New Issue: Science’s Impossible Questions. Read Now

Microbe Breaks the Powerhouse Rules

A single-celled organism discovered in chinchilla droppings is the only known eukaryotic organism that lacks mitochondria-like organelles. Christopher Intagliata reports.

Illustration of a Bohr atom model spinning around the words Science Quickly with various science and medicine related icons around the text

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

If you were searching for a lifeform unlike anything known to science, where would you look? Scientists at Charles University, in Prague, looked in the poop of a pet chinchilla. "They were isolating a lot of various strains from various environments—including their own pets." Anna Karnkowska, an evolutionary biologist who collaborated on the work, who is now at the University of British Columbia. "Scientists like to isolate things from everywhere possible." 

They found a relative of the parasite Giardia, called Monocercomonoides. It’s eukaryotic, meaning it has organelles and a nucleus enveloping its DNA. Just like our cells, or the ones in plants, or fungi. But unlike bacteria, which don’t have those things. 

And upon closer examination, the new critter was different from every other eukaryote known to science. Because it’s missing a key organelle—it seems to have no mitochondria.


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.


You probably learned in biology class that mitochondria, let’s all say it together, are the powerhouses of the cell. They charge up energy-rich molecules, when oxygen's around. But they do other stuff too: like manufacture certain essential proteins. This newly discovered microbe, and others that live in low-oxygen environments, use different, oxygen-free pathways to make energy. But they usually still have mitochondria for that protein assembly job. The new bug apparently pulls off the protein-synthesis by using a system that it picked up from bacteria, in what’s known as a lateral gene transfer. The findings are in the journal Current Biology. [Anna Karnkowska et al., A Eukaryote without a Mitochondrial Organelle]

Karnkowska says the microbe's ancestors probably had mitochondria at some point—then lost them once they’d acquired the bacterial system. And she says other microbes might share a similar story. "We know now that probably there are more of these weird things." And as this study suggests, they could be found in some weird places.

—Christopher Intagliata

[The above text is a transcript of this podcast.]

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe