Here I use the rationale assuming that if of a certain trait that exerts its function in some aspect of the genetic code or, more generally, in protein synthesis, it is possible to identify the evolutionary stage of its origin then it would imply that this evolutionary moment would be characterized by a high translational noise because this trait would originate for the first time during that evolutionary stage. That is to say, if this trait had a non-marginal role in the realization of the genetic code, or in protein synthesis, then the origin of this trait would imply that, more generally, it was the genetic code itself that was still originating. But if the genetic code were still originating - at that precise evolutionary stage - then this would imply that there was a high translational noise which in turn would imply that it was in the presence of a protocell, i.e. a progenote that was by definition characterized by high translational noise. I apply this rationale to the mechanism of modification of the base 34 of the anticodon of an isoleucine tRNA that leads to the reading of AUA and AUG codons in archaea, bacteria and eukaryotes. The phylogenetic distribution of this mechanism in these phyletic lineages indicates that this mechanism originated only after the evolutionary stage of the last universal common ancestor (LUCA), namely, during the formation of cellular domains, i.e., at the stage of ancestors of these main phyletic lineages. Furthermore, given that this mechanism of modification of the base 34 of the anticodon of the isoleucine tRNA would result to emerge at a stage of the origin of the genetic code - despite in its terminal phases - then all this would imply that the ancestors of bacteria, archaea and eukaryotes were progenotes. If so, all the more so, the LUCA would also be a progenote since it preceded these ancestors temporally. A consequence of all this reasoning might be that since these three ancestors were of the progenotes that were different from each other, if at least one of them had evolved into at least two real and different cells - basically different from each other - then the number of cellular domains would not be three but it would be greater than three.

在这里，我使用的基本原理假设，如果某个性状在遗传密码的某些方面发挥其功能，或者更一般地说，在蛋白质合成中，有可能确定其起源的进化阶段，那么这将意味着这种进化时刻将具有高平移噪音的特征，因为该特征将在该进化阶段首次出现。也就是说，如果这个性状在遗传密码的实现或蛋白质合成中具有非边际作用，那么这个性状的起源就意味着，更一般地说，仍然是遗传密码本身的起源。 . 但是，如果遗传密码仍然起源——在那个精确的进化阶段——那么这将意味着存在高平移噪声，这反过来又意味着它存在于原始细胞中，即根据定义特征为的后代高平移噪声。我将这一基本原理应用于异亮氨酸 tRNA 反密码子第 34 位碱基的修饰机制，该机制导致古细菌、细菌和真核生物中 AUA 和 AUG 密码子的读取。该机制在这些系统谱系中的系统发育分布表明，该机制仅起源于最后一个普遍共同祖先（LUCA）的进化阶段之后，即细胞域形成期间，即这些主要系统谱系的祖先阶段。血统。此外，鉴于这种对异亮氨酸 tRNA 反密码子第 34 位碱基的修饰机制将导致在遗传密码起源的某个阶段出现——尽管处于其末期——那么所有这些都意味着细菌的祖先古细菌真核生物是祖先。如果是这样，更重要的是，LUCA 也将是一个后代，因为它在时间上先于这些祖先。所有这些推理的结果可能是，由于这三个祖先是彼此不同的后代，如果其中至少一个进化成至少两个真实且不同的细胞——基本上彼此不同——那么数量蜂窝域的数量不会是三个，但会大于三个。