Origin of the genetic code: first aminoacyl-tRNA synthetases could replace isofunctional ribozymes when only the second base of codons was established

The Roots of Genetic Coding in Aminoacyl-tRNA Synthetase Duality

Codon-dependent translation underlies genetics and phylogenetic inferences, but its origins pose two challenges. Prevailing narratives cannot account for the fact that aminoacyl-tRNA synthetases (aaRSs), which translate the genetic code, must collectively enforce the rules used to assemble themselves. Nor can they explain how specific assignments arose from rudimentary differentiation between ancestral aaRSs and corresponding transfer RNAs (tRNAs). Experimental deconstruction of the two aaRS superfamilies created new experimental tools with which to analyze the emergence of the code. Amino acid and tRNA substrate recognition are linked to phase transfer free energies of amino acids and arise largely from aaRS class-specific differences in secondary structure. Sensitivity to protein folding rules endowed ancestral aaRS-tRNA pairs with the feedback necessary to rapidly compare alternative genetic codes and coding sequences. These and other experimental data suggest that the aaRS bidirectional genetic ancestry stabilized the differentiation and interdependence required to initiate and elaborate the genetic coding table.

Aminoacyl-tRNA synthetase evolution and sectoring of the genetic code

The genetic code sectored via tRNA charging errors, and the code progressed toward closure and universality because of evolution of aminoacyl-tRNA synthetase (aaRS) fidelity and translational fidelity mechanisms. Class I and class II aaRS folds are identified as homologs. From sequence alignments, a structurally conserved Zn-binding domain common to class I and class II aaRS was identified. A model for the class I and class II aaRS alternate folding pathways is posited. Five mechanisms toward code closure are highlighted: 1) aaRS proofreading to remove mischarged amino acids from tRNA; 2) accurate aaRS active site specification of amino acid substrates; 3) aaRS-tRNA anticodon recognition; 4) conformational coupling proofreading of the anticodon-codon interaction; and 5) deamination of tRNA wobble adenine to inosine. In tRNA anticodons there is strong wobble sequence preference that results in a broader spectrum of contacts to synonymous mRNA codon wobble bases. Adenine is excluded from the anticodon wobble position of tRNA unless it is modified to inosine. Uracil is generally preferred to cytosine in the tRNA anticodon wobble position. Because of wobble ambiguity when tRNA reads mRNA, the maximal coding capacity of the three nucleotide code read by tRNA is 31 amino acids + stops.

Interdependence, Reflexivity, Fidelity, Impedance Matching, and the Evolution of Genetic Coding

Genetic coding is generally thought to have required ribozymes whose functions were taken over by polypeptide aminoacyl-tRNA synthetases (aaRS). Two discoveries about aaRS and their interactions with tRNA substrates now furnish a unifying rationale for the opposite conclusion: that the key processes of the Central Dogma of molecular biology emerged simultaneously and naturally from simple origins in a peptide•RNA partnership, eliminating the epistemological utility of a prior RNA world. First, the two aaRS classes likely arose from opposite strands of the same ancestral gene, implying a simple genetic alphabet. The resulting inversion symmetries in aaRS structural biology would have stabilized the initial and subsequent differentiation of coding specificities, rapidly promoting diversity in the proteome. Second, amino acid physical chemistry maps onto tRNA identity elements, establishing reflexive, nanoenvironmental sensing in protein aaRS. Bootstrapping of increasingly detailed coding is thus intrinsic to polypeptide aaRS, but impossible in an RNA world. These notions underline the following concepts that contradict gradual replacement of ribozymal aaRS by polypeptide aaRS: 1) aaRS enzymes must be interdependent; 2) reflexivity intrinsic to polypeptide aaRS production dynamics promotes bootstrapping; 3) takeover of RNA-catalyzed aminoacylation by enzymes will necessarily degrade specificity; and 4) the Central Dogma's emergence is most probable when replication and translation error rates remain comparable. These characteristics are necessary and sufficient for the essentially de novo emergence of a coupled gene-replicase-translatase system of genetic coding that would have continuously preserved the functional meaning of genetically encoded protein genes whose phylogenetic relationships match those observed today.

