Tree Of Life Ebooks Catalog

Tarot Card Readings and Your Destiny

Tarot Card Readings and Your Destiny

Discover Your Destiny Through The Magic Of Tarot Cards. Learn How These Cards Can Tell Your Past, Your Present And Your Future.

Get My Free Ebook

Reading Tarot Cards Revealed

Here's just a few things 'Reading Tarot Cards Revealed' will bring to your life: Learn how to read tarot cards for yourself, friends and even strangers within 60 days. Seek support and guidance when faced with a tough life decision and improve your confidence and security in your chosen path. Find out the truth that you friends, lovers, family and work colleges may be hiding from you (and themselves) Impress your friends and have hours of fun doing readings while at the same time helping those you care about most. Bring love into your life by reading what is store for you and potential future friends and lovers. Make the correct career decisions and enjoy a more secure and prosperous life. Help others with your new expertise and at the same time creating a lucrative career as a professional tarot card reader. Here are just a sample of the things you'll learn inside your copy: The true history and symbolism behind the Tarot Cards that you must understand to have true mastery of the art (Page 8) Illustrated meanings of all of the major cards, including the Magician, the High Priestess, the Lovers, Death, the Devil, the Fool and Justice (Page 13) Meanings of the 4 suits of minor cards, including the suit of Wands, Swords, Cups and Pentacles. Plus additional meanings you wont find anywhere else.

Reading Tarot Cards Revealed Summary


4.6 stars out of 11 votes

Contents: Ebook
Author: Teresa Caro
Price: $29.95

My Reading Tarot Cards Revealed Review

Highly Recommended

I started using this book straight away after buying it. This is a guide like no other; it is friendly, direct and full of proven practical tips to develop your skills.

I give this ebook my highest rating, 10/10 and personally recommend it.

Download Now

Phylogenetics Reconstructing the Tree of Life

Defining phylogenetics and the tree of life Making and reading phylogenetic trees Putting phylogenetic trees to use Over time, the sum of these speciation events generates what scientists refer to as the tree of life. The neat thing about trees of life (scientific name phylogenetic trees) is that they enable us to trace the history of species in much the same way that genealogical trees let people trace their family histories. In a nutshell, phylogenetics lets biologists figure out the actual history of branching (speciation) for a given set of species.

The universal tree of life

Five-kingdom model was demolished after 1977 in a remarkable f series of papers by Carl Woese and colleagues from the University S of Illinois. Their molecular trees showed a deep split into three fundamental divisions, the domains Bacteria (or Eubacteria), Archaea (or Archaebacteria), and Eucarya (or Eukaryota). So the prokaryotes are no more, forming the domains Bacteria and Archaea, and it is still not clear whether Archaea and Bacteria split first, or Archaea and Eucarya. Despite this uncertainty at the root, Woese had produced the first universal tree of life (Fig. 6). 6. The universal tree of life 6. The universal tree of life

Where is the root of the tree of life

In phylogenetic analysis using molecular sequences external information is required to identify the root of an inferred tree, i.e., the node from which all other nodes of the tree are descended. Usually, an outgroup is needed to root a tree, i.e., a taxon which is known to diverge earlier than the group of interest. However, this methodology becomes inapplicable to the problem of rooting the tree of life (since all organisms are part of the group of interest). One method of determining the root of the tree of life from molecular data is to use ancient duplication events. If a gene duplication event has occurred before the divergence of all extant organisms, then the phylogenetic tree containing both gene duplicates will be symmetrical, and one set of duplicated genes can be used as an outgroup to the other. In the past, several pairs of anciently duplicated genes have been detected and analysed. The analyses produced a variety of controversial results as summarized in Table 9.1. A...

Phylogenetic evidence Hangin round on the Tree of Life

As I explain in Chapter 9, phylogenetics takes data about existing species and reconstructs the evolutionary branching pattern that led to those species. Not surprisingly, no small amount of effort has been devoted to reconstructing the parts of the tree of life where humans reside. Our particular branch includes the apes gibbons, orangutans, gorillas, the two types of chimpanzees (the standard one that you're familiar with and the bonobo, which used to be called the pygmy chimp but which turns out to be a species of its own), and us

Photosynthesis and the Eukaryote Tree of Life

Oxygenic Photosynthesis Across the Eukaryote Tree of Life Our current understanding of the eukaryote tree of life is a work in progress, based on a patchwork of data. Parts of the tree date as far back as the earliest morphology-based trees of Haeckel (see Hamm and Smetaceck, Chapter 14, this volume). These were repeatedly revised, often radically, based on data from improved microscopes and microscopic techniques (Whittaker and Margulis 1978), and this continues to the present

Drawing the Tree of Life Branching Patterns and Speciation

Scientists show phylogenetic relationships by drawing phylogenetic trees. If you trace the process of speciation on paper, you end up with a branching pattern that's referred to as the tree of life. Each branch in the tree represents a speciation event, when one species evolved into another.

The Tree of Life and the Origin

The first great surprise delivered by the Archaea, the extremophilic microbes on Earth, was that they could live in such extreme environments. The second and equally dramatic discovery was that archaeans are among the most ancient of extant organisms on Earth, and display some characters believed to be primitive. Studies of the genes of bacteria and archaeans (using powerful techniques of molecular biology) have shown that both appear to be near the very base of the so-called Tree of Life (also known as the Woese rooted tree of life after its discoverer, geneticist C.R. Woese see Figure 4.1). The Tree of Life is really a model of life's evolution into the major categories of organisms existing today, and as such it is built simply of a series of hypotheses in which we have greater or lesser degrees of confidence. Studies that compare gene sequences in various organisms give us a theoretical map Making sense (and understanding the order) of life's diversity is the specialty of...

