonin subunit-encoding genes, eight distinct CCT gene families (paralogs) have been characterized in eukaryotes. We are interested in determining when during eukaryotic evolution the multiple gene duplications producing the CCT subunits occurred. We describe the sequence and phylogenetic analysis of five CCT genes from TRICHOMONAS: vaginalis and seven from GIARDIA: lamblia, representatives of amitochondriate protist lineages thought to have diverged early from other eukaryotes. Our data show that the gene duplications producing the eight CCT paralogs took place prior to the organismal divergence of TRICHOMONAS: and GIARDIA: from other eukaryotes. Thus, these divergent protists likely possess completely hetero-oligomeric CCT complexes like those in yeast and mammalian cells. No close phylogenetic relationship between the archaeal chaperonins and specific CCT subunits was observed, suggesting that none of the CCT gene duplications predate the divergence of archaea and eukaryotes. The duplications producing the CCTdelta and CCTepsilon subunits, as well as CCTalpha, CCTbeta, and CCTeta, are the most recent in the CCT gene family. Our analyses show significant differences in the rates of evolution of archaeal chaperonins compared with the eukaryotic CCTs, as well as among the different CCT subunits themselves. We discuss these results in light of current views on the origin, evolution, and function of CCT complexes.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".