diaz@aecom.YU.EDU (Dizzy Dan) (07/20/88)
In article <7169@sigi.Colorado.EDU>, pell@boulder.Colorado.EDU (Anthony Pelletier) writes: > > I think you got a couple of things mixed up here. The "two-base code" > is a bit of a misnomer. They only did the work for one tRNA; unlike > translation, information for which must be constrained in a physical > space (the A nd P sites of the ribosome), there is no reason that all > tRNA sythetases need use the same number of contacts or even contacts > on analogous parts of the molecule. ... > Anyway, personally, I think Schimmel is stretching > the importance of his work a bit. Despite what the popular (and unpopular) press may publish, there is still quite a bit of work to be done to establish the protein-protein and protein-nucleic acid contacts involved in charging tRNAs with the appropriate amino acids. I recently attended the Gordon Research Conference on Nucleic Acids, where both Schimmel and his competitor McClain spoke. Although I am not at liberty to discuss the nature of their presentations, suffice it to say that there was some hearty disagreement on how the extant data should be interpreted. Part of the problem, alluded to by Tony and others, appears to be that some might be looking for portions of all tRNA molecules which will then interact with corresponding domains of their amino acyl synthetases. This might be an apples and oranges problem. Another problem I see is in the interpretation of in vitro studies and the in vivo conclusions drawn from them. At least it appears that the controversy will foster further competition and perhaps lead us to the answer(s) more quickly. -- dn/dx Dept Molecular Biology diaz@aecom.yu.edu Dizzy Dan Al Einstein's Med School Big Bad Bronx, NY