throbber

`
`MOLECULAR BIOLOGY OF
`
`THE CELL
`
`THIRD EDITION
`
`Bruce Alberts 0 Dennis Bray
`Julian Lewis 0 Martin Raff - Keith Roberts
`James D. Watson
`
`Garland Publishing, Inc.
`NewYork 84 London
`
`GeneDX 1025, pg. 1
`
`GeneDX 1025, pg. 1
`
`

`

`Text Editor: Miranda Robertson
`
`Managing Editor: Ruth Adams
`Illustrator: Nigel Orme
`Molecular Model Drawings: Kate Heskelh—Moore
`Director of Electronic Publishing: John M-Roblin
`Computer Specialist: Chuck Bartelt
`Disk Preparation: Carol Winter
`Copy Editor: Shirley M. Cohen
`Production Editor: Douglas Goettzen
`Production Coordinator: Perry Bessas
`Indexer: Maija Hinlde
`
`BruceAlberrs received his PhD. from Harvard University and is
`currently President of the National Academy of Sciences and Professor
`of Biochemistry and Biophysics at the University of California, San
`Francisco. Dennis Bray received his Ph.D. from the Massachusetts
`Institute of Technology and is currently a Medical Research Council
`Fellow in the Department of Zoology, University of Cambridge.
`Julian Lewis received his D.Phil. from the University of Oxford and is
`currently a Senior Scientist in the Imperial Cancer Research Fund
`Developmental Biology Unit, University of Oxford. Martin Rafireceived
`his MD. from McGill University and is currently a Professor in the MRC
`Laboratory for Molecular Cell Biology and the Biology Department,
`University College London. Keith Roberts received his PhD. from the
`University of Cambridge and is currently Head of the Department of Cell
`Biology, the John Innes Institute, Norwich. James D. Watson received his
`PhD. from Indiana University and is currently Director of the Cold Spring
`Harbor Laboratory. He is the author of Molecular Biology of the Gene and,
`with Francis Crick and Maurice Wilkins. won the Nobel Prize in Medicine
`and Physiology in 1962.
`
`© 1983, 1989, 1994 by Bruce Alberts, Dennis Bray, Julian Lewis,
`Martin Raff, Keith Roberts, and James D. Watson.
`
`All rights reserved. No part of this book covered by the copyright hereon
`may be reproduced or used in any form or by any means—graphic,
`electronic, or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, taping, or
`information storage and retrieval systems—without permission of the
`publisher.
`
`Library of Congress Catalogirigein-Publication Data
`Molecular biology of the cell / Bruce Alberta .
`.
`. [et al.].—3rd ed.
`p.
`cm.
`Includes bibliographical references and index.
`ISBN 0-8153—1619—4 (hard Govern—ISBN 0-8l53-l 620—8 (phlo)
`1. Cytology. 2. Molecular biology. I. Alberts, Bruce.
`[DNLMz 1. Cells. 2. Molecular Biology. QH 581.2 M718 1994]
`QH581.2.M64 1994
`574.87‘dc20
`DNLM/ DLC
`
`for Library of Congress
`
`Published by Garland Publishing, Inc.
`717 Fifth Avenue, New York, NY 10022
`
`Printed in the United States of America
`1514131210987654
`
`Front cover: The photograph shows a rat nerve cell
`in culture. It is labeled ( yellow) with a fluorescent
`antibody that stains its cell body and dendritic
`processes. Nerve terminals ( green) from other
`neurons (not visible), which have made synapses on
`the cell, are labeled with a different antibody.
`(Courtesy of Olaf Mundigl and Pietro de Cainilli.)
`Dedication page: Gavin Borden, late president
`of Garland Publishing, weathered in during his
`mid-19805 climb near Mount McKinley with
`MBoC author Bruce Alberts and famous mountaineer
`guide Mugs Stump (1940—1992).
`Back cover: The authors, in alphabetical order,
`crossing Abbey Road in London on their way to lunch.
`Much of this third edition was written in a house just
`around the corner. (Photograph by Richard Olivier.)
`
`93—45907
`CIP
`
`
`
`GeneDX 1025, pg. 2
`
`GeneDX 1025, pg. 2
`
`

