The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The Phylogeny of Prokaryotes
Abstract
For the first time a single experimental approach, 16 S ribosomal RNA sequence characterization, has been used to develop an overview of phylogenetic relationships in the bacterial world. The technique permits the tracing of relationships back to the common ancestor of all extant life. This first glimpse of bacterial phylogeny reveals a world whose roots appear to span more than 3 billion years. A deep phylogenetic split exists among the bacteria, which necessitates their division into two major lines of descent, the archaebacteria and the true bacteria (or eubacteria). It is a general finding that the most ancient bacterial phenotypes are anaerobic, and that aerobic phenotypes have arisen a number of times. Photosynthetic phenotypes are also extremely ancient. Many nonphotosynthetic groups appear to have arisen from photosynthetic ancestry, which is reason to question the generally held belief that the first bacteria were anaerobic heterotrophs. The two ultimate lines of bacterial descent are no more closely related to one another than either is to the cytoplasmic aspect of the eukaryotic cell. However, in that the eukaryotic cell is a phylogenetic chimera, it itself cannot be seen as a line of descent comparable to the two bacterial lines—although some of its individual parts can be so viewed. In this way, the chloroplast and perhaps the mitochondrion are each eubacterial, and at least one ribosomal protein is archaebacterial. A third line of descent that is neither eubacterial nor archaebacterial is represented in the 18 S ribosomal RNA.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
The concept of cellular evolution
Woese, C. R., & Fox, G. E. (1977) · Journal of Molecular Evolution · doi:10.1007/bf01796132 · Cited by 388
Self-citation
Cited by
Towards a natural system of organisms: proposal for the domains Archaea, Bacteria, and Eucarya.
Woese, C. R., Kandler, O., & Wheelis, M. L. (1990) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.87.12.4576 · Cited by 6,128
Self-citationDavis, N. M., Proctor, D. M., Holmes, S. P., Relman, D. A., & Callahan, B. J. (2018) · Microbiome · doi:10.1186/s40168-018-0605-2 · Cited by 3,493
Woese, C. R. (1987) · Microbiological Reviews · doi:10.1128/mr.51.2.221-271.1987 · Cited by 5,042
Self-citationThe Uncultured Microbial Majority
Rappé, M. S., & Giovannoni, S. J. (2003) · Annual Review of Microbiology · doi:10.1146/annurev.micro.57.030502.090759 · Cited by 2,017
Report of the ad hoc committee for the re-evaluation of the species definition in bacteriology.
Stackebrandt, E., Frederiksen, W., Garrity, G. M., Grimont, P. A. D., Kämpfer, P., Maiden, M. C. J., Nesme, X., Rosselló-Mora, R., Swings, J., Trüper, H. G., et al. (2002) · International Journal of Systematic and Evolutionary Microbiology · doi:10.1099/00207713-52-3-1043 · Cited by 1,540
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Fox, G. E., Stackebrandt, E., Hespell, R. B., Gibson, J., Maniloff, J., Dyer, T. A., Wolfe, R. S., Balch, W. E., Tanner, R. S., Magrum, L. J., Zablen, L. B., Blakemore, R., Gupta, R., Bonen, L., Lewis, B. J., Stahl, D. A., Luehrsen, K. R., Chen, K. N., & Woese, C. R.
- Venue
- Science
- Published
- 1980-07-25
- Volume
- 209
- Issue
- 4455
- Pages
- 457-463
- ISSN
- 0036-8075 (ISSN-L)
- 1095-9203
- OpenAlex
- W1963946970
- Cited by
- 1,458
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 41.30
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The Phylogeny of Prokaryotes. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1126/science.6771870
- The paper
- Fox, G. E., Stackebrandt, E., Hespell, R. B., Gibson, J., Maniloff, J., Dyer, T. A., Wolfe, R. S., Balch, W. E., Tanner, R. S., Magrum, L. J., Zablen, L. B., Blakemore, R., Gupta, R., Bonen, L., Lewis, B. J., Stahl, D. A., Luehrsen, K. R., Chen, K. N., & Woese, C. R. (1980). The Phylogeny of Prokaryotes. Science. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.6771870
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.