ReviewEndosymbiosis and evolution of the plant cell
Introduction
‘Picture a palm tree growing peacefully on the shore of a spring, and a lion, lying hidden beside the palm, all its muscles tense, blood lust in its eyes, ready to pounce on an antelope and slaughter it. In order to understand fully the inner secret of this picture with its two such drastically different manifestations of life, a palm tree and a lion, it is essential to appreciate the theory of endosymbiosis. The life of the palm tree is so calm and peaceful because it is a symbiosis, it contains a legion of workers, green slaves (plastids) that work for it and nourish it. The lion has to feed itself.
Imagine that every cell of the lion’s body was filled with plastids, and I have no doubt that it would immediately lay itself peacefully by the palm, feeling replete with nothing more than some water and a few nutrient salts.’
Mereschkowsky, 1905 [1]
The acquisition of plastids by eukaryotic cells must rank as one of the most momentous events in the planet’s history; for plant cells it was their defining moment. Schimper [2] seems to have been the first biologist to realise that plastids derive from endosymbiotic photosynthetic bacteria (Figure 1), but it was Mereschkowsky [1] who elaborated the concept in eloquent detail. Modern research is painting in more and more detail Mereschkowsky’s idyllic picture of a bacterial cell living within a nucleated host cell. The availability of whole cyanobacterial genome sequences, combined with the advantage of being able to extrapolate from bacterial systems, which can be used to model events in chloroplasts, has allowed us to probe many of the questions of chloroplast biology with unprecedented finesse. My review focuses on the recent rapid progress in our understanding of how the endosymbiont divides and how its need for host-encoded proteins is satisfied.
Section snippets
Chloroplast division
To establish a permanent endosymbiosis (i.e. one not requiring ongoing recruitment of fresh endosymbionts) the endosymbiont must divide within the host cells. Daughter endosymbionts must then be segregated into each daughter host. Little is known about these processes at the molecular level [3•]. Most plant cells contain numerous chloroplasts (or plastids) that divide throughout the plant cell cycle (Figure 1), which perhaps suggests that the segregation process is only loosely regulated.
Intracellular gene transfer and transit peptides
A free-living cyanobacterium possesses about 3,000 genes [16] but a chloroplast has only 100–200 genes [17••]. Clearly, numerous genes such as those coding for peptidoglycan wall synthesis, became dispensable when the bacterium took up residence within the confines of a host, and these were probably lost; it is also clear that many indispensable genes have relocated to the plant cell nucleus [17••]. Estimates of 1000–5000 nuclear genes encoding chloroplast proteins have been postulated 17••,
Chloroplast protein import machinery
Intra-chloroplast protein targeting has long been known to derive from the endosymbiont secretion machinery [39] and several recent papers confirm this origin 40, 41, 42, 43, 44. For many years the ΔpH-dependent pathway involved in thylakoid protein targeting was thought to be an exception to this rule and was regarded as a specific invention of chloroplasts. It is now becoming clear, however, that chloroplast hcf106 (high chlorophyll fluorescence) — a protein central to ΔpH-dependent targeting
Plastid targeting in unicellular ‘plants’
The plastids of many protists groups are bounded by multiple membranes, which present additional obstacles for protein targeting. As in plant chloroplasts, targeting is mediated by N-terminal extensions but in these organisms a bipartite, or even tripartite, N-terminus is evident 59, 60•. The first portion of the leader, which is nearest to the N-terminus, comprises a classic, hydrophobic signal peptide for secretion into the endomembrane system 61•, 62•. The second component is a hydrophilic
Conclusions
Chloroplasts arose from cyanobacterial-like endosymbionts that were engulfed by a eukaryotic heterotroph about 1 billion years ago. The availability of the complete genome sequence for a cyanobacterium now allows us to frame hypotheses for the mechanisms of chloroplast division and the targeting of nuclear-encoded proteins into the organelle. Although much of the original endosymbiont machinery appears to be conserved, some components have undergone substantial modification to either change or
Acknowledgements
I thank the Australian Research Council for support and Sue Barnes for Figure 1b. Errors in the translation of Mereschkowsky [1] are mine.
References and recommended reading
Papers of particular interest, published within the annual period of review, have been highlighted as:
• of special interest
•• of outstanding interest
References (65)
- et al.
Plastid division: evidence for a prokaryotically derived mechanism
Curr Opin Plant Biol
(1998) Ftsz, a tubulin homologue in prokaryote cell division
Trends Cell Biol
(1997)- et al.
Transfer of rps10 from the mitochondrion to the nucleus in Arabidopsis thaliana: evidence for RNA-mediated transfer and exon shuffling at the integration site
FEBS Lett
(1995) - et al.
A novel plant nuclear gene encoding chloroplast ribosomal protein S9 has a transit peptide related to that of rice chloroplast ribosomal protein L12
FEBS Letts
(1999) GFP for in vivo imaging of subcellular structures in plant cells
Trends Plant Sci
(1998)- et al.
The structural flexibility of the preferredoxin transit peptide
FEBS Lett
(1999) Galactolipid biosynthesis genes and endosymbiosis
Trends Plant Sci
(1997)- et al.
Functional divergence of the plastid and cytosolic forms of the 54-kDa subunit of signal recognition particle
Biochem Biophys Res Comm
(1999) - et al.
Chloroplast SecY is complexed to SecE and involved in the translocation of the 33-kDa but not the 23-kDa subunit of the oxygen-evolving complex
J Biol Chem
(1999) - et al.
Characterization of a cDNA encoding the thylakoidal processing peptidase from Arabidopsis thaliana — implications for the origin and catalytic mechanism of the enzyme
J Biol Chem
(1998)