`

`
`
`Summary
`
`The sequence ofsubunits in a macromolecale contains information that determines
`the three—dimensional contours ofits surface. lhese contours in turn govern the rec-
`ognition between one molecule and another, or between difierent parts ofthe same
`molecule, by means of weak, noncovalent bonds. The attractive forces are offour
`types: ionic bonds, van der Waals attractions, hydrogen bonds, and an interaction
`between nonpolar groups caused by their hydrophobic expulsion from water. Two
`molecules will recognize each other by a process in which they meet by random dif-
`fusion, stick togetherfor a while, and then dissociate. The strength ofthis interaction
`is generally expressed in terms ofan equilibrium constant. Since the only way to make
`recognition infallible is to make the energy of binding infinitely large, living cells
`constantly make errors; those that are intolerable are corrected by specific repair
`processes.
`
`
`
`Genes Are Made of DNA 9
`
`It has been obvious for as long as humans have sown crops or raised animals that
`each seed or fertilized egg must contain a hidden plan, or design, for the devel-
`opment of the organism. In modern times the science of genetics grew up around
`the premise of imisible information-containing elements, called genes, that are
`distributed to each daughter cell when a cell divides. Therefore, before dividing,
`a cell has to make a copy of its genes in order to give a complete set to each
`daughter cell. The genes in the sperm and egg cells carry the hereditary informa—
`tion from one generation to the next.
`The inheritance of biological characteristics must involve patterns of atoms
`that follow the laws of physics and chemistry: in other words, genes must be
`formed from molecules. At first the nature of these molecules was hard to imag-
`ine. What kind of molecule could be stored in a cell and direct the activities of
`a developing organism and also be capable of accurate and almost unlimited
`replication?
`
`By the end of the nineteenth century biologists had recognized that the car-
`riers of inherited information were the chromosomes that become visible in the
`nucleus as a cell begins to divide. But the evidence that the deoxyribonucleic acid
`(DNA) in mese chromosomes is the substance of which genes are made came
`only much later, from studies on bacteria. In 1944 it was shown that adding pu—
`rified DNA from one strain of bacteria to a second, slightly different bacterial
`strain conferred heritable properties characteristic of the first strain upon the
`second. Because it had been commonly believed that only proteins have enough
`conformational complexity to carry genetic information. this discovery came as
`a surprise, and it was not generally accepted until the early 1950s Today Lhe idea
`that DNA carries genetic information in its long chain of nucleotides is so fun-
`damental to biological thought that it is sometimes difficult to realize the enor—
`mous intellectual gap that it filled.
`
`DNA Molecules Consist of Two Long Chains Held Together
`by Complementary Base Pairs 10
`
`l‘he difficulty that geneticists had in accepting DNA as the substance of genes is
`understandable, considering the simplicily of its chemistry. A DNA chain is a
`long, unbranched polymer composed of only four types of subunits. These are
`the deoxyribouucleotides containing the bases adenine (A). cytosine (C), guanine
`(G), and thymine (T). The nucleotides are linked together by covalent phospho-
`diester bonds that join the 5’ carbon of one deoxyribose group to Lhe 3’ carbon
`of the next (see Panel 2—6, pp. 58-59}. The four kinds of bases are attached to this
`
`98
`
`Chapter 3 : Macromolecules: Structure, Shape, and Information
`
`GeneDX 1025, pg. 3
`
`GeneDX 1025, pg. 3
`
`

