Final answer:
Even though archaea are prokaryotic organisms, based on molecular evidence. Archaea are more related to eukaryotes, than bacteria. Based off the common ancestor. Molecular doesn't ALWAYS represent relatedness.
Step-by-step explanation:
Even though archaea are prokaryotic organisms, based on molecular evidence, Archaea are more related to eukaryotes, than bacteria.
Based off the common ancestor, molecular evidence doesn't ALWAYS represent relatedness. This is because Archaea share a more recent common ancestor with Eukarya than with Bacteria, indicated by similarities in their genetic material and certain metabolic pathways.
Archaea and Eukarya both have genes and proteins that are not found in Bacteria. These include certain enzymes for transcription and translation that are closer to those found in Eukarya.
The cell walls of Archaea are also distinct from those of Bacteria, not containing peptidoglycan.
Furthermore, while all cells share features like a plasma membrane, cytoplasm, ribosomes, and DNA due to their descent from a common ancestor, the specific characteristics of these features in Archaea are more similar to those found in Eukarya than in Bacteria.
Some theories suggest that the three domains of life (Archaea, Bacteria, and Eukarya) evolved from a single ancestral prokaryote, but the exact phylogenetic relationships are still a subject of scientific research and debate.
Even though archaea are prokaryotic organisms, based on molecular evidence. Archaea are more related to eukaryotes, than bacteria. Based off the common ancestor. Molecular doesn't ALWAYS represent relatedness.