Mark Farmer (farmer at EMLAB.ZOO.UGA.EDU) wrote:
: It's an old paper but it may help in your quest for finding answers
: about nuclear pores in protists.
: Franke, W. W. 1970. On the universality of nuclear pore complex
: structure. Z. Zellforsch. 105:405-429.
: This author also refers to a paper by Daniels et al. [Z. Zellforsch.
: 98:357-363] in which nuclear pores were described for Pelomyxa
: carolinensis.
Thanks for the reference; I'll try to get ahold of a copy.
: I agree with Graham that a eukaryote with a nucleus but no nuclear pores
: is most likely a DEAD eukaryote :-)
Yes, that's probably true, but I wonder about the "first" nucleus--the
nuclear pore is quite a complex structure, and I suspect that early nuclei
were poreless, but still able to transit things in and out
(endocytosis/exocytosis?) without nuclear pores, but just much less
efficiently and perhaps with much less precision. The
nucleus-complete-with-nuclear-pores would be a vastly superior model, but
perhaps there is some slow-growing primitive euk out there getting by OK
and persisting? Yes, I am most interested in transitional forms...
Thanks again for your response and cite - Kathleen (vstr18a at sfsu.edu)