`

`5‘ chain end
`
`0
`
`5' end
`down
`
`0\p4)
`\
`0
`
`double-
`helix axis
`
`0
`&P' O
`
`
`
`.
`-
`d
`phosphodiester
`
`5 Chain en
`bond
`hydrogen bond
`3. chain
`
`(Al
`
`(B)
`
`
`and
`
`
`repetitive sugar—phosphate Chain almost like four kinds of beads strung on a
`necklace
`How can a long Chain of nucleotides encode the instructions for an organ—
`ism or even a cell? And how can these messages be copied from one generation
`of cells to the next? The answers lie in the structure of the DNA molecule.
`Early in the 19505 x—ray diffraction analyses of specimens of DNA pulled into
`fibers suggested that the DNA molecule is a helical polymer composed of two
`strands. The helical structure of DNA was not surprising since, as we have seen,
`a helix will often form if each of the neighboring subunits in a polymer is regu-
`larly oriented. But the finding that DNA is two—stranded was of crucial signifi—
`cance. It provided the clue that led, in 1953, to the construction of a model that
`
`fitted the observed X-ray diffraction pattern and thereby solved the puzzle of DNA
`structure and function.
`An essential feature of the model was that all of the bases of the DNA mol-
`
`Eigur: 34s The DNA double helix.
`(A) A short section of the helix viewed
`from its side. Four complementary
`base pal“ are Show” The bases are
`Shown m green, While the dioxyr‘bose
`:2irggr:ngl”§£:)t£:f5:13;]?‘1’3‘1
`strands mm in opposite directions and
`that each base pair is held together by
`either two or three hydrogen bonds
`(see also Panel 3W2, pp, 100,101),
`
`
`
`ecule are on the inside of the double helix, with the sugar phosphates on the
`outside. This demands that the bases on one strand be extremely close to those
`on the other, and the fit proposed required specific base—pairingbetween a large
`purine base (A or (3, each of which has a double ring) on one chain and a smaller
`pyrimidine base (T or C, each of which has a single ring) on the other chain (Fig—
`ure 340).
`Both evidence from earlier biochemical experiments and conclusions derived
`from model building suggested that complementary base pairs (also called
`Watson—Crick base pairs) form between A and T and between G and C. Biochemi-
`cal analyses of DNA preparations from different species had shown that, although
`the nucleotide composition of DNA varies a great deal (for example, from 13%
`A residues to 36% A residues in the DNA of different types of bacteria), there is
`a general rule that quantitatively [G] = [Cl and [A] = [T]. Model building revealed
`that the numbers of effective hydrogen bonds that could be formed between G
`and C or between A and T were greater than for any other combinations (see
`Panel 3—2, pp. 100401). The double-helical model for DNA thus neatly explained
`the quantitative biochemistry.
`
`The Structure of DNA Provides an Explanation
`for Heredity 11
`
`A gene carries biological information in a form that must be precisely copied and
`transmitted from each cell to all of its progeny. The implications of the discov—
`
`Nucleic Acids
`
`99
`
`
`
`GeneDX 1025, pg. 4
`
`GeneDX 1025, pg. 4
`
`

