Skip to main content
  • 1164 Accesses

Abstract

The sequence of a single-stranded nucleic acid is referred to as its primary structure. When it forms a duplex by pairing with a complementary singlc strand it adopts a secondary structure. Chargaff’s first parity rule for duplex DNA was consistent with the Watson-Crick idea of a base in one strand of the duplex pairing with a complementary base in the other strand of the duplex (inlerstrand base pairing), thus stabilizing the secondary structure (Fig. 2-1). By the same token, the existence of a parity rule for single strands of nucleic acid (see Chapter 4), suggested intrastrand base pairing. At least by virtue of the composition of the stems in stem-loop secondary structures, there should be approximately equivalent quantities of the classical pairing bases. Do single-stranded nucleic acids have the potential to form such intrastrand secondary structures? If so, is this a chance event, or are adaptive forces involved? These questions began to be addressed when the sequences of various tRNAs and bacterial viruses became available in the 1970s. It became evident that nucleic acid structure (“flaps”) is a form of information that has the potential to conflict with other forms.

“No system consisting of these elements could possibly have the properties that atoms were known to have. ... In Bohr’s paper of 1913 this paradox was met by introducing the notions of stable orbits and jumps between these orbits. ... These were very irrational assumptions, which shocked ... many physicists ....The crucial point ... is the appearance of a conflict between separate areas of experience, which gradually sharpens into a paradox and must then be resolved by a radically new approach.” Max Delbrück (1949) [1]

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Delbrück M (1949) Transactions of the Connecticut Academy of Arts and Sciences 38: 173–190

    Google Scholar 

  2. Salser W (1970) Discussion. Cold Spring Harbor Symposium in Quantitative Biology 35: 19

    Google Scholar 

  3. Ball LA (1972) Implications of secondary structure in messenger RNA. Journal of Theoretical Biology 36:313–320

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Forsdyke DR (1998) An alternative way of thinking ahout stem-loops in DNA. Journal of Theoretical Biology 192:489–504

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Seffens W, Digby D (1999) mRNAs have greater negative folding free energies than shuffled or codon choice randomized sequences. Nucleic Acids Research 27: 1578–1584

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Tinoco I, Uhlenbeck OC, Levine MD (1971) Estimating secondary structure in rihonucleic acids. Nature 230:362–367

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Allawi HT, SantaLucia I (1997) Thermodynamics and NMR of internal GT mismatches in DNA. Biochemistry 36: 10581–10589

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Zuker M (1990) Predicting optimal and suhoptimal secondary structure for RNA. Methods in Enzymology 183:281–306

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Bass BL (2002) RNA editing by adenosine deaminases that act on RNA. Annual Review of Biochemistry 71:817–846

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2006 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Forsdyke, D.R. (2006). Stems and Loops. In: Evolutionary Bioinformatics. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-33419-6_5

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics