The economics of organellar gene loss and endosymbiotic gene transfer
Open accessPublished version of a preprint
Abstract
Background: The endosymbiosis of the bacterial progenitors of the mitochondrion and the chloroplast are landmark events in the evolution of life on Earth. While both organelles have retained substantial proteomic and biochemical complexity, this complexity is not reflected in the content of their genomes. Instead, the organellar genomes encode fewer than 5% of the genes found in living relatives of their ancestors. While many of the 95% of missing organellar genes have been discarded, others have been transferred to the host nuclear genome through a process known as endosymbiotic gene transfer. Results: Here, we demonstrate that the difference in the per-cell copy number of the organellar and nuclear genomes presents an energetic incentive to the cell to either delete organellar genes or transfer them to the nuclear genome. We show that, for the majority of transferred organellar genes, the energy saved by nuclear transfer exceeds the costs incurred from importing the encoded protein into the organelle where it can provide its function. Finally, we show that the net energy saved by endosymbiotic gene transfer can constitute an appreciable proportion of total cellular energy budgets and is therefore sufficient to impart a selectable advantage to the cell. Conclusion: Thus, reduced cellular cost and improved energy efficiency likely played a role in the reductive evolution of mitochondrial and chloroplast genomes and the transfer of organellar genes to the nuclear genome.
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
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.
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 107 · Cited by 62
- Authors
- Kelly, S.
- Affiliations
- University of Oxford (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Kelly, Steven
- ORCID
- Kelly, Steven
- Venue
- Genome Biology
- Published
- 2021-12
- Volume
- 22
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 345-345
- ISSN
- 1465-6906 (ISSN-L)
- 1474-760X
- PMC
- PMC8686548
- OpenAlex
- W4225590076
- Cited by
- 62
- References
- 107
- Citations by year
- 2026: 17 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 17 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 1
- FWCI
- 2.98
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Genome biology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) (acceptedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- Funders
- H2020 European Research Council (637765)
- Royal Society
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Protist diversity and phylogeny
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Evolution and Genetic Dynamics
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Photosynthetic Processes and Mechanisms
- Keywords
- endosymbiotic gene transfer, mitochondrial genome, chloroplast genome, reductive evolution, genome copy number, energy efficiency, organelle proteome, endosymbiosis
- MeSH terms
- Host Microbial Interactions, Bacteria, Cell Nucleus, Chloroplasts, Mitochondria, Symbiosis, Arabidopsis, Genome, Plant, Gene Transfer, Horizontal, Proteomics, Genome, Chloroplast, Genome, Mitochondrial
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