`

`A chain
`‘
`
`t
`
`_
`71‘
`
`:
`1
`
`5
`
`"
`
`1
`
`'
`
`§”—'_‘_.— !
`3
`é >
`"
`’
`"
`s
`y
`‘
`
`_
`
`:
`
`"
`
`A}
`.
`
`,
`
`.
`
`1
`
`_
`'
`
`‘
`
`"
`
`'
`
`_
`
`L
`
`.
`£1
`
`.
`
`_
`x
`
`._.
`..
`
`/
`
`J
`‘
`
`,
`'
`
`l
`
`‘
`‘
`
`,_:
`'
`
`_
`
`3
`
`,
`
`4
`‘ 36
`
`_
`
`"
`
`The Nucleotide Sequence of a Gene Determines the Amino
`Acid Sequence of a Protein 13
`DNA is relatively inelt chemically. The information it contains is expressed in-
`directly via other molecules: DNA directs the synthesis of specific RNA and pro
`tein molecules, which in turn determine the cell’s chemical and physical prop-
`erties.
`At about the time that biophysicists were analyzing the three-dimensional
`structure of DNA by X-ray diffraction. biochemists were intensively studying the
`chemical structure of proteins. It was already known that proteins are chains of
`amino acids joined together by sequential peptide linkages; but it was only in the
`early 19505, when the small protein insulin was sequenced (Figure 3-14), that it
`was discovered that each type of protein consists of a unique sequence of amino
`
`acids. Just as solving the structure of DNA was seminal in understanding the
`molecular basis of genetics and heredity, so sequencing insulin provided a key
`to understanding the structure and function of proteins. If insulin had a definite,
`genetically determined sequence, then presumably so did every other protein.
`It seemed reasonable to suppose, moreover, that the properties of a protein
`would depend on the precise order in which its constituent amino acids are ar—
`ranged.
`
`Both DNA and protein are composed of a linear sequence of subunits; even-
`tually. the analysis of the proteins made by mutant genes demonstrated that the
`two sequences are c0-linear——that is, the nucleotides in DNA are arranged in an
`order corresponding to the order of the amino acids in the protein they specify.
`It became evident that the DNA sequence contains a coded specification of the
`protein sequence. The central question in molecular biology then became how
`a cell translates a nucleotide sequence in DNA into an amino acid sequence in
`a protein.
`
`Portions of DNA Sequence Are Copied into RNA Molecules
`That Guide Protein Synthesis ‘4
`
`The synthesis of proteins involves copying specific regions of DNA (the genes)
`into polynucleotides of a chemically and functionally different type known as
`ribonucleic acid, or RNA. RNA, like DNA, is composed of a linear sequence of
`nucleotides, but it has two small chemical differences: [1) the sugar—phosphate
`backbone of RNA contains ribose instead of a deoxyribose sugar and (2) the base
`thymine (T) is replaced by uracil (U), a very closely related base that likewise pairs
`with A (see Panel 3—2, pp. 100—101).
`RNA retains all of the information of the DNA sequence from which it was
`copied, as well as the base—pairing properties of DNA. Molecules of RNA are syn-
`thesized by a process known as DNA transcription, which is similar to DNA rep-
`lication in that one of the two strands of DNA acts as a template on which the
`base-pairing abilities of incoming nucleotides are tested. When a good match is
`achieved with the DNA template, a tibonucleotide is incorporated as a covalently
`bonded unit. In this way the growing RNA chain is elongated one nucleotide at
`a time.
`
`DNA transcription differs from DNA replication in a number of ways. The
`RNA product, for example, does not remain as a strand annealed to DNA. Iust
`behind the region where the ribonucleotides are being added, the original DNA
`helix re—forms and releases the RNA chain. Thus RNA molecules are single-
`
`104
`
`Chapter 3 : Macromolecules: Structure, Shape, and Information
`
`W
`
`Figure 3—14 The amino acid
`sequence ofbovine insulin. Insulin is
`a very small protein that consists of
`two polypeptide chains, one 21 and
`the other 30 amino acid residues long,
`Each chain has a unique, genetically
`determined sequence of amino acids.
`The one-letter symbols used to
`specify amino acids are those listed
`in Panel 2—5: pages 56—57; the
`5—8 bonds shown in red are disulfide
`bonds between cysteine fesidues‘ The
`protein is made initially as a single
`long polypeptide chain (encoded by a
`single gene) that is subsequently
`0133"“ to give the W0 Chaiflsa
`
`
`
`GeneDX 1025, pg. 5
`
`GeneDX 1025, pg. 5
`
`

`

`
`
`EUCARYOTES
`
`PROCARYOTES
`
`intron exon
`\
`/
`2W:=
`
`éTRANSCRIPTlON
`
`
`
`
`
`'maNA —
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` RNA
`spucmo
`
`as
`
`TBANSLATlON
`
`
`proteinW
`
`
`
`DNA
`
`‘ immune»:
`_
`,
` mRNAvr-zgrrw .
`; TBANSLATlDN
`‘ proteinmmm ,
`
`
`__ ; 34 Z The transfer of
`.
`,
`information from DNA to protein.
`The transfer proceeds by means of an
`RNA intermediate called messenger
`RNA (mRNA). In procaryotic cells the
`process is simpler than in eucaryotic
`cells. In eucaryotes the coding regions
`of the DNA (in the axons, shown in
`color) are separated by noncoding
`regions (the z'ntrons). As indicated,
`these introns must be removed by an
`enzymatically catalyzed RNA-splicing
`reaction to form the mRNA.
`
`stranded. Moreover, RNA molecules are relatively short compared to DNA mol-
`ecules since they are copied from a limited region of the DNA—enough to make
`one or a few proteins (Figure 3—15). RNA transcripts that direct the synthesis of
`protein molecules are called messenger RNA (mRNA) molecules, while other
`RNA transcripts serve as transfer RNAS (ZRNAS) or form the RNA components of
`ribosomes (rRNA) or smaller ribonucleoprotein particles.
`The amount of RNA made from a particular region of DNA is controlled by
`gene regulatory proteins that bind to specific sites on DNA close to the coding
`sequences of a gene. ln any cell at any given time, some genes are used to make
`RNA in very large quantities while other genes are not transcribed at all. For an
`active gene thousands of RNA transcripts can be made from the same DNA seg-
`ment in each cell generation. Because each mRNA molecule can be translated
`into many thousands of copies of a polypeptide chain, the information contained
`in a small region of DNA can direct the synthesis of millions of copies of a spe-
`cific protein. The protein fibroin, for example, is the major component of silk. In
`each silk gland cell a single fibroin gene makes 104 copies of mRNA, each of which
`directs the synthesis of l05 molecules of fibroin—producing a total of 109 mol~
`ecules of fibroin in just 4 days.
`
`Eucaryotic RNA Molecules Are Spliced to Remove
`Intron Sequences 15
`
`In bacterial cells most proteins are encoded by a single uninterrupted stretch of
`DNA sequence that is copied without alteration to produce an mRNA molecule.
`In 1977 molecular biologists were astonished by the discovery that most eucary~
`Otic genes have their coding sequences (called axons) interrupted by noncoding
`Sequences (called introns). To produce a protein, the entire length of the gene,
`including both its introns and its exons, is first transcribed into a very large RNA
`molecule—the primary transcript. Before this RNA molecule leaves the nucleus,
`a Complex of RNA—processing enzymes removes all of the intron sequences,
`thereby producing a much shorter RNA molecule. After this RNA-processing step,
`Called RNA splicing, has been completed, the RNA molecule moves to the cyto-
`Dlasm as an mRNA molecule that directs the synthesis of a particular protein (see
`Figure 3am.
`This seemingly wasteful mode of information transfer in eucaryotes is pre-
`SUmed to have evolVed because it makes protein synthesis much more versatile.
`The primary RNA transcripts of some genes, for example, can be spliced in vari-
`Ous ways to produce different mRNAs, depending on the cell type or stage of
`
`Nucleic Acids
`
`105
`
`GeneDX 1025, pg. 6
`
`GeneDX 1025, pg. 6
`
`

`

` ,
`
`
`;3 The genetic code. Sets of
`three nucleotides (codons) in an
`mRNA molecule are translated into
`amino acids in the course of protein
`synthesis according to the rules
`shown. The codons GUG and GAG,
`for example, are translated into valine
`and glutamic acid, respectively. Note
`that those codons with U or C as the
`second nucleotide tend to specify the
`more hydrophobic amino acids
`(compare with Panel 25, pp. 56—57).
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`3.
`
`Avg,
`
`5.
`
`one AGC GUU‘AC
`
`m
`
`1
`
`
`
`c 3.1 T The three possible
`
`reading frames in protein synthesis.
`In the process of translating a
`nucleotide sequence (blue) into an
`amino acid sequence (green), the
`sequence of nucleotides in an mRN‘A
`molecule is read from the 5’ to the 3'
`end in sequential sets of three
`nucleotides. In principle, therefore,
`the same RNA sequence can specifY_
`three completely different amino 301
`sequences, depending on the
`“reading frame.”
`
`
`
`GeneDX 1025, pg. 7
`
`1st position
`
`2nd position
`
`3rd position
`(3' end)
`
`i
`
`Ser
`Set
`Set
`Ser
`
`Tyr
`Tyr
`STOP
`STOP
`
`Cys
`Cys
`STOP
`Trp
`
`_
`,.
`.:
`
`
`
`
`_
`Arg
`His
`Pro
`a:
`Arg
`His
`Pro
`.
`Arg
`Gln
`Pro
`PTO
`Gln
`Arg
`’2
`
`
`Set
`Asn
`Thr
`lie
`Set
`Asn
`Thr
`lle
`lle
`Thr
`Lys
`Arg
`Met
`Thr
`Lys
`Arg
`
`
`Val
`Val
`Val
`Val
`
`Ala
`Ala
`Ala
`Ala
`
`Asp
`Asp
`Glu
`Glu
`
`Gly
`Gly
`Gly
`Gly
`
`,
`j
`.
`
`development. This allows different proteins to be produced from the same gene.
`Moreover, because the presence of numerous introns facilitates genetic recom-
`bination events between exons, this type of gene arrangement is likely to have
`been profoundly important in the early evolutionary history of genes, speeding
`up the process whereby organisms evolve new proteins from parts of preexist-
`ing ones instead of evolving totally new amino acid sequences.
`
`Sequences of Nucleotides in mRNA Are “Read” in Sets
`of Three and Translated into Amino Acids 1‘3
`
`The rules by which the nucleotide sequence of a gene is translated into the amino
`acid sequence of a protein, the so—called genetic code, were deciphered in the
`early 19603. The sequence of nucleotides in the mRNA molecule that acts as
`an intermediate was found to be read in serial order in groups of three. Each
`triplet of nucleotides, called a codon, specifies one amino acid. Since RNA is
`a linear polymer of four different nucleotides, there are 43 = 64 possible codon
`triplets (remember that it is the sequence of nucleotides in the triplet that is
`important). However. only 20 different amino acids are commonly found in
`proteins, so that most amino acids are specified by several codons: that is, the
`genetic code is degenerate. The code (shown in Figure 3—16) has been highly
`conserved during evolution: with a few minor exceptions, it is the same in organ—
`isms as diverse as bacteria, plants, and humans.
`In principle, each RNA sequence can be translated in any one of three dif—
`ferent readingflames depending on where the decoding process begins (Figure
`3—17). In almost every case only one of these reading frames will produce a func—
`tional protein. Since there are no punctuation signals except at the beginning and
`end of the RNA message, the reading frame is set at the initiation of the trans
`lation process and is maintained thereafter.
`
`tRNA Molecules Match Amino Acids
`to Groups of Nucleotides ‘7
`
`The codons in an mRNA molecule do not directly recognize the amino acids they
`specify in the way that an enzyme recognizes a substrate. The translation of
`mRNA into protein depends on ”adaptor" molecules that recognize both an
`
`106
`
`Chapter 3 : Macromolecules: Structure, Shape, and Information
`
`GeneDX 1025, pg. 7
`
`

