Evolving eukaryotes: an interview with Joel Dacks
- Joel B. DacksEmail authorView ORCID ID profile
- Published: 1 November 2018
Abstract
Joel
Dacks is an Associate Professor and Canada Research Chair in
Evolutionary Cell Biology at the University of Alberta, a Scientific
Associate at the Natural History Museum (London), and the current
President of the International Society for Evolutionary Protistology.
His research group studies the evolution and diversity of the eukaryotic
membrane-trafficking system, from origins to potential disease
therapeutics. In this interview, Joel shares some perspectives on
gaining a balanced view of comparative cell biology and the importance
of a constructive peer review process.
Keywords
- Evolution
- Genomics
- Eukaryotes
- Membrane-trafficking
- Golgi
- Parasitism
What are your current research interests?
My
lab studies the evolution and diversity of membrane-trafficking
organelles. Using genomics and molecular evolutionary techniques, with a
focus on microbial eukaryotes (protists), we are examining the
conservation in how material is moved around the cell and the ways in
which different lineages across eukaryotes vary from the canonical
configuration. This information tells us about the diversity of modern
membrane trafficking mechanisms and function. It can also be used to
understand the evolutionary processes and details of how the
endomembrane organelles, and their associated molecular machinery, arose
[1].
Currently, we have several projects examining the genomes of parasitic
lineages (and their harmless free-living relatives) to understand the
evolution of the specialized membrane-trafficking machinery that
underpins parasitic mechanisms [2].
We also have a project using transcriptomics and bioinformatics to
investigate the gene regulatory networks and cell biology of contractile
vacuoles, endolysosomal organelles that regulate osmotic pressure in
freshwater protists. Finally, we are delving into the evolution of key
membrane-trafficking families such as SNAREs (e.g., [3]), vesicle coats (e.g., [4]), and GTPases (e.g., [5]).
What are your predictions for the field over the next 5 years?
There
has been a major community effort to produce tractable molecular cell
biological model systems in the areas of the eukaryotic tree other than
plants, animals, and fungi (e.g., the MMI program [6]).
I expect that these efforts are going to increasingly produce a wealth
of comparative data, enabling a more balanced and informed view of all
of eukaryotic cell biology. Also, the field of eukaryogenesis was
revolutionized in the past few years by the discovery of the Asgard
archaea as the closest prokaryotic relatives of eukaryotes [7].
Efforts to isolate and culture these organisms will lead to even
greater advances in understanding both a previously unknown type of
organism and the contributors to eukaryogenesis. I also hope that new
lineages will be described which are even closer to eukaryotes than the
Asgard archaea already described.
What motivates you to provide peer review for journals?
I
think that the peer-review process is more important now than ever.
With the vast amount of material available online that can be used to
inform and mis-inform, a rigorous peer-review process is absolutely
crucial since it is what sets scientific data apart from opinion backed
by anecdotal facts. As well, we as a community rely on the good-will and
sense of responsibility of our colleagues to keep the peer-review
system working. My colleagues do this, and I feel a responsibility to
contribute.
Have you had any memorably good or bad experiences of peer review, as an author or as a reviewer?
My
two best peer-review experiences, in retrospect though perhaps not at
the time, were both rejections. The first was a rejection of a paper I
submitted whilst in graduate school, where the editor told me that the
result was interesting but that I needed to collect more data to test my
interpretation of the findings that we had. But the next data that we
collected were seemingly contradictory to the first! So we kept
collecting and looking at different data points to bring into the study.
Because we had to keep pushing and piece together data that were more
complex than initially anticipated, we ended up coming up with a very
different paper, one that laid the foundation for our proposed mechanism
of how non-endosymbiotically derived eukaryotic organelles evolve. The
second experience was quite recent. We had submitted our work to several
high impact journals and received form-letter rejections. Finally, we
got a rejection but with detailed and thoughtful criticism. It turned
out that the reviewers were interpreting our paper in a way that I had
not anticipated, prompting me to rewrite the entire manuscript to
clarify our points. The next submission to a different high impact
journal was completely straightforward and positive.
Declarations
Acknowledgements
JBD wishes to thank members of the Dacks lab, past and present, for their contributions.
Funding
JBD is the Canada Research
Chair (Tier II) in Evolutionary Cell Biology. Research in the Dacks lab
is supported by a Discovery Grant (RES0021028).
Availability of data and materials
Not applicable.
Author’s contributions
JBD wrote the manuscript. JBD read and approved the final manuscript.
Competing interests
The author declares he has no competing interests.
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/),
which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any
medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s)
and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and
indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain
Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
References
- Schlacht A, Herman EK, Klute MJ, Field MC, Dacks JB. Missing pieces of an ancient puzzle: evolution of the eukaryotic membrane-trafficking system. Cold Spring Harb Perspect Biol. 2014;6(10):a016048. https://doi.org/10.1101/cshperspect.a016048.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
- Klinger CM, Karnkowska A, Herman EK, Hampl V, Dacks JB. In the light of free-living relatives: understanding the phylogeny and evolutionary cell biology of parasites. In: Walochnik J, Duchêne M, editors. Molecular parasitology—protozoan parasites and their molecules. Wien: Springer; 2016. p. 383–408.Google Scholar
- Venkatesh D, Boehm C, Barlow LD, Nankissoor NN, O’Reilly A, Kelly S, Dacks JB, Field MC. Evolution of the endomembrane systems of trypanosomatids – conservation and specialisation. J Cell Sci. 2017;130(8):1421–34. https://doi.org/10.1242/jcs.197640.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
- Hirst J, Schlacht A, Norcott JP, Traynor D, Bloomfield G, Antrobus R, Kay RR, Dacks JB, Robinson MS. Characterization of TSET, an ancient and widespread membrane trafficking complex. Elife. 2014;3:e02866. https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.02866. View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
- Klinger CM, Spang A, Dacks JB, Ettema TJ. Tracing the archaeal origins of eukaryotic membrane-trafficking system building blocks. Mol Biol Evol. 2016;33(6):1528–41. https://doi.org/10.1093/molbev/msw034.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation. https://www.moore.org/article-detail?newsUrlName=$8m-awarded-to-scientists-from-the-gordon-and-betty-moore-foundation-to-accelerate-development-of-experimental-model-systems-in-marine-microbial-ecology. Accessed 1 Oct 2018.
- Eme L, Spang A, Lombard J, Stairs CW, Ettema TJG. Archaea and the origin of eukaryotes. Nat Rev Microbiol. 2017;15(12):711–23. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrmicro.2017.133.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
Nenhum comentário:
Postar um comentário
Observação: somente um membro deste blog pode postar um comentário.