Cells occupy a prominent place in the history of life on planet Earth. The central role of cellular organization is observed by the fact that “cellular life” is often used as a synonym for life itself. Thus, most characteristics used to define cells overlap with the ones used to define life. Notwithstanding, new scenarios about the origin of life are bringing alternative views to describe how cells may have evolved from the open biological systems named progenotes. Here, using a logical and conceptual analysis, we re-evaluate the characteristics used to infer a single origin for cells. We argue that some evidences used to support cell monophyly, such as the presence of elements from both the translation mechanism and the universality of the genetic code, actually indicate a unique origin for all “biological systems”, a term used to define not only cells, but also virus and progenotes. Besides, we present evidence that at least two biochemical pathways as important as (i) DNA replication and (ii) lipid biosynthesis may not homologous between Bacteria and Archaea. The identities observed between the proteins involved in those pathways along representatives of these two ancestral Domains are too low to indicate common genic ancestry. Altogether these facts can be seen as an indication that cellular organization has possibly evolved two or more times and that LUCA (the Last Universal Common Ancestor) might not have existed as a cellular entity. Thus, we aim to consider the possibility that different strategies acquired by biological systems to exist, such as viral, bacterial and archaeal were originated independently from the evolution of different progenote populations.

The monophyly of Nymphaeaceae (water lilies) represents a critical question in understanding the evolutionary history of early-diverging angiosperms. A recent plastid phylogenomic investigation claimed new evidence for the monophyly of Nymphaeaceae, but its results could not be verified from the available data. Moreover, preliminary gene-wise analyses of the same dataset provided partial support for the paraphyly of the family. The present investigation aims to re-assess the previous conclusion of the monophyly of Nymphaeaceae under the same dataset and to determine the congruence of the phylogenetic signal across different plastome genes and data partition strategies. To that end, phylogenetic tree inference is conducted on each of 78 protein-coding plastome genes, both individually and upon concatenation, and under four data partitioning schemes. Moreover, the possible effects of various sequence variability and homoplasy metrics on the inference of specific phylogenetic relationships are tested using multiple logistic regression. Differences in the variability of polymorphic sites across codon positions are assessed using parametric and non-parametric analysis of variance. The results of the phylogenetic reconstructions indicate considerable incongruence among the different gene trees as well as the data partitioning schemes. The results of the multiple logistic regression tests indicate that the fraction of polymorphic sites of codon position 3 has a significant effect on the recovery of the monophyly of Nymphaeaceae. Taken together, these results indicate that the monophyly of Nymphaeaceae currently remains indeterminate, and that specific phylogenetic conclusions are strongly dependent on the precise plastome gene, data partitioning scheme, and codon position evaluated. In closing, I discuss the importance of archiving all data of an investigation in publicly accessible data repositories, along with sufficient details to replicate the published results, and provide recommendations on future plastid phylogenomic investigations of Nymphaeales.