Coevolution theory of the genetic code: is the precursor-product hypothesis invalid?

Optimization of the standard genetic code according to three codon positions using an evolutionary algorithm

Many biological systems are typically examined from the point of view of adaptation to certain conditions or requirements. One such system is the standard genetic code (SGC), which generally minimizes the cost of amino acid replacements resulting from mutations or mistranslations. However, no full consensus has been reached on the factors that caused the evolution of this feature. One of the hypotheses suggests that code optimality was directly selected as an advantage to preserve information about encoded proteins. An important feature that should be considered when studying the SGC is the different roles of the three codon positions. Therefore, we investigated the robustness of this code regarding the cost of amino acid replacements resulting from substitutions in these positions separately and the sum of these costs. We applied a modified evolutionary algorithm and included four models of the genetic code assuming various restrictions on its structure. The SGC was compared both with the codes that minimize the objective function and those that maximize it. This approach allowed us to place the SGC in the global space of possible codes, which is a more appropriate and unbiased comparison than that with randomly generated codes because they are characterized by relatively uniform amino acid assignments to codons. The SGC appeared to be well optimized at the global scale, but its individual positions were not fully optimized because there were codes that were optimized for only one codon position and simultaneously outperformed the SGC at the other positions. We also found that different code structures may lead to the same optimality and that random codes can show a tendency to minimize costs under some of the genetic code models. Our results suggest that the optimality of SGC could be a by-product of other processes.

Hydrothermal focusing of chemical and chemiosmotic energy, supported by delivery of catalytic Fe, Ni, Mo/W, Co, S and Se, forced life to emerge

Energised by the protonmotive force and with the intervention of inorganic catalysts, at base Life reacts hydrogen from a variety of sources with atmospheric carbon dioxide. It seems inescapable that life emerged to fulfil the same role (i.e., to hydrogenate CO(2)) on the early Earth, thus outcompeting the slow geochemical reduction to methane. Life would have done so where hydrothermal hydrogen interfaced a carbonic ocean through inorganic precipitate membranes. Thus we argue that the first carbon-fixing reaction was the molybdenum-dependent, proton-translocating formate hydrogenlyase system described by Andrews et al. (Microbiology 143:3633-3647, 1997), but driven in reverse. Alkaline on the inside and acidic and carbonic on the outside - a submarine chambered hydrothermal mound built above an alkaline hydrothermal spring of long duration - offered just the conditions for such a reverse reaction imposed by the ambient protonmotive force. Assisted by the same inorganic catalysts and potential energy stores that were to evolve into the active centres of enzymes supplied variously from ocean or hydrothermal system, the formate reaction enabled the rest of the acetyl coenzyme-A pathway to be followed exergonically, first to acetate, then separately to methane. Thus the two prokaryotic domains both emerged within the hydrothermal mound-the acetogens were the forerunners of the Bacteria and the methanogens were the forerunners of the Archaea.