`

`Summary
`
`Before the synthesis of a particular protein can begin, the corresponding mRNA
`molecule must be produced by DNA transcription. Then a small ribosomal subunit
`binds to the mRNA molecule at a start cation (AUG) that is recognized by a unique
`initiator tRM/l molecule. A large ribosomal subunit binds to complete the ribosome
`and initiate the elongation phase ofprotein synthesis. During this phase aminoacyl
`ZRNAs, each bearinga specific amino acid, sequentially bind to the appropriate cation
`in mRNA by forming complementary base pairs with the tRNA anticoa'nn. Each
`amino acid is added to the carboxyl-terminal end of the growing polypeptide by
`means ofa cycle ofthree sequential steps: aminoacyl-tRNA binding, followed by pep—
`tide bond formation, followed by ribosome translocation. The ribosome progresses
`from cation to cation in the 5’—ro-3’ direction along the mRNA molecule until one of
`three stop codons is reached. A releasefactor then binds to the stop coolon, term inal—
`ing translation and releasing the completed polypeptidefi'om the ribosome.
`Eucaryotic and procaryotic ribosomes are highly homologous, despite substantial
`differences in the number and size of their rRNA and protein components. The pre-
`dominant role of rRNA in ribosome structure and function is likely to reflect the
`ancient origin ofprotein synthesis, which is thought to have evolved in an environ—
`ment dominated by RNA—mediated catalysis.
`
`‘\ “v «.0213 16
`.“ix fid‘}.uc£h.i
`
`
`The long-term survival of a species may be enhanced by genetic changes, but the
`survival of the individual demands genetic stability. Maintaining genetic stability
`requires not only an extremely accurate mechanism for replicating the DNA
`before a cell divides, but also mechanisms for repairing the many accidental le-
`sions that occur continually in DNA. Most such spontaneous changes in DNA are
`temporary because they are immediately corrected by processes collectively
`called DNA repair. Only rarely do the cell’s DNA maintenance processes fail and
`allow a permanent change in the DNA. Such a change is called a mutation, and
`it can destroy an organism if the change occurs in a vital position in the DNA se-
`quence.
`
`Before examining the mechanisms or” DNA repair, we briefly discuss the
`maintenance of DNA sequences from one generation to the next.
`
`DNA Sequences Arc Maintained with Very High Fidelity 17
`
`The rate at which stable changes occur in DNA sequences (the mutation rate) can
`be estimated only indirectly. One way is to compare the amino acid sequence of
`the same protein in several species. The fraction of the amino acids that are dif—
`ferent can then be compared with the estimated number of years since each pair
`of species diverged from a common ancestor, as determined from the fossil
`record. In this way one can calculate the number of years that elapse. on aver—
`ago, before an inherited change in the amino acid sequence of a protein becomes
`fixed in the species. Because each such change will commonly reflect the alter
`arion of a single nucleotide in the DNA sequence of the gene encoding that pro-
`tein, this value can be used to estimate the average number of years required to
`produce a single, stable mutation in the gene.
`Such calculations always will substantially underestimate the actual muta-
`
`tion rate because most mutajons will spoil the function of the protein and vanish
`from the population through natural selection. But There is one family of proteins
`Whose sequence does not seem to matter, arid so the genes that encode [hem can
`accumulate mutations without being selected against. These proteins are the
`fibrirropepfides—ZO—residue-long fragmenis that are discarded from the protein
`fibrinogen when it is activated to form fibrin during blood clotting. Since the
`function of fibrinopeprides apparently does not depend on their amino acid se-
`
`242 Chapter 6 : Basic Genetic Mechanisms
`
`GeneDX 1025, pg. 8
`
`GeneDX 1025, pg. 8
`
`

`

`observed Mutation Rates in Proliferating Cells
`Onsjstent with Evolutionary Estimates 13
`
`
`theY can tolerate almost any amino acid change. Sequence analysis of
`_ Opeptides indicates that an average-sized protein 400 amino acids long
`on fand0m1y altered by an amino acid change roughly once every 200,000
`_
`bite recently, DNA sequencing technology has made it possible to com—
`
`815’
`esponding nucleotide sequences in regions of the genome that do not
`
`Corr rotein. Comparisons of such sequences in several mammalian species
`. C
`e estimates of the mutation rate during evolution that are in excellent
`
`_ proficient with those obtained from the fibrinopeptide studies.
`‘ 3!?
`
`mutation rate can be estimated more directly by observing the rate at which
`
`The taneous genetic changes arise in a large population of cells followed over a
`
`s Drivel}: short period of time. This can he done either by estimating the fre—
`{glancy with which new mutants arise in very large animal populations (in a
`L
`' grim, of fruit flies or mice, for example) or by screening for changes in specific
`Egoteins in cells growing in culture. Although they are only approximate, the
`
`numbers obtained in both cases are consistent with an error frequency of 1 base-
`
`pair change in roughly 109 base pairs for each cell generation. Consequently, a
`_ Single gene that encodes an average-sized protein (containing about 103 coding
`
`-
`i base pairs) Would suffer a mutation once in about 105 cell generations. This num—
`
`" he; is at least roughly consistent with the evolutionary estimate described above,
`.vahiCh one mutation appears in an average gene in the germ line every 200,000
`
`, years.
`
`Most Mutations in Proteins Are Deleterious
`' and Are Eliminated by Natural Selection 19
`
`, When the number of amino acid differences in a particular protein is plotted for
`
`several pairs of species against the time since the species diverged, the result is
`,a reasonably straight line. That is, the longer the period since divergence, the
`larger the number of differences. For convenience, the slope of this line can be
`expressed in terms of the “unit evolutionary time" for that protein, which is the
`average time required for 1 amino acid change to appear in a sequence of 100
`amino acid residues. When various proteins are compared, each shows a different
`but characteristic rate of evolution (Figure 6—32). Since all DNA base pairs are
`thought to be subject to roughly the same rate of random mutation, these differ—
`ent rates muSt reflect differences in the probability that an organism with a ran—
`dOHI mutation over the given protein will survive and propagate. Changes in
`amino acid sequence are evidently much more harmful for some proteins than
`for Others. From Table 6—2 we can estimate that about 6 of every 7 random amino
`acld Changes are harmful over the long term in hemoglobin, about 29 of every
`30.3mino acid changes are harmful in cytochrome c, and virtually all amino
`acid Changes are harmful in histone H4. We assume that individuals who carried
`:glch harmful mutations have been eliminated from the population by natural
`GCtlon.
`
`LOW Mutation Rates Are Necessary for Life as We Know It 19
`33:16 most mutations are deleterious, no species can afford to allow them to
`@Ulate at a high rate in its germ cells. We discuss later why the observed
`“133% frequency, low though it is, nevertheless, is thought to limit the number
`BO’OOSoential proteins that any organism can encode in its germ line to about
`highe - By an extenston ot the same arguments, a mutatlon frequency tenfold
`e
`r Would limit an organlsm to about 6000 essential proteins. In this case
`a filltion would probably have stopped at an organism no more complex than
`H fly.
`
`DNA Repair
`
`AO aminoacidchangesper100aminoacids
`
`
`
`
`
`200
`
`400
`
`600
`
`800
`
`1000
`
`millions of years since divergence
`of species
`
`Figure 6—32 Different proteins
`evolve at very different rates. A
`comparison of the rates of amino acid
`change found in hemoglobin, cyto-
`chrome c, and the fibrinopeptides.
`Hemoglobin and cytochrome c have
`changed much more slowly during
`evolution than the fibrinopeptides. In
`determining rates of change per year
`[as in Table 6—2), it is important to
`realize that two species that diverged
`from a common ancestor 100 million
`years ago are separated by 200 million
`years of evolutionary time.
`
`243
`
`GeneDX 1025, pg. 9
`
`GeneDX 1025, pg. 9
`
`

