Of two contending models for eukaryotic evolution the “archezoan“ has an amitochondriate eukaryote take up an endosymbiont, while “symbiogenesis“ states that an Archaeon became a eukaryote as the result of this uptake. If so, organelle formation resulting from new engulfments is simplified by the primordial symbiogenesis, and less informative regarding the bacterium‐to‐mitochondrion conversion. Gradualist archezoan visions still permeate evolutionary thinking, but are much less likely than symbiogenesis. Genuine amitochondriate eukaryotes have never been found and rapid, explosive adaptive periods characteristic of (...) symbiogenetic models explain this. Mitochondrial proteomes, encoded by genes of “eukaryotic origin“ not easily linked to host or endosymbiont, can be understood in light of rapid adjustments to new evolutionary pressures. Symbiogenesis allows “expensive” eukaryotic inventions via efficient ATP generation by nascent mitochondria. However, efficient ATP production equals enhanced toxic internal ROS formation. The synergistic combination of these two driving forces gave rise to the rapid evolution of eukaryotes.Also watch the Video Abstract. (shrink)

As free‐living organisms, alpha‐proteobacteria produce reactive oxygen species (ROS) that diffuse into the surroundings; once constrained inside the archaeal ancestor of eukaryotes, however, ROS production presented evolutionary pressures – especially because the alpha‐proteobacterial symbiont made more ROS, from a variety of substrates. I previously proposed that ratios of electrons coming from FADH2 and NADH (F/N ratios) correlate with ROS production levels during respiration, glucose breakdown having a much lower F/N ratio than longer fatty acid (FA) breakdown. Evidently, higher endogenous ROS (...) formation did not hinder eukaryotic evolution, so how were its disadvantages mitigated? I propose that the resulting selection pressures favoured the evolution of a variety of eukaryotic ‘innovations’: peroxisomes for FA breakdown, carnitine shuttles, the linkage of beta‐oxidation to antioxidant properties, uncoupling proteins (UCPs) and using mitochondrial uncoupling during beta‐oxidation to reduce ROS. Recently observed relationships between peroxisomes and mitochondria further support the model. (shrink)

Many conserved eukaryotic traits, including apoptosis, two sexes, speciation and ageing, can be causally linked to a bioenergetic requirement for mitochondrial genes. Mitochondrial genes encode proteins involved in cell respiration, which interact closely with proteins encoded by nuclear genes. Functional respiration requires the coadaptation of mitochondrial and nuclear genes, despite divergent tempi and modes of evolution. Free‐radical signals emerge directly from the biophysics of mosaic respiratory chains encoded by two genomes prone to mismatch, with apoptosis being the default penalty for (...) compromised respiration. Selection for genomic matching is facilitated by two sexes, and optimizes fitness, adaptability and fertility in youth. Mismatches cause infertility, low fitness, hybrid breakdown, and potentially speciation. The dynamics of selection for mitonuclear function optimize fitness over generations, but the same selective processes also operate within generations, driving ageing and age‐related diseases. This coherent view of eukaryotic energetics offers striking insights into infertility and age‐related diseases. (shrink)