Nature C.> The retention of ancestral alphaproteobacterial pathways in some protist lineages reveals that the mitochondrion of the last eukaryotic common ancestor was more metabolically versatile than are the highly derived mitochondria that are found in most modern eukaryotes.
Press release> These findings suggest that the earliest eukaryotes were far more metabolically versatile than their modern descendants.
The ancestors of mitochondria were parasite bacteria, and they made a lot of proteins themself. (I don't know. Perhaps they changed host frequently? perhaps just in case the sucker dies? Perhaps to survive while they hunt a new host?)
Modern mitochondria lost many of these features because they relay on the host that is stable.
The mitochondria of this eukaryote are strange, because they (only partially?) lost one of these features to create one of the proteins. (I'm not sure. It looks like it's non functional, but some parts are still there? Perhaps they only do some steps and relay on the host eukaryote for the rest?)
So, when the ancestors of these eukaryote and the ancestors of most eukaryotes (including us) split, the mitochondria were still able to make this protein. Our mitochondria lost it completely, but their mitochondria only partially.
Suggested fix> These findings suggest that the *the mitochondria* of earliest eukaryotes were far more metabolically versatile than their modern descendants.
I don't think what this sentence says is surprising (but I'm not a biologist). Anyway, the paper is about a more subtle detail that is more interesting. It's about the mitochondria at the moment of the ancient split of the eukaryotes. Perhaps there is a better way to fake-edit the press release.
nhatcher•2mo ago
https://www.msstate.edu/newsroom/article/2025/11/new-clues-o...
gus_massa•2mo ago
Nature C.> The retention of ancestral alphaproteobacterial pathways in some protist lineages reveals that the mitochondrion of the last eukaryotic common ancestor was more metabolically versatile than are the highly derived mitochondria that are found in most modern eukaryotes.
Press release> These findings suggest that the earliest eukaryotes were far more metabolically versatile than their modern descendants.
The ancestors of mitochondria were parasite bacteria, and they made a lot of proteins themself. (I don't know. Perhaps they changed host frequently? perhaps just in case the sucker dies? Perhaps to survive while they hunt a new host?)
Modern mitochondria lost many of these features because they relay on the host that is stable.
The mitochondria of this eukaryote are strange, because they (only partially?) lost one of these features to create one of the proteins. (I'm not sure. It looks like it's non functional, but some parts are still there? Perhaps they only do some steps and relay on the host eukaryote for the rest?)
So, when the ancestors of these eukaryote and the ancestors of most eukaryotes (including us) split, the mitochondria were still able to make this protein. Our mitochondria lost it completely, but their mitochondria only partially.
Suggested fix> These findings suggest that the *the mitochondria* of earliest eukaryotes were far more metabolically versatile than their modern descendants.
I don't think what this sentence says is surprising (but I'm not a biologist). Anyway, the paper is about a more subtle detail that is more interesting. It's about the mitochondria at the moment of the ancient split of the eukaryotes. Perhaps there is a better way to fake-edit the press release.