Comb Jelly Genome Grows More Mysterious

The publication of the draft genetic sequence of a comb jelly reveals a nervous system like no other

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

Comb jellies, or ctenophores, look like tiny disco balls and propel themselves around oceans using specialized hairs, lapping up small prey with their sticky tentacles. “They are aliens who’ve come to Earth,” says Leonid Moroz, a neuroscientist at the University of Florida in St Augustine.

The genome of the Pacific sea gooseberry (Pleurobrachia bachei), which Moroz and his team report online today in Nature, adds to the mystery of ctenophores (L. L. Moroz et al. Nature http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nature13400; 2014). The sequence omits whole classes of genes found in all other animals, including genes normally involved in immunity, development and neural function. For that reason, the researchers contend that ctenophores evolved a nervous system independently.

Ctenophores have long vexed taxonomists. Their resemblance to jellyfish earned them a spot on the tree of life as a sister group to cnidarians (the phylum that includes jellyfish). On the basis of their nervous systems — which can detect light, sense prey and move musculature — many researchers had them branching off from the common ancestor of other animals after the sponges and flattened multi­cellular blobs known as placozoans, neither of which have a nervous system. Now armed with data showing that ctenophores lack many common genes, some scientists contend that these are the closest living relatives to the first animals.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


Moroz’s team argues that the P. bachei genome, along with gene-expression data from other ctenophores, supports this theory. For example, microRNAs, which regulate gene expression in other animals, are completely missing from the sea gooseberry genome.

The biggest surprise, Moroz says, was the absence of many standard components of a nervous system. Nearly all known nervous systems use the same ten primary neurotransmitters; the Pacific sea gooseberry seems to employ just one or two. Moroz speculates that the organism might complete its nervous system using molecules that researchers have not yet found in this species, such as specialized protein hormones.

The uniqueness of this ctenophore’s nervous system leads Moroz and his team to argue that it must have evolved independently, after the ctenophore lineage branched off from other animals some 500 million years ago. “Everyone thinks this kind of complexity cannot be done twice,” Moroz says. “But this organism suggests that it happens.”

Gert Wörheide, an evolutionary geobiologist at Ludwig Maximilian University in Munich, Germany, is intrigued by the theory that the nervous system evolved twice in different animal branches, but disputes that ctenophores are the closest relatives of the first animals.

The common ancestor of all animals may have looked nothing like comb jellies, and the P. bachei nervous system may be a more recent adaptation, he says. “I think the last word is not spoken yet on where the ctenophores go.”

> Listen to Leonid Moroz and Andreas Hejnol discuss the comb jelly genome

This article is reproduced with permission from the magazine Nature. The article was first published on May 21, 2014.

Ewen Callaway is a senior reporter at Nature.

More by Ewen Callaway

First published in 1869, Nature is the world's leading multidisciplinary science journal. Nature publishes the finest peer-reviewed research that drives ground-breaking discovery, and is read by thought-leaders and decision-makers around the world.

More by Nature magazine

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe