1996Annual Review of Ecology and SystematicsRequires access

MICROBIAL DIVERSITY: Domains and Kingdoms

David M. Williams, T. Martin Embley

Open publisher page 14 citations

Abstract

▪ Abstract With the discovery of the eukaryote nucleus, all living organisms were neatly divided into prokaryotes, which lacked a nucleus, and eukaryotes, which possessed it. As data derived directly from the genome became available, it was clear that prokaryotes were comprised of two groups, Eubacteria and Archaebacteria. These were subsequently renamed at the new taxonomic level of Domain as Bacteria and Archaea, with the eukaryotes named as the Eucarya Domain. The interrelationships of the three Domains are still subject to discussion and evaluation, as is their monophyly. Further data, drawn from various protein sequences, suggest conflicting schemes, and resolution may not be straightforward. Additionally, Bacteria and Archaea as well as Eucarya are largely based on organisms already in culture. Investigation of the potentially enormous quantity of uncultured organisms in nature is likely to have as broad-ranging implications as the exploration of new protein sequences.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

▪ Abstract With the discovery of the eukaryote nucleus, all living organisms were neatly divided into prokaryotes, which lacked a nucleus, and eukaryotes, which possessed it. As data derived directly from the genome became available, it was clear that prokaryotes were comprised of two groups, Eubacteria and Archaebacteria. These were subsequently renamed at the new taxonomic level of Domain as Bacteria and Archaea, with the eukaryotes named as the Eucarya Domain. The interrelationships of the three Domains are still subject to discussion and evaluation, as is their monophyly. Further data, drawn from various protein sequences, suggest conflicting schemes, and resolution may not be straightforward. Additionally, Bacteria and Archaea as well as Eucarya are largely based on organisms already in culture. Investigation of the potentially enormous quantity of uncultured organisms in nature is likely to have as broad-ranging implications as the exploration of new protein sequences.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 14 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

▪ Abstract With the discovery of the eukaryote nucleus, all living organisms were neatly divided into prokaryotes, which lacked a nucleus, and eukaryotes, which possessed it. As data derived directly from the genome became available, it was clear that prokaryotes were comprised of two groups, Eubacteria and Archaebacteria. These were subsequently renamed at the new taxonomic level of Domain as Bacteria and Archaea, with the eukaryotes named as the Eucarya Domain. The interrelationships of the three Domains are still subject to discussion and evaluation, as is their monophyly. Further data, drawn from various protein sequences, suggest conflicting schemes, and resolution may not be straightforward. Additionally, Bacteria and Archaea as well as Eucarya are largely based on organisms already in culture. Investigation of the potentially enormous quantity of uncultured organisms in nature is likely to have as broad-ranging implications as the exploration of new protein sequences.

Key concepts: Archaea, Three-domain system, Eukaryote, Biology, Evolutionary biology, Monophyly, Genome, Phylum

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
MICROBIAL DIVERSITY: Domains and Kingdoms — Research Paper | ScholarLens