`

`4. DNA cloning, whereby a single DNA molecule can be copied to generate
`many billions of identical molecules.
`
`5. DNA engineering, by which DNA sequences are altered to make modified
`versions of genes, which are reinserted back into cells or organisms.
`
`in this chapter we explain how recombinant DNA technology has generated
`the new experimental approaches that have revolutionized cell biology.
`
`
`
`Before the 19703 the goal of isolating a single gene from a large chromosome
`seemed unattainable. Unlike a protein, a gene does not exist as a discrete entity
`in cells, but rather as a small region of a much larger DNA molecule. Although
`the DNA molecules in a cell can be randomly broken into small pieces by me—
`chanical force, a fragment containing a single gene in a mammalian genome
`would still be only one among a hundred thousand or more DNA fragments,
`indistinguishable in their average size. How could such a gene be purified? Since
`all DNA molecules consist of an approximately equal mixture of the same four
`nucleotides, they cannot be readily separated, as proteins can, on the basis of
`their different charges and binding properties. Moreover, even if a purification
`scheme could be devised, vast amounts of DNA would be needed to yield enough
`of any particular gene to be useful for further experiments.
`The solution to all of these problems began to emerge with the discovery of
`restriction nucleases. These enzymes, which can be purified from bacteria, cut the
`DNA double helix at specific sites defined by the local nucleotide sequence, pro~
`ducing double—stranded DNA fragments of strictly defined sizes. Different spe—
`cies of bacteria make restriction nucleases with different sequence specificities,
`and it is relatively simple to find a restriction nuclease that will create a DNA
`fragment that includes a particular gene. The size of the DNA fragment can then
`
`
`
`
` m- ,vwa .i. ,_ c - __ am. "3,:
`
`
`
`
`liable 7—3. Some Major Steps in the Development of Recombinant DNA TechnologyW
`1869
`Miescher isolated DNA for the first time.
`
`1944
`
`1953
`
`1957
`
`1961
`
`1962
`
`1966
`1967
`
`Avery provided evidence that DNA, rather than protein, carries the
`genetic information during bacterial transformation.
`Watson and Crick proposed the double-helix model for DNA structure
`based on x-ray results of Franklin and Wilkins.
`Kornberg discovered DNA polymerase, the enzyme now used to
`produce labeled DNA probes.
`Marmur and Doty discovered DNA ren aturation, establishing the
`specificity and feasibility of nucleic acid hybridization reactions.
`Arber provided the first evidence for the existence of DNA restriction
`nucleases, leading to their later purification and use in DNA sequence
`characterization by Nathans and H. Smith.
`Nirenberg, Ochoa, and Khorana elucidated the genetic code.
`Gellert discovered DNA ligase, the enzyme used to join DNA fragments
`together.
`
`1975
`
`1972—1973 DNA cloning techniques were developed by the laboratories of Boyer,
`Cohen, Be

This document is available on Docket Alarm but you must sign up to view it.


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge
throbber

Still Working On It

This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.

Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.

throbber

A few More Minutes ... Still Working

It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.

Thank you for your continued patience.

This document could not be displayed.

We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

Set your membership status to view this document.

With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll get a whole lot more, including:

  • Up-to-date information for this case.
  • Email alerts whenever there is an update.
  • Full text search for other cases.
  • Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.

Become a Member

One Moment Please

The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.

Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.

Your document is on its way!

If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.

Sealed Document

We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.

If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.


Access Government Site

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket

We are unable to display this document.

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket