Cited by 2,039Genomics and Phylogenetic StudiesMicrobial Community Ecology and PhysiologyProtist diversity and phylogeny

A new view of the tree of life

Open access
Hug, Laura A., Baker, Brett J., Anantharaman, Karthik, Brown, Christopher T., Probst, Alexander J., Castelle, Cindy J., Butterfield, Cristina N., Hernsdorf, Alex W. +9 more·2016·Nature Microbiology

Abstract

The tree of life is one of the most important organizing principles in biology 1 . Gene surveys suggest the existence of an enormous number of branches 2 , but even an approximation of the full scale of the tree has remained elusive. Recent depictions of the tree of life have focused either on the nature of deep evolutionary relationships 3–5 or on the known, well-classified diversity of life with an emphasis on eukaryotes 6 . These approaches overlook the dramatic change in our understanding of life's diversity resulting from genomic sampling of previously unexamined environments. New methods to generate genome sequences illuminate the identity of organisms and their metabolic capacities, placing them in community and ecosystem contexts 7,8 . Here, we use new genomic data from over 1,000 uncultivated and little known organisms, together with published sequences, to infer a dramatically expanded version of the tree of life, with Bacteria, Archaea and Eukarya included. The depiction is both a global overview and a snapshot of the diversity within each major lineage. The results reveal the dominance of bacterial diversification and underline the importance of organisms lacking isolated representatives, with substantial evolution concentrated in a major radiation of such organisms. This tree highlights major lineages currently underrepresented in biogeochemical models and identifies radiations that are probably important for future evolutionary analyses.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/nmicrobiol.2016.48

Cites

6 of 6 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Numerous studies support possibility 3 (neither domain arose from the other, such that LUCA was the common ancestor of bacteria and archaea sampled here).

    “numerous studies support possibility 3 [47, 147, 148]”
  • The bacterial candidate phyla radiation (CPR) and the DPANN archaea diversify near the base of the Bacteria and Archaea respectively.

    “Trees visualized at https://itol.embl.de/itol.cgiusing Netwick files from Hug et al. (2016) concatenated ribosomal proteins in place of 16S rRNA genes (Fig. 3B) indicate that a large radiation of predominantly uncultured mesophilic taxa, which are comprised of potentially symbiotic organisms with small cells and genomes and are referred to as the bacterial candidate phyla radiation (CPR) and the”

    From The Emergence of Life (2019) · cites this paper as Hug et al. 2016

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Hug, L. A., Baker, B. J., Anantharaman, K., Brown, C. T., Probst, A. J., Castelle, C. J., Butterfield, C. N., Hernsdorf, A. W., Amano, Y., Ise, K., Suzuki, Y., Dudek, N., Relman, D. A., Finstad, K. M., Amundson, R., Thomas, B. C., & Banfield, J. F.
Affiliations
  • University of California, Berkeley (US)
  • University of Texas at Austin Marine Science Institute (US)
  • Japan Atomic Energy Agency (JP)
  • The University of Tokyo (JP)
  • University of California, Santa Cruz (US)
  • VA Palo Alto Health Care System (US)
Corresponding author
Banfield, Jillian F.
Venue
Nature Microbiology
Published
2016-04-11
Volume
1
Issue
5
Pages
16048-16048
ISSN
2058-5276 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2315521535
Cited by
2,039
References
6
Citations by year
2026: 122 · 2025: 154 · 2024: 190 · 2023: 176 · 2022: 182 · 2021: 249 · 2020: 279 · 2019: 233 · 2018: 206 · 2017: 183 · 2016: 65
FWCI
119.05
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Nature Microbiology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • eScholarship (California Digital Library) (publishedVersion)
  • eScholarship (California Digital Library) (acceptedVersion)
  • eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion)
  • OSTI OAI (U.S. Department of Energy Office of Scientific and Technical Information) (submittedVersion)
  • Universitätsbibliographie, Universität Duisburg-Essen (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation (DEAC02-05CH11231, 1406956)
  • U.S. Department of Energy (-AC02-05CH11231, 05CH11231, DE AC02 05CH11231, DOE‐SC10010566, SC10010566, DE-AC02-)
  • National Aeronautics and Space Administration (DE-AC02-05CH11231)
  • Joint Genome Institute (AC02-05CH11231, DE–AC02–05CH11231)
  • Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry
  • Office of Science (DOE-SC10010566, DEAC02–05CH11231, AC02-05CH11231, DE-AC02, 05CH11231)
  • U.S. Navy
  • Agency for Natural Resources and Energy
  • Office of Naval Research (DE-AC02-05CH11231, N00014)
  • Division of Environmental Biology
  • Biological and Environmental Research (05CH11231, DOE-SC10010566, DE-AC02 − 05CH11231, AC02-05CH11231)
  • Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (AC02‐05CH11231, DE-AC02-05CH11231, 05CH11231)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Genomics and Phylogenetic Studies
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Microbial Community Ecology and Physiology
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Protist diversity and phylogeny
Keywords
tree of life, microbial diversity, bacterial diversification, archaea, eukaryotes, biogeochemical modeling, metabolic diversity
MeSH terms
Archaea, Bacteria, Phylogeny, Ecosystem, Evolution, Molecular, Biodiversity, Eukaryota

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review