Cover Image: December 2008 Scientific American Magazine See Inside

Triple Helix: Designing a New Molecule of Life [Preview]

Peptide nucleic acid, a synthetic hybrid of protein and DNA, could form the basis of a new class of drugs—and of artificial life unlike anything found in nature















Share on Tumblr



Peptide nucleic acid (gold) readily enters DNA's major groove to form triple-stranded and other structures with DNA, allowing it to modify the activity of genes in new ways. Image: Jean-Francois Podevin

In Brief

  • A synthetic molecule called peptide nucleic acid (PNA) combines the information-storage properties of DNA with the chemical stability of a proteinlike backbone.
  • Drugs based on PNA would achieve therapeutic effects by binding to specific base sequences of DNA or RNA, repressing or promoting the corresponding gene.
  • Some researchers working to construct artificial life-forms out of mixtures of chemicals are also considering PNA as a useful ingredient for their designs.
  • PNA-like molecules may have served as primordial genetic material at the origin of life.

For all the magnificent diversity of life on this planet, ranging from tiny bacteria to majestic blue whales, from sunshine-harv­­est­­ing plants to mineral-digesting endoliths miles underground, only one kind of “life as we know it” exists. All these organisms are based on nucleic acids—DNA and RNA—and proteins, working together more or less as described by the so-called central dogma of molecular biology: DNA stores information that is transcribed into RNA, which then serves as a template for producing a protein. The proteins, in turn, serve as important structural elements in tissues and, as enzymes, are the cell’s workhorses.

Yet scientists dream of synthesizing life that is utterly alien to this world—both to better understand the minimum components required for life (as part of the quest to uncover the essence of life and how life originated on earth) and, frankly, to see if they can do it. That is, they hope to put together a novel combination of molecules that can self-organize, metabolize (make use of an energy source), grow, reproduce and evolve.


Subscribe     Buy This Issue

Already a Digital subscriber? Sign-in Now
If your institution has site license access, enter here.

22 Comments

Add Comment
View
  1. 1. bipinnavlakha 06:46 AM 11/24/08

    PNA sounds to be a good idea. But doesn't it seem too stable and simple to make up the primordial genetic information carrier?

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
  2. 2. AbleCluster 08:48 AM 11/24/08

    Sounds like pretty good sense to me.

    jess
    http://www.privacy.es.tc/

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
  3. 3. Nathaniel 06:45 PM 12/2/08

    Great idea, make a form of artificial life that no living creature on earth can recognize, attack, or defend against. Fantastic!

    Actually, I think this technology would be interesting to incorporate into a living cell such that it provides a more robust error-checking process for key genes such as those that may mutate to form cancers.

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
  4. 4. quanta537 07:26 PM 12/2/08

    Advances in dendrimer technology would solve the bioavailability problem.

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
  5. 5. DocM in reply to Nathaniel 09:30 PM 12/2/08

    Yes, just what we need: a synthetic 'life' that could evolve (or be turned into) a bioweapon more powerful than any from or modified from nature.

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
  6. 6. bcm 12:27 PM 12/3/08

    Clarification question:

    In preventing PNA-PNA duplex formation, is it the sequence of bases that is modified (away from the ideal complimentary oligomer), or is it the bases themselves that are modified (to something other than ATGC)?

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
  7. 7. EB 03:17 PM 12/3/08

    The Creation of Life.

    Great, in some ways. Success here would scientifically support that Life here COULD indeed have been Created by another intelligence. Was or asn't may still be arguable, but 'couldn't have' will be eliminated lacking PROOF to the contrary.

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
  8. 8. Tungster 05:23 PM 12/3/08

    Artificial life sounds a little tough, how about just enhanced manufacturing for starters. Spray some synthetic PNA and raw materials in specific places on a substrate and let the electronic circuits assemble themselves.

    High temperature super conductor anyone? Yea, it's gonna take a bigger paint gun though.

    The possibilities of assembling new and complex compounds is truly amazing.

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
  9. 9. Cerebral*Origami 10:35 AM 12/4/08

    Maybe grow three dimensional electronics in a vat of "nutrients".

    Now how do we make sure the 3 laws are grown into the matrix?

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
  10. 10. cicatriz9 01:20 PM 12/4/08

    Does this ultimately make us a descendant of this "artificial life" if proven to be a precedent to our evolved organism?

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
  11. 11. EB 10:18 PM 12/6/08

    cicatriz9-

    I think you mean 'ancestor' in that context.

    I do suspect that if you told whatever has evolved from it millions of years hence that we Created it, that it was Created at all, you would get a disbelieving and insulted 'JJJUk~GFTp!!!' for a response.

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
  12. 12. nanomatrix 07:00 PM 12/7/08

    The key point of this technology is being able to store 50% more information on the same backbone. But if you want to build a 'self organizing system' you will need some type of an energy source.
    Sounds like they're going to need an analog to ATP.

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
  13. 13. cicatriz9 in reply to EB 04:07 AM 12/8/08

    No I meant 'descendant' not ancestor as you suggest. I referred to us as descendants of this PNA molecule, meaning that it precedes us in existence and it is our ancestor, if proven that these PNA-like molecules may have served as primordial genetic material at the origin of life. In the case that they never existed before us and are a product of us then yes they owe their thanks to us for creating them and I think that's what you thought I was referring to, by saying that I meant us as ancestors, but no.

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
  14. 14. cicatriz9 in reply to bipinnavlakha 04:11 AM 12/8/08

    Well I think that any original molecule or cell for that matter was simple in nature in early life on this planet. It must evolve in order to reach the complexity of cells or molecules involved to make an organism that we find today.

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
  15. 15. extremesport 02:04 PM 12/8/08

    sounds good in theory but what would be the long term effects of controlling genes. not to mention who determines what traits of people should be shut off in the genes, like should we shut off the gay or lesbian gene? also would this new structure interfere with dna replication or would the structure be so solid that it couldn't replicate and cause a person to die?

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
  16. 16. EB in reply to extremesport 12:13 AM 12/10/08

    extremesport-

    Or, would it be so stable that it could replicate accurately, indefinitely? Immortality?

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
  17. 17. drewg 02:06 AM 12/28/08

    interesting

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
  18. 18. kate 06:00 AM 1/12/09

    I wanted to be positive when i started this post, however, technology is surpassing our humanity at an alarming rate. I feel too much emphasis is placed on the fear of human death.. on an individual state especially, and not enough on the light of life itself. We are all going to die and though the unknown frightening, tis a part of life.
    I am a student of microbiology, in hiatus, mind you, so i do not feel i am at a point where i can scientifically difute the processes that are currently underway. I just wonder why so little emphasis is placed on the LIFE itself these days, and most one the genetic manipulation just because we have the technology to do so. Research is a blessing and is necessary, but let us not exclude the other half. Science is only half the story.

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
  19. 19. kate 06:24 AM 1/12/09

    Very few do a job to make a difference. Most do a job to make money, to secure a sense of self. If that fails people do something different, or stay in a rut. These comments may appear to have nothing to do with the topic at hand but i ask you... when is our humanity going to surpass our technology?? While most have an abundance of fear in our lives, (death) this type of technology (obv PNA) is fantastic for those who take renewed life in both hands, but where does one draw the line? Focus should be on balance. East meets West. If there were no mystery, would life really be worth living?
    I am a microbiology student, who is looking for a change... Research in all fields is paramount, but not at the sacrifice of our HUMANITY.

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
  20. 20. jack.123 06:27 PM 5/24/09

    Has any of these people doing this research read Frankenstien, it's alive,but the villager's won't be able to kill it.

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
  21. 21. Ratnpravi 02:24 PM 2/16/10

    It sounds gr8. but be ready with safety measures.

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
  22. 22. Ratnpravi 02:25 PM 2/16/10

    IT REALLY SOUHDS GR8. BUT BE READY WITH SAFETY MEASURES FIRST.

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
Leave this field empty

Add a Comment

You must sign in or register as a ScientificAmerican.com member to submit a comment.
Click one of the buttons below to register using an existing Social Account.

More from Scientific American

See what we're tweeting about

Scientific American Editors

More »

Free Newsletters


Get the best from Scientific American in your inbox

Solve Innovation Challenges

Powered By: Innocentive

  SA Digital

Latest from SA Blog Network

  SA Digital

Email this Article

Triple Helix: Designing a New Molecule of Life: Scientific American Magazine

X
Scientific American Magazine

Subscribe Today

Save 66% off the cover price and get a free gift!

Learn More >>

X

Please Log In

Forgot: Password

X

Account Linking

Welcome, . Do you have an existing ScientificAmerican.com account?

Yes, please link my existing account with for quick, secure access.



Forgot Password?

No, I would like to create a new account with my profile information.

Create Account
X

Report Abuse

Are you sure?

X

Institutional Access

It has been identified that the institution you are trying to access this article from has institutional site license access to Scientific American on nature.com. To access this article in its entirety through site license access, click below.

Site license access
X

Error

X

Share this Article

X