Science News / It’s DNA Jim, But Not As We Know It

• Subscribe •

In This Issue

Sequencing the dead to save the living: Reviving ancient genomes of long-extinct creatures offers a window into past extinctions—and may help prevent future die outs
No gene is an island: Even as biologists catalog the discrete parts of life forms, an emerging picture reveals that life’s functions arise from interconnectedness
The decider: Informing the debate over the reality of ‘free will’ requires learning something about the lateral habenula
This week's table of contents

It’s DNA Jim, but not as we know it

Artificial DNA variant could aid medicine, biotechnology and nanotechnology

By Patrick Barry

August 2nd, 2008; Vol.174 #3

Text Size

If aliens have DNA, it might look something like this.

Chemists have synthesized a DNA-like molecule using unnatural versions of the A, T, C and G “letters” that make up the genetic code. The resulting molecule has greater structural stability than natural DNA and would resist breakdown by DNA-degrading enzymes in cells, the team reports in the July 23 Journal of the American Chemical Society.

“The artificial DNA may be a superior building scaffold for constructing medical and nanotechnological structures,” says lead scientist Masahiko Inouye of the University of Toyama in Japan. “Our research opens the door to ... creating DNA-like molecules similar to natural DNA in terms of their ability for potential information storage.”

While other variants of DNA and its cousin RNA have been made before, the new molecule is the first to have unnatural versions of the compounds that constitute all four letters of the genetic code, Inouye and his colleagues report.

The variant is also the first to replace the bond holding each letter to the helix-shaped “backbone” with a more rigid triple bond. This new bond is what gives the unnatural DNA its greater stability and resistance to enzymes.

Like natural DNA, the new molecule can form a triple helix as well as a double helix. Preliminary tests show that the DNA-like variant has some ability to pair up with natural DNA to form a hybrid double helix, but this work is still ongoing, Inouye says.

“The DNA structure is a whole lot more pliable than we originally thought, and that’s fascinating,” comments Floyd Romesberg, a molecular biologist at the Scripps Research Institute in La Jolla, Calif. “This is coming along with a [chemical] structure that’s been preserved for millennia and saying, ‘Well, I’m bored. I want to try a different architecture.’”

Nanotechnology researchers have eyed DNA as a possible building block for assembling structures at the nanoscale. Strings of DNA bind to each other in predictable ways determined by genetic code, which makes them attractive as an engineering material. The ability to customize DNA’s structural and binding traits will give nanotechnologists even more control, Romesberg says.

Scientists are also developing novel drugs that use snippets of DNA or RNA to treat diseases. Enzymes in the body rapidly degrade regular RNA, comments Martin Egli, a structural biologist specializing in nucleic acids at Vanderbilt University in Nashville, Tenn. Egli says the chemical modifications made by Inouye’s group should be easy to apply to RNA as well.

“It’s kind of hard to imagine that there will ever be a [DNA- or RNA-] based drug that will not be chemically modified,” Egli says.

Inouye says the next step is to look more closely at how well the new molecule binds to natural DNA and RNA, important for potential medical uses.

Found in: Molecules

Share & Save

Comments 3

Life's DNA is a section of the primal living organism, of the gene!

A. From "It's DNA Jim, but not as we know it"

http://www.sciencenews.org/view/generic/id/33978/title/It%E2%80%99s_DNA_Jim%2C_but_not_as_we_know_it

- "Chemists synthesized a DNA-like molecule using unnatural versions of the "letters" that make up the genetic code."

- "creating DNA-like molecules similar to natural DNA in terms of their ability for potential information storage".

- "the new molecule is the first to have unnatural versions"

- "Like natural DNA, the new molecule can form a triple helix as well as a double helix."

B. From "Life's Chirality, The Earliest Surviving Darwinian Evolution Product"

http://www.physforum.com/index.php?showtopic=14988&st=180&#entry327715

"The sugars and the nitrogen-based compounds that, together with the phosphates, are the components of the genes-organisms, are chiral. There probably is an energetic advantage in homochirality and chiral homogeneity for the self-replication of biopolymers.

This serendipitous occurrence set up a matrix-field of energy with a potential extended between its source, the sun radiation and the out-of-solution or -emulsion precipitating organisms. This was the genesis of the ongoing formation and maintenance of Earth's biosphere.

And since the biosphere thus started it could only evolve in more favorable energetic directions and towards stabler components. Survival was the direction. After all, this was already Earth-life's evolution."

C. Life's DNA is section of a living organism, of a gene

Life's DNA is neither "a molecule with ability for potential information storage" nor "letters that make up the genetic code."

Open your eyes and mind, "scientists"!

Life's DNA is a section of the primal living organism, of the gene!

Dov Henis
http://blog.360.yahoo.com/blog-P81pQcU1dLBbHgtjQjxG_Q--?cq=1

Dov Henis

Jul. 16, 2008 at 3:23pm
So why didn't nature evolve towards a triple-bonded DNA? My guess is that it's too stable. Evolution rewards beneficial changes. Mutations that work thrive. Sure, there may be a thousand or even a million mutations that fail for every successful mutation, but that isn't important in the long run. Survival requires improvement and adaptation. Too much genetic stability locks a species into a design. Competitors, predators and even prey that can adapt more quickly will win out.

chartguy

Jul. 13, 2008 at 12:50pm
Wouldn't a "superior scaffold" stifle genetic variability, and therefore adaptability in times of stress? A great recipe for evolutionary disaster would presumably fall under the rubric of "Shouldn't do it just because you can do it."

grikdog

Jul. 10, 2008 at 9:13am