The Tree Of Life

Reconstructing the tree of life one that includes E. coli and humans and everything else that lives on Earth has been one of modern biology's great quests. In 1837, Charles Darwin drew his first version of the tree of life. On a page in his private notebook he sketched a few joined branches, each with a letter at its tip representing a species. Across the top of the page he wrote, I think. It took a long time for a more accurate picture of the tree of life to take hold. One major obstacle was the lack of information scientists could use to determine how E. coli is related to other bacteria, or how bacteria are related to us. To compare ourselves to a bat, we can simply use our eyes to study fur, fingers, and other parts of our shared anatomy. Under a microscope, however, many bacteria look like nondescript balls or rods. Microbiologists sometimes classified species of bacteria based on little more than their ability to eat a certain sugar, or the way they turned purple when they were...

Conclusion and Future Progress

High-level metazoan phylogeny is in a state of flux. This is a time of unparalleled research activity and funding possibilities. Reconstructing the tree of life has been afforded similar priority status as the various genome-sequencing projects. As a result, the next decade will witness a great expansion and refinement of our developing views about the phy-logenetic history of life. The overview presented in this article should thus be considered as merely a tentative sketch, parts of which will be consolidated as new data accrue, while other parts will inevitably be significantly altered. The mono-phyly of Protostomia, the phylogeny within Lophotrochozoa, and the sequence of divergences of nonbilaterians are some of the most pressing questions of high-level metazoan phylogenetics. However, similar unanswered questions also prevail on lower levels, ranging from the phylogeny of the basic gnathostome clades within the Vertebrata, to the phylogeny of extant birds. Irrespective of what...

Coding DNA Changing the Number of Genes an Organism

Think back to the branching tree of life (refer to Chapter 9) and the evolution of more complex organisms such as humans from less-complex organisms. You can appreciate why the number of genes has increased. In this section, I explain how the number of genes an organism has can change. New genes can appear in a variety of ways.

Out of Africa Hominid migration patterns

The evidence Most hominid fossils are found only in Africa, and for those species with a wider distribution, the oldest specimens are always found in Africa. In addition, humans' most closely related living relative (both genetically and as placed on the tree of life refer to Figure 16-1), the chimpanzee, lives in Africa. Not enough to convince you The existing genetic variation in the human population provides another line of evidence.

Solid facts and open questions

In their long quest towards the resolution of the tree of life, phylogeneticists generally agree that several of its major branches can be currently considered as reliably inferred. For example, the monophyly of two of the three domains of life, Bacteria and Eukaryotes, is supported by numerous genes and does not seem to result from any known reconstruction artefact (Brown et al., 2001 Philippe and Forterre, 1999). Of course, the monophyly of a domain depends as a last resort on the location of the root of the tree of life because falling within a domain would render it paraphyletic rather than monophyletic (see below). In contrast, the monophyly of Archaea, which is often taken for granted (Woese et al., 1990), has never been significantly supported, even in multiple gene analyses (Brown et al., 2001 Daubin et al., 2002). Using a rate-invariant method applied to SSU rRNA, Lake (1988) proposed that Crenarchaeota are related to Eukaryotes and Euryarchaeota to Bacteria, thus rendering...

Discovering Phylogeny

The basis of all studies in palaeontology is the tree of life. All organisms, living and extinct, are linked by a single great branching tree, or phylogeny. Living organisms, from viruses and slime moulds to humans and oak trees, and all known fossil species, are related to each other. This means that they can be traced back through numerous ancestors, to a single common ancestor of all life. The fossil evidence suggests that life originated at least 3500 million years ago, and that is probably when the common ancestor lived. logeny of life because so many fossil species are probably missing, and indeed so many living species have not yet been studied (perhaps only 5-10 of living species have been named). Palaeontologists and biologists concentrate on disentangling parts of the tree of life, and this has now become a major research direction. There are two principal analytical techniques for establishing the relationships of vertebrates and their relatives, cladistic analysis of...

Use of higher order characters example of ATPases

The use of ATPase catalytic and non-catalytic subunits to root the tree of life was originally introduced by Gogarten et al. (1989). This pair of anciently duplicated genes places the root on the branch leading to Bacteria with high confidence (see Figure 9.3). Either the catalytic or the non-catalytic subunits can be considered 186 Horizontal gene transfer, gene histories, and the root of the tree of life Present 186 Horizontal gene transfer, gene histories, and the root of the tree of life Present

The origin of eukaryotes

Until recently, it seemed clear that prokaryotes had dominated the Earth for a billion years or more, before the first eukaryotes appeared. However the evidence is far from clear now. First, as we have seen, molecular reconstructions of the universal tree of life do not confirm that Eucarya arose later than Bacteria or Archaea, as had been expected. In fact, all three domains might have arisen at about the same time for all we know. Geochemical data from biomarkers has also given surprising evidence.

Evolutionary Theory in Philosophical Focus

This chapter surveys the philosophical problems raised by the two Darwinian claims of the existence of Tree of Life and the explanatory power of natural selection. It explores the specificity of explanations by natural selection, emphasizing the high context dependency of any process of selection. Some consequences are drawn about the difficulty of those explanations to fit a nomological model of explanation, and the irreducibility of their historic-narrative dimension. The paper introduces debates about units of selection, stating the compelling force of genic selectionism but highlighting some critiques. It then addresses the limitations of selectionist explanations the compared status of selection, drift, and phylogenetic inertia are investigated, and the debates over adaptationism are presented, with the aim of defining the varieties of adaptationisms as research programs. In order to assess the scope of natural selection, the chapter addresses weak and strong challenges to the...

What might the aliens be like

But do we have to rely on flights of fancy, or can science guide us toward more likely images Let's consider alien biologies, first at the biochemical level, and then at the level of the whole organism, particularly large organisms comparable in size to large plants and large animals on Earth. At the top of the tree of life, what might ETI look like

The Road To Escherichia

The newest versions of the tree of life look nothing like Haeckel's Christmas tree. Scientists can now compare thousands of species at once, and the only way to draw all of their branches is to arrange them like the spokes on a wheel. At the center of the wheel is the last common ancestor of all life on Earth today. From the center you can move outward, steering from branch to branch to follow the evolution of a particular lineage. To get to our own species, you first travel up to the common ancestor of archaea and eukaryotes. From there you bear right onto the eukaryote branch. Our ancestors remained single-celled protozoans until about 700 million years ago. They parted ways with the branches that would give rise to multicellular plants and fungi. Eventually the path takes you to the animal kingdom. Bear right again and you follow our ancestors as they become vertebrates. The ancestors of other vertebrates branch off along the way zebrafish, chickens, mice, chimpanzees. Finally the...

The Eukaryote Root

Probably the single most outstanding question in eukaryote evolution is the location of the root of the tree. For a long time, the predominant theory was that Archezoa (now mostly classified as ami-tochondriate excavates) arose near the root of eukaryotes, as these tend to form the deepest branches in molecular trees, including those based on large multigene datasets (Philippe and Adoutte 1998 Baldauf et al. 2000 Bapteste et al. 2002 Ciccarelli et al. 2006). However, there has been growing distrust in the ability of molecular phylogeny to resolve the deepest branches in the tree of life, largely due to the problem of LBA (Embley and Hirt 1998 Philippe and Ardoutte 1998).

Why any of this is important

I How the great diversity of animals on Earth could have evolved from a common ancestor. DNA sequence data has allowed researchers to refine the picture of the tree of life and the details of the branching process, but DNA sequence information by itself does not explain how so many varied body plans can have arisen from a common ancestor. Knowledge of developmental controls, as well as laboratory experiments showing how small changes in developmental genes result in large changes in animal body plan (think multi-headed jellyfish), are giving scientists this understanding.

The great leap forwardI

Compare, say, a tree based on molecular sequences of modern rodents with a tree constructed by measuring the teeth and other anatomical features of living and extinct species. Inevitably, everyone hears about the cases where the results disagree. In the early days of molecular sequencing, some bizarre results emerged, but the methods were young, and mistakes were easy to make. Such bizarre results are rare now. In some cases, palaeontologists have humbly accepted that they have been entirely unable to resolve certain parts of the evolutionary tree, and the molecules give an unequivocal answer straight away. In other cases, there is no resolution yet, and more work is required. Some parts of the great tree of life may remain forever mysterious, perhaps because rates of evolution were so fast that characters did not accumulate, or the branching points are so ancient that subsequent evolution has obliterated the clues to relationship.

First eukaryote fossils

At one time, there was a clear story of prokaryotes-first, eukaryotes-second. As we have seen, however, the waters are considerably muddied by new molecular and chemical evidence. There are clear-cut biomarkers for eukaryotes dating from 2.7 billion years ago, and the universal tree of life resolutely refuses to resolve itself in a clear way to show that Eucarya is a younger branch than either Bacteria or Archaea.

What is the relationship between TUs and character states that is the individual entries in the data matrix

Neither the concept of TU nor the concept of character can be fully understood alone, without reference to each other and to the 'fractal' nature of the tree of life (as discussed earlier). The nature of both TUs and characters change as you go up and down this fractal scale. These considerations suggest that the problems being faced, and their best-justified solutions, will change as you go up and down this fractal scale. The nature of TUs and usable characters are going to change, and we need to have a way to scale phylogenetic results from one level to the next if we are going to have a hope of building a complete tree of life. There is effectively an infinite number of semaphoronts out there there will never be a 'complete' data matrix for all of them for the practical reason that there are too many. But more importantly, it isn't at all clear that a single global analysis of all semaphoronts living on Earth would be desirable, even if we could do it. There is the fact discussed...

Mapping gene trees onto species trees

Koonin's work is based upon complete genomes. This allows a definitive statement about presence and copy number, or absence of genes from a genome. Gene families, like those found in HOVERGEN (Duret et al. 1994), the Master Catalog (Benner et al. 2000), and The Adaptive Evolution Database (TAED Liberles et al. 2001), are based upon gene or domain families, or independently evolving units in the case of the Master Catalog. Independently evolving units are pieces of a gene that are found as a self-contained gene in at least one organism or secondarily are found in conjunction with gene segments that are self-contained in another species. Families based upon genes or independently evolving units permit an assessment of more species (including those without complete genomes), but only allow a statement of presence and minimum copy number, not of absence. This can all be combined to give an increasingly comprehensive picture of the genes common to various last common ancestral points in...

A genome fusion at the origin of eukaryotes

The tree of life, Archaea are usually the most slowly evolving group. Invariantly, any fusion scenario implies that the eukaryotic genes found in the nucleus of both bacterial and archaeal ancestry started to diverge from their prokaryotic counterparts at the same time. Therefore, it is difficult to explain the fact that the bacterial genes could be easily traced back to an alpha-proteobacteria, while the supposedly archaeal genes could not be affiliated to any extant methanogenic archaeon. In addition, the nuclear genes of archaeal ancestry have probably not been subject to the secondary simplification pressures that have been acting on mitochondrial genes of bacterial ancestry (and thus do not show an accelerated evolutionary rate). Taken together, these points rule out a large divergence as an explanation for the lack of a specific association between genes from eukaryotes and methanogenic Archaea comparable to the association observed between alpha-proteobacteria and mitochondrial...

Looking for Easter Island

Of creation 'science', the reality of evolution as a historical process is not in dispute. And whatever the divergences of opinion, which as often as not have a tacit ideological agenda concerning the origins of human uniqueness, there is a uniform consensus that vitalism was safely buried many years ago, and the slight shaking of the earth above the grave marking the resting place of teleology is certainly an optical illusion. But is it an illusion Perhaps as the roots and the branches of the Tree of Life are more fully explored our perspectives will begin to shift. Evolution is manifestly true, but that does not necessarily mean we should take it for granted the end results, be it the immense complexity of a biochemical system or the fluid grace of a living organism, are genuinely awe-inspiring. Could it be that attempts to reinstall or reinject notions of awe and wonder are not simply delusions of some deracinated super-ape, but rather reopen the portals to our finding a metaphysic...

Stochastic error and the need for more data

Profiting from the synergistic effects of the massive increase of sequence data and the improvement of tree reconstruction methods, the resolution of the tree of life is rapidly progressing (Delsuc et al., 2005). However, a few important questions are expected to remain difficult to answer in the near future because the phylogenetic signal is either scarce or dominated by strong non-phylogenetic signals. Beside the afore-mentioned mutational saturation inherent in ancient events, the lack of phylogenetic signal can be due to the existence of short internal branches associated with numerous speciation events concentrated within a short time span (i.e., adaptive radiations). Furthermore, the resolution of ancient events is complicated by a dramatic reduction of the available data, because of the concomitant decrease in the number of orthologous genes (due to duplications and HGTs) and in the number of unambiguously aligned positions (due to considerable sequence divergence).

Evolving by direct action

Is that not rather odd Once upon a time an evolutionary process started up, but there are seemingly no brand new beginnings any more. The tree of life flourishes but apparently there is only one tree with no sign, even, of any recent saplings on the same ground. Why are there no signs of present or recent spontaneous generation Of course a random-branching-and-pruning picture of the growth of evolutionary trees is too simple. There would have been other factors at work. One of these was pointed out by Darwin organisms no longer originate de novo because any brand new forms of life would be promptly eaten by evolved forms. No doubt this is so. But how promptly If the very first forms had been inorganic crystal genes, they would have been unappetising to any organisms of the modern type. Darwin's point explains, perhaps, why there are no obvious well-developed saplings around the tree of life. But on the crystal gene idea should there not be myriads of very small saplings, near-starter...

Endless Forms Most Beautiful And Most Wonderful Have Been And Are Being Evolved

What I suggested in my 1989 paper is that evolvability is a property of embryologies. Genes mutate to change an animal's body, but they have to work through processes of embryonic growth. And some embryologies are better than others at throwing up fruitful ranges of genetic variation for natural selection to work upon, and might therefore be better at evolving. 'Might' seems too weak. Isn't it almost obvious that some embryologies must be better than others at evolving, in this sense I think so. It is less obvious, but nevertheless I think a case can be made, that there might be a kind of higher-level natural selection in favour of 'evolvable embryologies'. As time goes by, embryologies improve their evolvability. If there is a 'higher-level selection' of this kind, it would be rather different from ordinary natural selection, which chooses individuals for their capacity to pass on genes successfully (or, equivalently, chooses genes for their capacity to build successful individuals)....

The Pernicious Legacy Of The Great Chain Of Being

But what is it about the birds that tempts us to hive them off from the reptiles What is it that seems to justify bestowing on birds the accolade of 'class', when they are, evolutionarily speaking, just one branch within reptiles It is the fact that the immediately surrounding reptiles, birds' close neighbours on the tree of life, happen to be extinct, while the birds, alone of their kind, marched on. The closest relatives of birds are all to be found among the longextinct dinosaurs. If a wide variety of dinosaur lineages had survived, birds would not stand out they would not have been elevated to the status of their own class of vertebrates, and we would not be asking any such question as 'Where are the missing links between reptiles and birds ' Archaeopteryx would still be a nice fossil to have in your museum, but it would not play its present starring role as the stock answer to (what we can now see is) an empty challenge 'Produce your intermediates.' If the cards of extinction had...

Pilbara Sulfur Isotopes

Sulfur isotopes are a promising additional tool in our armoury for investigating the early biosphere given that primitive bacteria which metabolize sulfur compounds are one of the most deeply rooted groups in the Tree of Life (e.g. Mojzsis, 2007, Figs. 7.5-12). Sulfur isotopes have also been utilized as a hotly debated tracer for the rise of atmospheric oxygen, an application that we will not discuss further here (see instead Kasting, 2006 Mojzsis, 2007). The analysis of sulfur isotopes preserved within ancient sulfides and sulfates can be used to recognize various processes in the sulfur cycle, in particular biological sulfate reduction and disproportionation of intermediate sulfur compounds (e.g. Shen and Buick, 2004). Evidence consistent with life at 3,490 Ma comes from the study of microscopic sulfides contained within barite crystals (BaSO4) pseudomorphing gypsum (CaSO4) in the Dresser Formation from North Pole, Western Australia (Shen et al., 2001). Fractionations of up to 21.1...

Systematics And Classification

Another system that has been proposed for classifying living organisms, including plants, is the Phylocode (Cantino and de Queiroz, 2006). This system is very controversial, but is meant to reflect phylogenetic systematics more than Linnean taxonomy (Nixon et al., 2003). Monophyletic groups, that is those consisting of a single common ancestor and all descendants of that ancestor (clade), are defined solely by their position on the tree of life. Clades may have any rank, but the rank is added after nomenclature is completed. It will be interesting to see if this system gains recognition within the plant systematic community since many plant taxa are now thought to be paraphyletic (Rieseberg and Brouillet, 1994) paraphyletic groups include the ancestor and some, but not all, of its descendants). It would appear reasonable to assume that a classification scheme like the Phylocode, which includes only taxa that fit into mono-phyletic groups, will not be an accurate and useful tool for...

