backtop


Print E-mail del.icio.us 17 comment(s) - last by jtemplin.. on Jan 17 at 1:40 PM

Researchers say it's like finding the mold used to make the tool can act as the tool as well

It probably comes as no surprise to most that one of the greatest mysteries known to man is how our own bodies function and operate. Scientists are still unraveling the secrets of the human genome and the building blocks of our bodies.

A pair of scientists at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) have discovered something not previously hypothesized about the way DNA works using computational biology and comparative genomics. This process uses computational tools to compare and investigate the genetic makeup of organisms from yeasts to humans.

Professor Manolis Kellis and fellow researcher Alexander Stark found that both strands of a DNA segment can perform useful functions. Previously it was believed that one strand of a DNA segment acted as a template for the other strand and that only one strand could perform a useful function.

The researchers’ computational models have found that both strands in a DNA segment can actually perform tasks inside the body. The discovery is likened to finding that a mold used to cast a tool can serve as the tool itself.

The researchers say that many RNAs are translated into proteins with specific functions and that some RNA molecules act directly carrying out functions inside the body. Some RNA genes known as microRNAs play important regulatory roles inside cells during the development of an embryo.

The microRNAs fold into hairpin structures with to nearly perfect complementary sequences. The scientists discovery shows that both these DNA strands can encode RNA and fold into hairpin structures both becoming mature microRNAs. Kellis and Stark say they have found two of these microRNA pairs in the fruit fly and eight pairs in the mouse.

"This represents a new phase in genomics-making biological discoveries sitting not at the lab bench, but at the computer terminal," Kellis says.

Other researchers from MIT were in the news recently with the development of a process that makes growing blood vessels easier to accomplish.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

good stuff...
By Oregonian2 on 1/15/2008 3:38:55 PM , Rating: 2
Pretty amazing. Who designed this stuff? Definitely very high-tech!




RE: good stuff...
By jtemplin on 1/15/2008 3:49:32 PM , Rating: 2
save me jeebus?


RE: good stuff...
By stephenfs on 1/15/2008 3:53:44 PM , Rating: 2
Nice one. My wife seems to think I have a Simpson's quote for every occasion.


RE: good stuff...
By jtemplin on 1/17/2008 1:40:40 PM , Rating: 2
My girlfriend would find some common ground with your wife :)

Something just made me think of homer, in a mockery of the old Jello slogan (always room for jello), proclaiming "No room for you, jello" as he chucks his food from his plate out the front window onto the lawn pile. "when the sun hits diaper hill..." lol i <3 simpsons


RE: good stuff...
By Adonlude on 1/15/08, Rating: 0
RE: good stuff...
By eye smite on 1/15/2008 8:29:08 PM , Rating: 2
The human proteome folding project is voluntary and runs through the world community grid at IBM. I've been on the project since may 27th last year and to date I have 4 yrs 40 days of cpu time on the project. It's a good way to give back to the community with the money you've invested in pc hardware with no money coming out your pocket to a charity. The project also does fight aids at home, help conquer cancer and dengu medicine. It's the boinc client developed to do seti and use more than one core in your cpu at a time. It's a really cool project, now don't all of you want to be part of the largest super computer in the world and try to catch my paltry amd's on cpu time?


RE: good stuff...
By MrHanson on 1/16/2008 10:30:52 AM , Rating: 2
As is almost always the case, none of these articles dare to speculate about how these incredible mechanisms might have evolved by a blind, purposeless process of chance. Darwin’s theory was written for a past era when the cell seemed as simple as a blob of jello. Wave him and his theory good-bye as we fast-forward into the 21st century era of molecular machinery. Biology of the future is reserved for those who appreciate and understand “engineering-design principles.”


RE: good stuff...
By Polynikes on 1/16/2008 12:17:29 PM , Rating: 2
What an "Intelligent Design!"


To be a bit clearer
By tmouse on 1/15/2008 3:56:33 PM , Rating: 6
It may appear to many that the article is implying that Stark and Kellis discovered micro-RNAs, this is not so. They were discovered 15 years ago by the Ambros lab at Harvard in C. elegans. I have been working with them for the past few years; the field is very competitive and exciting. Stark and Kellis discovered that the opposite DNA strands could also encode miRNA, this is also interesting, but I did want to clarify the article.




RE: To be a bit clearer
By CBone on 1/16/2008 12:16:37 PM , Rating: 2
You beat me to it. I was just going to say that.


RE: To be a bit clearer
By geddarkstorm on 1/17/2008 12:14:18 PM , Rating: 2
Yeah, this has been believed to be the case for a long while now, actually. This is really old news--or rather old news among the science circles and now finally being formally released to the public. Eukaryotic anti-template coded RNAi regulation of mRNA is what all this suggests, which should totally not be a surprise (since prokaryots use that method extensively)


Good to see some evidence...
By Cygni on 1/15/2008 6:14:11 PM , Rating: 2
This has been assumed for awhile, but its good to have some evidence (albeit mathematical evidence) that the template strand is active in some RNA production.

The key in this is the fact that the microRNA's are produced from what is essentially a genomic palindromes... which is why they fold in on themselves. Because they are palindromes folding in on themselves and not actually producing protiens, the inverse coding of them (contained on the template strand) should be just as functional as the original.




RE: Good to see some evidence...
By Cygni on 1/15/2008 6:22:31 PM , Rating: 2
*note, this isnt my field, so i may have gotten something wrong in that post. ;)


RE: Good to see some evidence...
By zinfamous on 1/15/2008 7:21:32 PM , Rating: 3
except that improperly-folded proteins are generally not very useful. a protein's function is determined by its folding, as it interacts rather specifically with a particular binding site.

a prions are improperly-folded proteins. ...mad cow, anyone? ;)


RE: Good to see some evidence...
By Cygni on 1/16/2008 2:24:40 AM , Rating: 2
These microRNA strands are not translated into proteins... thats the point. Since they arent translated into proteins, and are designed to simply fold in on themselves and regulate reactions, the reversed coding on the template strand that would normally render a totally different protein is irrelevant. Its the genomic palindrome, which is present on both DNA strands, thats important.


very interesting, but....
By zinfamous on 1/15/2008 7:19:02 PM , Rating: 2
isn't worth much until they design and implement an in vivo, or even in vitro study to support it.

in silico studies (yes, they actually call them that in journals) are nice and all, but life is not determined by software.




Dna replication...
By Bigjee on 1/16/2008 1:21:21 AM , Rating: 2
So much for the 'non-template' strand




“And I don't know why [Apple is] acting like it’s superior. I don't even get it. What are they trying to say?” -- Bill Gates on the Mac ads













botimage
Copyright 2008 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki