Essential Cell Biology 5th edition
194CHAPTER 5DNA and Chromosomesforms: a pathogenic form that causes a lethal infectionwhen injected into animals, and a harmless form that iseasily conquered by the animal’s immune system anddoes not produce an infection.In the course of his investigations, Griffith injected variouspreparations of these bacteria into mice. He showedthat pathogenic pneumococci that had been killed byheating were no longer able to cause infection. Thesurprise came when Griffith injected both heat-killedpathogenic bacteria and live harmless bacteria intothe same mouse. This combination proved unexpectedlylethal: not only did the animals die of pneumonia,but Griffith found that their blood was teeming withlive bacteria of the pathogenic form (Figure 5–30). Theheat-killed pneumococci had somehow converted theharmless bacteria into the lethal form. What’s more,Griffith found that the change was permanent: he couldgrow these “transformed” bacteria in culture, and theyremained pathogenic. But what was this mysteriousmaterial that turned harmless bacteria into killers? Andhow was this change passed on to progeny bacteria?TransformationGriffith’s remarkable finding set the stage for the experimentsthat would provide the first strong evidencethat genes are made of DNA. The American bacteriologistOswald Avery, following up on Griffith’s work,discovered that the harmless pneumococcus could betransformed into a pathogenic strain in a test tube byexposing it to an extract prepared from the pathogenicstrain. It would take another 15 years, however, forAvery and his colleagues Colin MacLeod and MaclynMcCarty to successfully purify the “transforming principle”from this soluble extract and to demonstrate thatthe active ingredient was DNA. Because the transformingprinciple caused a heritable change in the bacteriathat received it, DNA must be the very stuff of whichgenes are made.The 15-year delay was in part a reflection of the academicclimate—and the widespread supposition thatthe genetic material was likely to be made of protein.Because of the potential ramifications of their work, theresearchers wanted to be absolutely certain that thetransforming principle was DNA before they announcedtheir findings. As Avery noted in a letter to his brother,also a bacteriologist, “It’s lots of fun to blow bubbles,but it’s wiser to prick them yourself before someone elsetries to.” So the researchers subjected the transformingmaterial to a battery of chemical tests (Figure 5–31).They found that it exhibited all the chemical propertiescharacteristic of DNA; furthermore, they showedthat enzymes that destroy proteins and RNA did notRNAS-strain cellsEXTRACT PREPARED ANDFRACTIONATED INTOCLASSES OF MOLECULESMOLECULES TESTED FOR ABILITY TO TRANSFORM R-STRAIN CELLSRstrainprotein DNA lipid carbohydrateRstrainSstrainRstrainCONCLUSION: The molecule that carries theheritable “transforming principle” is DNA.RstrainFigure 5–31 Avery, MacLeod, and McCarty demonstratedthat DNA is the genetic material. The researchers preparedan extract from the disease-causing S strain of pneumococciand showed that the “transforming ECB5 e5.04/5.04 principle” that wouldpermanently change the harmless R-strain pneumococci into thepathogenic S strain is DNA. This was the first evidence that DNAcould serve as the genetic material.affect the ability of the extract to transform bacteria,while enzymes that destroy DNA inactivated it. And likeGriffith before them, the investigators found that theirpurified preparation changed the bacteria permanently:DNA from the pathogenic species was taken up by theharmless species, and this change was faithfully passedon to subsequent generations of bacteria.This landmark study offered rigorous proof that purifiedDNA can act as genetic material. But the resulting paper,published in 1944, drew strangely little attention. Despitethe meticulous care with which these experiments wereperformed, geneticists were not immediately convincedthat DNA is the hereditary material. Many argued thatthe transformation might have been caused by sometrace protein contaminant in the preparations. Or thatthe extract might contain a mutagen that alters thegenetic material of the harmless bacteria—convertingthem to the pathogenic form—rather than containingthe genetic material itself.
195Virus cocktailsThe debate was not settled definitively until 1952, whenAlfred Hershey and Martha Chase fired up their laboratoryblender and demonstrated, once and for all, thatgenes are made of DNA. The researchers were studyingT2—a virus that infects and eventually destroys thebacterium E. coli. These bacteria-killing viruses behavelike tiny molecular syringes: they inject their geneticmaterial into the bacterial host cell, while the emptyvirus heads remain attached outside (Figure 5–32A).Once inside the bacterial cell, the viral genes direct theformation of new virus particles. In less than an hour,the infected cells explode, spewing thousands of newviruses into the medium. These then infect neighboringbacteria, and the process begins again.The beauty of T2 is that these viruses contain only twokinds of molecules: DNA and protein. So the geneticmaterial had to be one or the other. But which? Theexperiment was fairly straightforward. Because theviral genes enter the bacterial cell, while the rest of thevirus particle remains outside, the researchers decidedto radioactively label the protein in one batch of virusand the DNA in another. Then, all they had to do wasfollow the radioactivity to see whether viral DNA orviral protein wound up inside the bacteria. To do this,Hershey and Chase incubated their radiolabeled viruseswith E. coli; after allowing a few minutes for infection totake place, they poured the mix into a Waring blenderand hit “puree.” The blender’s spinning blades shearedthe empty virus heads from the surfaces of the bacterialcells. The researchers then centrifuged the sampleto separate the heavier, infected bacteria, which formeda pellet at the bottom of the centrifuge tube, from theempty viral coats, which remained in suspension (Figure5–32B).As you have probably guessed, Hershey and Chasefound that the radioactive DNA entered the bacterialcells, while the radioactive proteins remained outsidewith the empty virus heads. They found that the radioactiveDNA was also incorporated into the next generationof virus particles.This experiment demonstrated conclusively that viralDNA enters bacterial host cells, whereas viral proteindoes not. Thus, the genetic material in this virus hadto be made of DNA. Together with the studies done byAvery, MacLeod, and McCarty, this evidence clinchedthe case for DNA as the agent of heredity.E. coli(A)virus head(B)DNA labeledwith 32 PE. colicellviral genetic material:protein or DNA?CENTRIFUGEprotein labeledwith 35 Sviruses allowed toinfect E. coliviral headssheared offthe bacteriainfected bacteriacontain 32 P butnot 35 SFigure 5–32 Hershey and Chase showed definitively that genes are made of DNA. (A) The researchers worked with T2 viruses,which are made entirely of protein and DNA. Each virus acts as a molecular syringe, injecting its genetic material into a bacterium;the empty viral capsule remains attached to the outside of the cell. (B) To determine whether the genetic material of the virus is madeof protein or DNA, the researchers labeled the DNA in one batch of viruses with radioactive phosphorous ( 32 P) and the proteins in asecond batch of viruses with radioactive sulfur ( 35 S). Because DNA lacks sulfur and the proteins lack phosphorus, these radioactiveisotopes allowed the researchers to distinguish these two ECB5 types e5.05/5.05 of molecules. The radioactively labeled viruses were allowed to infectE. coli, and the mixture was then disrupted by brief pulsing in a Waring blender and centrifuged to separate the infected bacteria fromthe empty viral heads. When the researchers measured the radioactivity, they found that much of the 32 P-labeled DNA had enteredthe bacterial cells, while the vast majority of the 35 S-labeled proteins remained in solution with the spent viral particles. Furthermore,the radioactively labeled DNA also made its way into subsequent generations of virus particles, confirming that DNA is the heritable,genetic material.
- Page 178 and 179: 144HOW WE KNOWMEASURING ENZYME PERF
- Page 180 and 181: 146 CHAPTER 4 Protein Structure and
- Page 182 and 183: 148 CHAPTER 4 Protein Structure and
- Page 184 and 185: 150 CHAPTER 4 Protein Structure and
- Page 186 and 187: 152 CHAPTER 4 Protein Structure and
- Page 188 and 189: 154 CHAPTER 4 Protein Structure and
- Page 190 and 191: 156 CHAPTER 4 Protein Structure and
- Page 192 and 193: 158 CHAPTER 4 Protein Structure and
- Page 194 and 195: 160 CHAPTER 4 Protein Structure and
- Page 196 and 197: 162 CHAPTER 4 Protein Structure and
- Page 198 and 199: 164 PANEL 4-3 CELL BREAKAGE AND INI
- Page 200 and 201: 166PANEL 4-4 PROTEIN SEPARATION BY
- Page 202 and 203: 168PANEL 4-6 PROTEIN STRUCTURE DETE
- Page 204 and 205: 170 CHAPTER 4 Protein Structure and
- Page 206 and 207: 172 CHAPTER 4 Protein Structure and
- Page 208 and 209: 174 CHAPTER 5 DNA and ChromosomesTh
- Page 210 and 211: 176 CHAPTER 5 DNA and Chromosomes5
- Page 212 and 213: 178 CHAPTER 5 DNA and Chromosomes(A
- Page 214 and 215: 180 CHAPTER 5 DNA and ChromosomesFi
- Page 216 and 217: 182 CHAPTER 5 DNA and ChromosomesY
- Page 218 and 219: 184 CHAPTER 5 DNA and ChromosomesFi
- Page 220 and 221: 186 CHAPTER 5 DNA and Chromosomesli
- Page 222 and 223: 188 CHAPTER 5 DNA and ChromosomesTH
- Page 224 and 225: 190 CHAPTER 5 DNA and Chromosomeshe
- Page 226 and 227: 192 CHAPTER 5 DNA and Chromosomesge