Genome sizes at a glance

To standardize across all organisms, when scientists talk about genome size, they talk about the size of a haploid genome. For diploid organisms, genome size corresponds to the amount of DNA in a non-fertilized egg or in a sperm cell. Table 15-1 lists the haploid genome sizes and the number of genes for many organisms. It also identifies what branch of the tree of life the organism occupies. Branch of Tree of Life Branch of Tree of Life The tree of life (refer to Chapter 9) has three main branches i Viruses don't have non-coding DNA, but they don't fit neatly on the tree of life. In fact, viruses probably are not a single group. They have such small genomes that very little information is available to group them with other organisms. No one knows exactly why organisms on the different branches of the tree of life have different amounts of non-coding DNA, although scientists can make educated guesses

A pragmatic approach for selecting evodevo model species in amniotes

Amniote Evolutionary Tree

As indicated above, most of the research performed so far with model species has been justified by the potential power of these species for understanding human biology. However, in the context of evo-devo, it is the massive realm of living species that should, ideally, be opened to genome manipulation and phenotypic investigation. Indeed, the interests of evolutionary developmental biologists go well beyond conserved physiologies and developmental processes or patterns as they seek to understand the generative mechanisms underlying biological diversity (Minelli 2003). Uncovering these mechanisms will require the merging of several disciplines (Milinkovitch and Tzika 2007), including molecular developmental biology, evolutionary molecular genetics, palaeontology (Wagner and Larsson 2003) and ecology (Dusheck 2002, Gilbert and Bolker 2003). Hence, one major challenge in evo-devo will be to adapt the tremendous knowledge and sophisticated technologies accumulated on 'classical' model...

Respiratory convergence

There are, however, several important provisos. Arguably they should have been introduced at the very beginning of the discussion. They have, indeed, already received passing mention. Their overall importance is, however, clearer once the field has been reviewed. The first, and most obvious, point is that identification of convergence presupposes a reliable phylogeny. Indeed, assumptions about the reliability of the evidence and decisions on which characters are evolutionary relevant introduces a constant risk of circularity in the argument. Is a particular character the same because it evolved from a common ancestor, or is it convergent This point is far from trivial those who employ the methods of cladistics are constantly aware of what they call homoplasy, arising from characters that carry no phylogenetic information because they arose independently. A related question is whether a particular character is actually primitive, but by being lost (or transmuted beyond recognition) in...

Overview Of The Tree

Overview The Tree

Plantae) are the group in which eukaryotic photosynthesis first arose. Chromalveolates (alveolates + stramenopiles + cryptophytes + haptophytes) include all major groups of marine algae. Finally, the excavates (dis-cicristates + amitochondrial excavates) is a tenuous grouping of extremely diverse unicellular taxa. The main treatments of the higher level classification of eukaryotes are by Adl et al. (2005) and Cavalier-Smith (2004). Detailed organismal descriptions can be found in Lee et al. (2000) and Haus-man and Hulsmann (1996). There are many recent reviews of higher-level classification (Baldauf 2003 Cavalier-Smith, 2004 Simpson and Roger 2004 Keeling et al. 2005). Especially useful websites include the Tree of Life site (http tree ), and David Patterson's Micro*scope, which

The rise and fall ofArchezoa

Most common views of the universal tree of life. A. Schematic representation of Woese's paradigm. The root is located on the bacterial branch and the mitochondrial endosymbiosis occurred relatively late during the evolution of eukaryotes. B. Woese's tree corrected for LBA artefacts. Archaea and Bacteria are sister groups, rendering prokaryotes monophyletic. The diversification of extant eukaryotes occurred relatively recently, after the mitochondrial endosymbiosis. C. Genome fusion at the origin of eukaryotes. Fig. 8.6. Most common views of the universal tree of life. A. Schematic representation of Woese's paradigm. The root is located on the bacterial branch and the mitochondrial endosymbiosis occurred relatively late during the evolution of eukaryotes. B. Woese's tree corrected for LBA artefacts. Archaea and Bacteria are sister groups, rendering prokaryotes monophyletic. The diversification of extant eukaryotes occurred relatively recently, after the mitochondrial...

Barberton Sulfur Isotopes

A similar sulfur isotope story to that in the Pilbara emerges in the Barberton area from the work of Ohmoto et al. (1993). These authors sampled a shale and three black cherts from the uppermost Onverwacht Group (-3,300 Ma Mendon Formation) in the Barberton and used high resolution laser ablation mass spectroscopy to analyse individual pyrite grains. The range of 534S values (up to 12 o variation) from these pyrites was argued to be greater than that expected if they had formed from purely magmatic or hydrothermal H2S, and an origin from bacterial sulfate reduction was again invoked. This evidence of sulfate reduction from the Pilbara and Barberton predates previous evidence (Goodwin et al., 1976) by some 600-750 Ma and potentially allows calibration of an important deep branching node on the Tree of Life.

Paris Basin Anoplotherium

Oviraptor Outlines

The tree of life is a powerful and all-embracing concept (see pp. 128-35) - the idea that all species living and extinct are related to each other and their relationships may be represented by a great branching tree that links us all back to a single species somewhere deep in the Precambrian (see Chapter 8). Biologists want to know how many species there are on the Earth today, how life became so diverse, and the nature and rates of diversifications and extinctions (see pp. 169-80, 534-41). It is impossible to understand these great patterns of evolution from studies of living organisms alone.

Homology Similarity Due to Common Ancestry

All methods of ancestral character state reconstruction make explicit assumptions about the homology of the traits under study. In comparative biology the term 'homology' refers to similarity in form or function arising from common ancestry. In other words, homologous features among organisms can be traced to a single evolutionary origin. In the language of Garstang (1922), a homologous trait is a unique historical change in the developmental program of an evolving lineage. Homologous similarities may be observed in any aspect of the heritable phenotype, from properties of genetic sequences (e.g., base composition and gene order), through aspects of development, including cellular, tissue, and organismal phenotypes, to aspects of behavior that emerge from the organization of the nervous system. Homology in behavioral traits has been examined in a number of taxa, and in a variety of contexts (de Queiroz and Wimberger, 1993 Wimberger and de Queiroz, 1996 Blomberg et al., 2003). Taxa are...

Criticism And Defense Of The Hydrogen Hypothesis

Additional critique, but of less substantial nature, has come from Kurland, who asserted to have falsified the hydrogen hypothesis (Canback et al. 2002) by claiming (1) that glycolysis is a universal pathway, (2) that glycolytic enzymes reveal a classical three-domain tree of life that is indistinguishable from the RNA tree, and (3) that all genes that eukary-otes acquired from the mitochondrial endo-symbiont must be expected to branch with a-proteobacterial homologues. Regarding the first two claims, scientists familiar with carbohydrate metabolism in archaebacteria know well that archaebacteria rarely possess the Embden-Meyerhof at all and that when they do, most of the enzymes involved are altogether unrelated to the eukaryote (and eubacterial) versions (Verhees et al. 2003 Siebers and Sch nheit 2005). Archaebacte-ria generally do not possess homologues of the genes that specify the activities of the eukaryotic glycolytic pathway (Doolittle et al. 2003 Martin and Russell 2003)....

The scope of natural selection

Evolutionary theory puts together the Tree of Life claim, and the Selection principle however, these two statements are not logically connected. We can imagine a possible world where there is selection and not one Tree of Life Lamarckism gives a picture of the opposite possible world. The question then is the relationship between the two claims to what extent is the Tree of Life accountable for by natural selection This question was present but quite attenuated in Darwin since he thought of other mechanisms than selection (e.g., Lamarckian inheritance). However, it becomes urgent in the Modern Synthesis because it focuses on selectionist explanation in the forms and conditions outlined previously. No doubt challenges to Darwinian gradualism were numerous before Eldredge and Gould before the Synthesis there were saltationists like De Vries and afterward came the hopeful monsters'' proposed by the geneticist Goldschmidt (1940). As a result of this, Mayr (1965b) established that...

Humans And Chimpanzees The Narrow Divide

Order of less than 2 percent difference, but if the lens is pulled back and entire genes (segments of base pairs) or gene families (genes that get inherited together or that work together) are considered, then the human-chimpanzee genetic differences can be larger. This makes sense since most of the raw material is the same between chimpanzees and humans, it is just tweaked differently in each one. Both have hair, but it is just differently grown and arranged. Both have arms and legs, but they are just different lengths. Both have larger than normal brains and greater than average intelligence but humans are just more exaggerated. With hardly any sequence differences from chimpanzees, humans are not so derived as was previously assumed and we fit even more comfortably in the Tree of Life.

The Ancient and Legendary Gods of

One result of popular interest is that I receive a great deal of mail, all kinds of mail, some of it very pleasant, such as from the people who wrote poems and sonnets about the plaque on Pioneer 10 some of it from schoolchildren who wish me to write their weekly assignments for them some from strangers who want to borrow money some from individuals who wish me to check out their detailed plans for ray guns, time warps, spaceships, or perpetual motion machines and some from advocates of various arcane disciplines such as astrology, ESP, UFO-contact stories, the speculative fiction of von Danniken, witchcraft, palmistry, phrenology, tea-leaf reading, Tarot cards, the I-Ching, transcendental meditation, and the psychedelic drug experience. Occasionally, also, there are sadder stories, such as from a woman who was talked to from her shower head by inhabitants of the planet Venus, or from a man who tried to file suit against the Atomic Energy Commission for tracking his every movement...

How to use this book a users manual

The second part - life on Earth - begins with an exploration of microbial life on our planet and how it has adapted to extreme environments. These are analogous to environments that will be explored on Mars and other worlds in the Solar System. The part then moves on to the results of genomics - as exploited by phylogenetic methods. This allows us to explore the interrelationships of organisms to try to create a tree of life. This is central to efforts designed to address what the earliest organisms might have been like, and two chapters are devoted to such issues. This part then moves on to explore ideas on how metazoans originated approximately 560 million years ago.

Limits of selectionist explanation The debate on adaptationism

Remains the preliminary question of its limits within the field of evolutionary biology. Darwin said that the Tree of Life (first principle of Darwinism) was partly explained by natural selection (second principle), but that there were other mechanisms at work in its production.26 So, I now turn to the actual limits of selectionist explanation in explaining both the form of the Tree of Life and the peculiar features of organisms. This recognition of pluralism within the various explanatory strategies in evolutionary biology is likely to eliminate the false problems created by the adaptationist debates and leaves philosophers and biologists with the task of formulating and evaluating what could count as an adaptationist research program. Following Godfrey-Smith (2001b) and Lewens (in press), it is useful to define two large categories of adaptationists, the empirical one, who makes assertions on the pattern of the Tree of Life and the actual mechanisms of evolution, and the...


This chapter has benefited from analyses and collaborations supported by three NSF grants, and I acknowledge my co-principal investigators for their help in understanding these issues the Deep Gene Research Coordination Network (DEB- 0090227 the Green Tree of Life Project (EF-0228729 http TreeofLife ), and the ITR grant entitled Cyber Infrastructure for Phylogenetic Research (CIPRes EF-0331494 ).


As introduced earlier, the tree of life is essentially composed of nested sets of lineages. Look closely at one lineage, and it turns out to be composed of smaller lineages, all the way down to within the organism (e.g. cell lineages and gene genealogies). None of the levels of nested lineages can be considered fundamental (Mishler and Theriot 2000a, b,c) it depends on the scale of the specific question being asked. To build the large-scale framework of the tree of life one can probably ignore the fine-scale lineages within organisms and between organisms within populations. But to study microevolutionary differentiation processes and design conservation plans at the population level, one needs to look at the fine-scale lineages, and to look at the spread of cancer cells in a body, one needs to look at finer levels still.

Pattern and Process

Consider that if evolution is fundamentally an aspect of history, then certain things happened and other things didn't. It is the job of evolutionary biologists and geologists to reconstruct the past as best they can and to try to ascertain what actually happened as the tree of life developed and branched. This is the pattern of evolution, and indeed, along with the general agreement about the gradual appearance of modern forms over the past 3.8 billion years, the scientific literature is replete with disputes among scientists about specific details of the tree of life, about which structures represent transitions between groups and how different groups are related. Morphologically, most Neanderthal physical traits can be placed within the range of variation of living humans, but there are tests on fossil mitochondrial DNA that suggest that modern humans and Neanderthals shared a common ancestor very, very long ago no more recently than 300,000 years ago (Ovchinnikov et al....

Online Resources

Http tree The Tree of Life Project provides a regularly updated and authoritative treatment of the relationships among all groups of life. Like the UCMP page at Berkeley, it also includes resources for learning about how evolutionary trees are made and interpreted.

Nonproteincoding RNA

1 Determining historical relationships between species Beyond explaining the level at which people and fungi share similarities, the really fascinating thing about ribosomal RNA is that evolutionists can use nucleotide sequences to determine the historical relationships among species. In other words, it can help clarify which branch of the tree of life an organism belongs to. You can read more about the tree of life in Chapter 9.


The advent of large-scale sequencing techniques has given rise to phylogenomics, a new discipline that attempts to infer phylogenetic relationships from complete genome data. Though not immune to the systematic biases present in some lineages, phylogenomics has largely benefited from the progress of probabilistic methods. Its resolving power has led to a drastic revision of the tree of life. One important lesson from our current understanding, especially in the eukaryotic domain, is that the equation 'simple equals primitive' rarely holds, i.e., many morphologically simple organisms have actually evolved from complex ancestors through secondary simplification. This does not mean that the eukaryotic cell was complex from its very beginning, but rather that all extant eukaryotes can be traced back to an already highly evolved common ancestor, which has logically phased out its inferior competitors. Similarly, we have provided arguments in favour of arelatively sophisticated LUCA for all...

Mass extinctions

The biosphere took tens of millions of years to recover from each mass extinction. A few branches of the tree of life were terminated. Other branches were much depleted, such as the trilobites, which were almost wiped out in the Great Dying - their only living descendants are woodlice New branches appeared, such as the dinosaurs, which arose about 30 Myr after the Great Dying.


Against this background of evolutionary happenstance, it might be surprising if life should show any direction or pattern in its history. Nevertheless, it does. Larger and more complex forms evolved from simple unicellular progenitors, and the process demanded innovations to provide new ways of living (cf. Carroll 2001). Indeed, there is much support now and in the past in favour of an evolutionary tendency towards larger size, greater complexity, and richer diversity. Two schools of thought offer radically different mechanisms to explain these evolutionary trends. The first school, arguing that there is 'nowhere to go but up', favour a random and passive tendency to evolve away from the tiny size, less complex, and low diversity that characterized the first communities on the Earth. The second school subscribes to a non-random and active (or 'driven') process that tips evolution towards ever-higher levels of size and complexity. The fossil record and the phyloge-netic 'tree of life'...


On reading around, I discovered that cladistics had been promulgated by a German entomologist, Willi Hennig. He had written about the technique in the 1950s, but it had only really attracted attention when the book was translated into English and reissued in 1966. But, from 1966 to 1980, only a rather small group of true believers espoused the method, and it had not in any way become mainstream. Hennig argued passionately that systematists, the biologists and palaeontologists who were interested in species and the tree of life, should be more objective in their methods.

Song Of Ourselves

On every evolutionary level, from the taproots to the tips of the tree of life, our thinking about alien biology is extrapolated from the local example. We assume that other life will be built of the same basic biochemical parts, that it will need liquid water, will be carbon-based, and may even use proteins and DNA. Up in life's high canopy, we imagine that other complex, intelligent creatures will develop mathematics, science, and technology similar to ours and will sing songs of their own in prime-numbered pulses of radio waves.

Tree building

Extremely fractal tree of life are likely to be one of the major concerns in the theory of phylogenetics in coming years. In the future, my prediction is that more-careful selection of characters for particular questions (i.e. more-careful and rigorous construction of the data matrix) will lead to less emphasis on the need for modifications to equally weighted parsimony. The future of phylogenetic analysis appears to be in careful selection of appropriate characters (discrete, heritable, independent, and with an appropriate rate of change) for use at a carefully defined phylogenetic level.

Carrine E Blank

The first requirement for phylogenomic dating is a well-resolved phylogenetic tree - this provides the backbone for all subsequent analyses and inferences. In the past, phylogenetic trees of prokaryotes have been largely constructed using the 16S (also called small subunit, or SSU) ribosomal RNA gene (Woese, 1987). SSU rDNA was instrumental in articulating the three-domain structure of the tree of life (Woese et al., 1990). Soon after, rDNA studies identified a large number of fundamental bacterial lineages, or divisions (Pace, 1997). At the same time, the resolution of the branching relationships between these divisions was poor, with the phylogeny often collapsing into a polytomy. Also, phylogenies of other genes (such as RNA polymerase) sometimes conflicted with the rDNA tree (e.g., Klenk et al., 1999).

Convergent evolution

Adaptation is intimately connected with convergent evolution. This is when two species with ancestors in different parts of the tree of life (Section 5.1) have evolved to look or behave like each other to cope with some aspect of their environment. There are many examples of convergent evolution on Earth. Convergent evolution also extends to locomotion - legs, fins, flippers etc., and to the ways that bodies work. An example of the latter is warm bloodedness, found today in mammals, birds, and some ocean dwelling fish - three well separated strands in the animal branch of the tree of life. Warm bloodedness confers the advantage of a constant body temperature against variations in environmental temperature, thus avoiding the inactivity in the cold that characterizes, for example, insects and reptiles. Inactivity makes the animal vulnerable to predation, and limits food gathering.

Sea Squirt Anatomy

Ciona Adult Sea Squirt

Looked at more widely, vertebrates are a minor twig on the 'Universal Tree of Life' (Figure 1.1). Molecular studies through the 1990s (e.g.Woese,2000 Wolf et al., 2002) showed that previous conceptions of the tree were wrong, and that the fundamental splits in the tree of life were all among Bacteria, separating the two major groups Bacteria and Archaea. The familiar plants, animals and fungi are part of Eukaryotes, the major group characterized by complex cells with a nucleus, relative late-comers in the broad scheme of things.

