Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 31, 2026

A Practical Guide to Phylogenetics for Nonexperts
Published on: February 5, 2014
The archaea monophyly issue: A phylogeny of translational elongation factor G(2) sequences inferred from an optimized
P Cammarano1, R Creti, A M Sanangelantoni
1Istituto Pasteur Fondazione Cenci-Bolognetti, Dipartimento di Biotecnologie cellulari ed Ematologia, Sezione di Genetica molecolare, Universita' di Roma I "La Sapienza," Policlinico Umberto I, Viale Regina Elena 324, 00161 Roma, Italy.
Abstract:
A global alignment of EF-G(2) sequences was corrected by reference to protein structure. The selection of characters eligible for construction of phylogenetic trees was optimized by searching for regions arising from the artifactual matching of sequence segments unique to different phylogenetic domains. The spurious matchings were identified by comparing all sections of the global alignment with a comprehensive inventory of significant binary alignments obtained by BLAST probing of the DNA and protein databases with representative EF-G(2) sequences. In three discrete alignment blocks (one in domain II and two in domain IV), the alignment of the bacterial sequences with those of Archaea-Eucarya was not retrieved by database probing with EF-G(2) sequences, and no EF-G homologue of the EF-2 sequence segments was detected by using partial EF-G(2) sequences as probes in BLAST/FASTA searches. The two domain IV regions (one of which comprises the ADP-ribosylatable site of EF-2) are almost certainly due to the artifactual alignment of insertion segments that are unique to Bacteria and to Archaea-Eucarya. Phylogenetic trees have been constructed from the global alignment after deselecting positions encompassing the unretrieved, spuriously aligned regions, as well as positions arising from misalignment of the G' and G" subdomain insertion segments flanking the "fifth" consensus motif of the G domain (AE varsson, 1995). The results show inconsistencies between trees inferred by alternative methods and alternative (DNA and protein) data sets with regard to Archaea being a monophyletic or paraphyletic grouping. Both maximum-likelihood and maximum-parsimony methods do not allow discrimination (by log-likelihood difference and difference in number of inferred substitutions) between the conflicting (monophyletic vs. paraphyletic Archaea) topologies. No specific EF-2 insertions (or terminal accretions) supporting a crenarchaeal-eucaryal clade are detectable in the new EF-G(2) sequence alignment.
Related Concept Videos
Gene Evolution - Fast or Slow?
In contrast, regions which code...
Translation in Prokaryotes
Diversity of Archaea I
Diversity of Archaea II
Diversity of Archaea III
Microbial Phylogeny