- Page 230 and 231: 196 CHAPTER 5 DNA and ChromosomesQU
- Page 232 and 233: 198 CHAPTER 5 DNA and ChromosomesQU
- Page 234 and 235: 200 CHAPTER 6 DNA Replication and R
- Page 236 and 237: 202HOW WE KNOWTHE NATURE OF REPLICA
- Page 238 and 239: 204CHAPTER 6DNA Replication and Rep
- Page 240 and 241: 206 CHAPTER 6 DNA Replication and R
- Page 242 and 243: 208 CHAPTER 6 DNA Replication and R
- Page 244 and 245: 210 CHAPTER 6 DNA Replication and R
- Page 246 and 247: 212 CHAPTER 6 DNA Replication and R
- Page 248 and 249: 214 CHAPTER 6 DNA Replication and R
- Page 250 and 251: 216 CHAPTER 6 DNA Replication and R
- Page 252 and 253: 218 CHAPTER 6 DNA Replication and R
- Page 254 and 255: 220 CHAPTER 6 DNA Replication and R
- Page 256 and 257: 222 CHAPTER 6 DNA Replication and R
- Page 258 and 259: 224 CHAPTER 6 DNA Replication and R
- Page 260 and 261: 226 CHAPTER 6 DNA Replication and R
- Page 262 and 263: 228 CHAPTER 7 From DNA to Protein:
- Page 264 and 265: 230 CHAPTER 7 From DNA to Protein:
- Page 266 and 267: 232 CHAPTER 7 From DNA to Protein:
- Page 268 and 269: 234 CHAPTER 7 From DNA to Protein:
- Page 270 and 271: 236 CHAPTER 7 From DNA to Protein:
- Page 272 and 273: 238 CHAPTER 7 From DNA to Protein:
- Page 274 and 275: 240 CHAPTER 7 From DNA to Protein:
- Page 276 and 277: 242 CHAPTER 7 From DNA to Protein:
195
Virus cocktails
The debate was not settled definitively until 1952, when
Alfred Hershey and Martha Chase fired up their laboratory
blender and demonstrated, once and for all, that
genes are made of DNA. The researchers were studying
T2—a virus that infects and eventually destroys the
bacterium E. coli. These bacteria-killing viruses behave
like tiny molecular syringes: they inject their genetic
material into the bacterial host cell, while the empty
virus heads remain attached outside (Figure 5–32A).
Once inside the bacterial cell, the viral genes direct the
formation of new virus particles. In less than an hour,
the infected cells explode, spewing thousands of new
viruses into the medium. These then infect neighboring
bacteria, and the process begins again.
The beauty of T2 is that these viruses contain only two
kinds of molecules: DNA and protein. So the genetic
material had to be one or the other. But which? The
experiment was fairly straightforward. Because the
viral genes enter the bacterial cell, while the rest of the
virus particle remains outside, the researchers decided
to radioactively label the protein in one batch of virus
and the DNA in another. Then, all they had to do was
follow the radioactivity to see whether viral DNA or
viral protein wound up inside the bacteria. To do this,
Hershey and Chase incubated their radiolabeled viruses
with E. coli; after allowing a few minutes for infection to
take place, they poured the mix into a Waring blender
and hit “puree.” The blender’s spinning blades sheared
the empty virus heads from the surfaces of the bacterial
cells. The researchers then centrifuged the sample
to separate the heavier, infected bacteria, which formed
a pellet at the bottom of the centrifuge tube, from the
empty viral coats, which remained in suspension (Figure
5–32B).
As you have probably guessed, Hershey and Chase
found that the radioactive DNA entered the bacterial
cells, while the radioactive proteins remained outside
with the empty virus heads. They found that the radioactive
DNA was also incorporated into the next generation
of virus particles.
This experiment demonstrated conclusively that viral
DNA enters bacterial host cells, whereas viral protein
does not. Thus, the genetic material in this virus had
to be made of DNA. Together with the studies done by
Avery, MacLeod, and McCarty, this evidence clinched
the case for DNA as the agent of heredity.
E. coli
(A)
virus head
(B)
DNA labeled
with 32 P
E. coli
cell
viral genetic material:
protein or DNA?
CENTRIFUGE
protein labeled
with 35 S
viruses allowed to
infect E. coli
viral heads
sheared off
the bacteria
infected bacteria
contain 32 P but
not 35 S
Figure 5–32 Hershey and Chase showed definitively that genes are made of DNA. (A) The researchers worked with T2 viruses,
which are made entirely of protein and DNA. Each virus acts as a molecular syringe, injecting its genetic material into a bacterium;
the empty viral capsule remains attached to the outside of the cell. (B) To determine whether the genetic material of the virus is made
of protein or DNA, the researchers labeled the DNA in one batch of viruses with radioactive phosphorous ( 32 P) and the proteins in a
second batch of viruses with radioactive sulfur ( 35 S). Because DNA lacks sulfur and the proteins lack phosphorus, these radioactive
isotopes allowed the researchers to distinguish these two ECB5 types e5.05/5.05 of molecules. The radioactively labeled viruses were allowed to infect
E. coli, and the mixture was then disrupted by brief pulsing in a Waring blender and centrifuged to separate the infected bacteria from
the empty viral heads. When the researchers measured the radioactivity, they found that much of the 32 P-labeled DNA had entered
the bacterial cells, while the vast majority of the 35 S-labeled proteins remained in solution with the spent viral particles. Furthermore,
the radioactively labeled DNA also made its way into subsequent generations of virus particles, confirming that DNA is the heritable,
genetic material.