Acritarch Morphology

Calpionellids Structure

The link between art and paleontology has always been strong, with many images finding their inspiration in the beauty of the fossil form. Ernst Haeckel (1834-1919), the German evolutionary biologist, responsible for such terms as Darwinism and ecology , the phrase ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny and the first detailed tree of life (see p. 128) was also an accomplished artist he believed in the esthetic dimension of morphology (Fig. 9.11). His giant opus Art Forms in Nature (1899-1904) is considered to be one of the most elegant, artistic works of the 19th century, his illustrations being a paleontological precursor to the Art Nouveau movement. His style is nowhere better presented than in his monograph on the Radiolaria (Haeckel 1862). Unfortunately his attempts to associate science with art may have damaged his career, but current interest in the tree of life has generated a Haeckel renaissance. His illustrations are even available now as an attractive screensaver

Box Dating origins

Read more about the three-domain tree of life at http paleobiology . 3 Read around the debate about the universal tree of life, and consider whether it will ever be possible to determine which branched first - Archaea, Bacteria or Eucarya - and give reasons why some analysts believe that this will never be resolved. Cracraft, J. & Donoghue, M.J. (eds) 2004. Assembling the Tree of Life. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK. Baldauf, S.L., Bhattacharya, D., Cockrill, J., Hugenholtz, P., Pawlowski, J. & Simpson, A.C.B. 2004. The tree of life, an overview. In Cracraft, J. & Donoghue, M.J. (eds) Assembling the Tree of Life. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK, pp. 43-75. Ciccarelli, F.D., Doerks, T., von Mering, C. et al. 2006. Toward automatic reconstruction of a highly resolved tree of life. Science 311, 1283-7. Doolittle, W.F. & Bapteste, E. 2007. Pattern pluralism and the Tree of Life hypothesis. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA 104,...

Systematics Of Fungi

Phylogeny of the fungi was once based on morphology and, in some cases, characteristics in laboratory cultures. Today, the fungal tree (FIG. 3.1) of life is constantly refined using various molecular sequences. Most analyses include five Phyla within the fungi, three of which, the Glomeromycota, Ascomycota, and Basidiomycota, are considered monophyletic. The other fungi, which are considered to be the earliest-diverging fungi based on molecular phyl-ogenies, include the paraphyletic groups, Chytridiomycota and Zygomycota. See Blackwell et al. (2006) for a summary of progress on the fungal tree of life, as well as the special issue of Mycologia, A Phylogeny for Kingdom Fungi (98(6), December 2006).


Species are ultimately arbitrary classification categories placed on continuous, overlapping portions of the Tree of Life. There are many different definitions of species, or species concepts, which work for different organisms in space and time. The morphological and the genetic species concepts group organisms together that possess similar anatomy and genetic codes, respectively. The ecological species concept groups those that may have the same morphology but have a different niche. The biological species concept groups organisms together that can successfully reproduce viable, fertile offspring.

The origin of humans

After 1997, everything else seemed to fall into place. The South American placentals, the edentates, formed a second major group, the Xenarthra. And the remaining mammalian orders formed a third major clade, the Boreoeutheria ('northern mammals'), split into Laurasiatheria (insectivores, bats, artiodactyls, whales, perissodactyls, carnivores) and Euarchontoglires (primates, rodents, rabbits). So, in the course of two or three years, several independent teams of molecular biologists solved one of the outstanding puzzles in the tree of life.

No Borrowing

If feathers are a good idea within the bird 'theme', such that every single bird, without exception, has them whether it flies or not, why do literally no mammals have them Why would the designer not borrow that ingenious invention, the feather, for at least one bat The evolutionist's answer is clear. All birds have inherited their feathers from their shared ancestor, which had feathers. No mammal is descended from that ancestor. It's as simple as that.* The tree of resemblances is a family tree. It is the same kind of story for every branch and every sub-branch and every sub-sub-branch of the tree of life.

On Human Nature

The connection between the evolution of intelligence and the pain of childbirth seems unexpectedly to be made in the Book of Genesis. In punishment for eating the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, God says to Eve,* In pain shalt thou bring forth children (Genesis 3 16). It is interesting that it is not the getting of any sort of knowledge that God has forbidden, but, specifically, the knowledge of the difference between good and evil-that is, abstract and moral judgments, which, if they reside anywhere, reside in the neocortex. Even at the time that the Eden story was written, the development of cognitive skills was seen as endowing man with godlike powers and awesome responsibilities. God says Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the Tree of Life, and eat, and live forever (Genesis 3 22), he must be driven out of the Garden. God places cherubim with a flaming sword east of Eden to guard...

The Dinosaurs

We cannot point to a particular fossil and say, here, this is the ancestor of the dinosaurs. In fact, evolutionary biologists have changed how they group animals and categorize descent from ancestral forms, since the familiar and easily understood tree-of-life diagram was developed to grace textbooks and magazine articles. Biologists no longer look for the ancestor. Instead they concentrate on shared characteristics that define one group and the new characteristics that appear in the course of evolution to define a new group.

Lower Vertebrate

Example, human-like intelligence probably depends on the existence of heads. Thus, we want to know if the tree of life shows any convergence towards heads. If heads were a convergent feature of evolution one would expect independent lineages to evolve heads. Our short twig on the lower left labeled Homo has heads, but heads are found in no other branch. Our two closest relatives, plants and fungi, do not seem to have any tendency toward evolving heads. The evolution of heads (encephalization) is therefore not a convergent feature of evolution. Heads are monophyletic and were once the possessions of only one quirky unique species that lived about 600 or 700 million years ago. Its ancestors, no doubt possessed some kind of proto-head related to neural crests and placodes (Wada, 2001 Manzanares and Nieto, 2003).