quote:
I did.
It certainly isn't obvious from the quotes that any of these support your ideas.
The first talks about the LUCA being a "a candidate for a minimal cell". But doesn't explain why we should think so - even in the full text. So the argument is absent, in the only paper that offers anything like your idea of the LUCA given non-telic evolution.
The second argues that the current tRNA genes came about after the last LUCA. What the consequence of this is - or the relevance to your ideas is - is unclear.
Likewise the last offers nothing like your ideas, either (and it is very unclear how it how it argues for an RNA based LUCA, even given the full text)
Now, remembering your view that the LUCA was a complex prokaryote, two of these papers pose major challenges to your view. More importantly you don't offer any argument that these scenarios would lead us to reject the idea of deep homology. The third, at the least, involves massive amounts of lateral transfer of genetic material.
None of them seem to offer an argument that the LUCA is at all likely to have been an absolutely minimal prokaryotic cell. WHich is the real point of discussion.