Coding of Class I and II Aminoacyl-tRNA Synthetases

The aminoacyl-tRNA synthetases and their cognate transfer RNAs translate the universal genetic code. The twenty canonical amino acids are sufficiently diverse to create a selective advantage for dividing amino acid activation between two distinct, apparently unrelated superfamilies of synthetases, Class I amino acids being generally larger and less polar, Class II amino acids smaller and more polar. Biochemical, bioinformatic, and protein engineering experiments support the hypothesis that the two Classes descended from opposite strands of the same ancestral gene. Parallel experimental deconstructions of Class I and II synthetases reveal parallel losses in catalytic proficiency at two novel modular levels-protozymes and Urzymes-associated with the evolution of catalytic activity. Bi-directional coding supports an important unification of the proteome; affords a genetic relatedness metric-middle base-pairing frequencies in sense/antisense alignments-that probes more deeply into the evolutionary history of translation than do single multiple sequence alignments; and has facilitated the analysis of hitherto unknown coding relationships in tRNA sequences. Reconstruction of native synthetases by modular thermodynamic cycles facilitated by domain engineering emphasizes the subtlety associated with achieving high specificity, shedding new light on allosteric relationships in contemporary synthetases. Synthetase Urzyme structural biology suggests that they are catalytically-active molten globules, broadening the potential manifold of polypeptide catalysts accessible to primitive genetic coding and motivating revisions of the origins of catalysis. Finally, bi-directional genetic coding of some of the oldest genes in the proteome places major limitations on the likelihood that any RNA World preceded the origins of coded proteins.

Sharp switches between regular and swinger mitochondrial replication: 16S rDNA systematically exchanging nucleotides A<->T+C<->G in the mitogenome of Kamimuria wangi

Swinger DNAs are sequences whose homology with known sequences is detected only by assuming systematic exchanges between nucleotides. Nine symmetric (X<->Y, i.e. A<->C) and fourteen asymmetric (X->Y->Z, i.e. A->C->G) exchanges exist. All swinger DNA previously detected in GenBank follow the A<->T+C<->G exchange, while mitochondrial swinger RNAs distribute among different swinger types. Here different alignment criteria detect 87 additional swinger mitochondrial DNAs (86 from insects), including the first swinger gene embedded within a complete genome, corresponding to the mitochondrial 16S rDNA of the stonefly Kamimuria wangi. Other Kamimuria mt genome regions are "regular", stressing unanswered questions on (a) swinger polymerization regulation; (b) swinger 16S rDNA functions; and (c) specificity to rDNA, in particular 16S rDNA. Sharp switches between regular and swinger replication, together with previous observations on swinger transcription, suggest that swinger replication might be due to a switch in polymerization mode of regular polymerases and the possibility of swinger-encoded information, predicted in primordial genes such as rDNA.

The Rodin-Ohno hypothesis that two enzyme superfamilies descended from one ancestral gene: an unlikely scenario for the origins of translation that will not be dismissed

Background

Because amino acid activation is rate-limiting for uncatalyzed protein synthesis, it is a key puzzle in understanding the origin of the genetic code. Two unrelated classes (I and II) of contemporary aminoacyl-tRNA synthetases (aaRS) now translate the code. Observing that codons for the most highly conserved, Class I catalytic peptides, when read in the reverse direction, are very nearly anticodons for Class II defining catalytic peptides, Rodin and Ohno proposed that the two superfamilies descended from opposite strands of the same ancestral gene. This unusual hypothesis languished for a decade, perhaps because it appeared to be unfalsifiable.

Results

The proposed sense/antisense alignment makes important predictions. Fragments that align in antiparallel orientations, and contain the respective active sites, should catalyze the same two reactions catalyzed by contemporary synthetases. Recent experiments confirmed that prediction. Invariant cores from both classes, called Urzymes after Ur = primitive, authentic, plus enzyme and representing ~20% of the contemporary structures, can be expressed and exhibit high, proportionate rate accelerations for both amino-acid activation and tRNA acylation. A major fraction (60%) of the catalytic rate acceleration by contemporary synthetases resides in segments that align sense/antisense. Bioinformatic evidence for sense/antisense ancestry extends to codons specifying the invariant secondary and tertiary structures outside the active sites of the two synthetase classes. Peptides from a designed, 46-residue gene constrained by Rosetta to encode Class I and II ATP binding sites with fully complementary sequences both accelerate amino acid activation by ATP ~400 fold.

Conclusions

Biochemical and bioinformatic results substantially enhance the posterior probability that ancestors of the two synthetase classes arose from opposite strands of the same ancestral gene. The remarkable acceleration by short peptides of the rate-limiting step in uncatalyzed protein synthesis, together with the synergy of synthetase Urzymes and their cognate tRNAs, introduce a new paradigm for the origin of protein catalysts, emphasize the potential relevance of an operational RNA code embedded in the tRNA acceptor stems, and challenge the RNA-World hypothesis.

Reviewers

This article was reviewed by Dr. Paul Schimmel (nominated by Laura Landweber), Dr. Eugene Koonin and Professor David Ardell.

Amino acid fermentation at the origin of the genetic code

There is evidence that the genetic code was established prior to the existence of proteins, when metabolism was powered by ribozymes. Also, early proto-organisms had to rely on simple anaerobic bioenergetic processes. In this work I propose that amino acid fermentation powered metabolism in the RNA world, and that this was facilitated by proto-adapters, the precursors of the tRNAs. Amino acids were used as carbon sources rather than as catalytic or structural elements. In modern bacteria, amino acid fermentation is known as the Stickland reaction. This pathway involves two amino acids: the first undergoes oxidative deamination, and the second acts as an electron acceptor through reductive deamination. This redox reaction results in two keto acids that are employed to synthesise ATP via substrate-level phosphorylation. The Stickland reaction is the basic bioenergetic pathway of some bacteria of the genus Clostridium. Two other facts support Stickland fermentation in the RNA world. First, several Stickland amino acid pairs are synthesised in abiotic amino acid synthesis. This suggests that amino acids that could be used as an energy substrate were freely available. Second, anticodons that have complementary sequences often correspond to amino acids that form Stickland pairs. The main hypothesis of this paper is that pairs of complementary proto-adapters were assigned to Stickland amino acids pairs. There are signatures of this hypothesis in the genetic code. Furthermore, it is argued that the proto-adapters formed double strands that brought amino acid pairs into proximity to facilitate their mutual redox reaction, structurally constraining the anticodon pairs that are assigned to these amino acid pairs. Significance tests which randomise the code are performed to study the extent of the variability of the energetic (ATP) yield. Random assignments can lead to a substantial yield of ATP and maintain enough variability, thus selection can act and refine the assignments into a proto-code that optimises the energetic yield. Monte Carlo simulations are performed to evaluate the establishment of these simple proto-codes, based on amino acid substitutions and codon swapping. In all cases, donor amino acids are assigned to anticodons composed of U+G, and have low redundancy (1-2 codons), whereas acceptor amino acids are assigned to the the remaining codons. These bioenergetic and structural constraints allow for a metabolic role for amino acids before their co-option as catalyst cofactors. Reviewers: this article was reviewed by Prof. William Martin, Prof. Eörs Szathmáry (nominated by Dr. Gáspár Jékely) and Dr. Ádám Kun (nominated by Dr. Sandor Pongor)

On origin of genetic code and tRNA before translation

BACKGROUND

Synthesis of proteins is based on the genetic code - a nearly universal assignment of codons to amino acids (aas). A major challenge to the understanding of the origins of this assignment is the archetypal "key-lock vs. frozen accident" dilemma. Here we re-examine this dilemma in light of 1) the fundamental veto on "foresight evolution", 2) modular structures of tRNAs and aminoacyl-tRNA synthetases, and 3) the updated library of aa-binding sites in RNA aptamers successfully selected in vitro for eight amino acids.

RESULTS

The aa-binding sites of arginine, isoleucine and tyrosine contain both their cognate triplets, anticodons and codons. We have noticed that these cases might be associated with palindrome-dinucleotides. For example, one-base shift to the left brings arginine codons CGN, with CG at 1-2 positions, to the respective anticodons NCG, with CG at 2-3 positions. Formally, the concomitant presence of codons and anticodons is also expected in the reverse situation, with codons containing palindrome-dinucleotides at their 2-3 positions, and anticodons exhibiting them at 1-2 positions. A closer analysis reveals that, surprisingly, RNA binding sites for Arg, Ile and Tyr "prefer" (exactly as in the actual genetic code) the anticodon(2-3)/codon(1-2) tetramers to their anticodon(1-2)/codon(2-3) counterparts, despite the seemingly perfect symmetry of the latter. However, since in vitro selection of aa-specific RNA aptamers apparently had nothing to do with translation, this striking preference provides a new strong support to the notion of the genetic code emerging before translation, in response to catalytic (and possibly other) needs of ancient RNA life. Consistently with the pre-translation origin of the code, we propose here a new model of tRNA origin by the gradual, Fibonacci process-like, elongation of a tRNA molecule from a primordial coding triplet and 5'DCCA3' quadruplet (D is a base-determinator) to the eventual 76 base-long cloverleaf-shaped molecule.

CONCLUSION

Taken together, our findings necessarily imply that primordial tRNAs, tRNA aminoacylating ribozymes, and (later) the translation machinery in general have been co-evolving to ''fit'' the (likely already defined) genetic code, rather than the opposite way around. Coding triplets in this primal pre-translational code were likely similar to the anticodons, with second and third nucleotides being more important than the less specific first one. Later, when the code was expanding in co-evolution with the translation apparatus, the importance of 2-3 nucleotides of coding triplets "transferred" to the 1-2 nucleotides of their complements, thus distinguishing anticodons from codons. This evolutionary primacy of anticodons in genetic coding makes the hypothesis of primal stereo-chemical affinity between amino acids and cognate triplets, the hypothesis of coding coenzyme handles for amino acids, the hypothesis of tRNA-like genomic 3' tags suggesting that tRNAs originated in replication, and the hypothesis of ancient ribozymes-mediated operational code of tRNA aminoacylation not mutually contradicting but rather co-existing in harmony.

Editing mechanism of aminoacyl-tRNA synthetases operates by a hybrid ribozyme/protein catalyst

Aminoacyl-tRNA synthetases (aaRSs) are critical for the translational process, catalyzing the attachment of specific amino acids to their cognate tRNAs. To ensure formation of the correct aminoacyl-tRNA, and thereby enhance the reliability of translation, several aaRSs have an editing capability that hinders formation of misaminoacylated tRNAs. We investigated theoretically the mechanism of the editing reaction for a class I enzyme, leucyl-tRNA synthetase (LeuRS), complexed with a misaminoacylated tRNA(Leu), employing ab initio hybrid quantum mechanical/molecular mechanical potentials in conjunction with molecular dynamics simulations. It is shown that the water molecule that acts as the nucleophile in the editing reaction is activated by a 3'-hydroxyl group at the 3'-end of tRNA(Leu) and that the O2' atom of the leaving group of the substrate is capped by one of the water's hydrogen atoms. Thus, it is shown that editing is a self-cleavage reaction of the tRNA and so it is the tRNA, and not the protein, that drives the reaction. The protein does, however, have an important stabilizing effect on some high-energy intermediates along the reaction path, which is more efficient than the ribozyme would be alone. This indicates that editing is achieved by a novel "hybrid ribozyme/protein catalyst". Analysis of existing experimental data and additional modeling shows that this ribozymal mechanism appears to be widespread, occurring in the ribosome as well as in other aaRSs. It also suggests transitional forms that could have played an important role in the RNA world hypothesis for the origin of life.

On primordial sense-antisense coding

The genetic code is implemented by aminoacyl-tRNA synthetases (aaRS). These 20 enzymes are divided into two classes that, despite performing same functions, have nothing common in structure. The mystery of this striking partition of aaRSs might have been concealed in their sterically complementary modes of tRNA recognition that, as we have found recently, protect the tRNAs with complementary anticodons from confusion in translation. This finding implies that, in the beginning, life increased its coding repertoire by the pairs of complementary codons (rather than one-by-one) and used both complementary strands of genes as templates for translation. The class I and class II aaRSs may represent one of the most important examples of such primordial sense-antisense (SAS) coding (Rodin and Ohno, Orig Life Evol Biosph 25:565-589, 1995). In this report, we address the issue of SAS coding in a wider scope. We suggest a variety of advantages that such coding would have had in exploring a wider sequence space before translation became highly specific. In particular, we confirm that in Achlya klebsiana a single gene might have originally coded for an HSP70 chaperonin (class II aaRS homolog) and an NAD-specific GDH-like enzyme (class I aaRS homolog) via its sense and antisense strands. Thus, in contrast to the conclusions in Williams et al. (Mol Biol Evol 26:445-450, 2009), this could indeed be a "Rosetta stone" gene (Carter and Duax, Mol Cell 10:705-708, 2002) (eroded somewhat, though) for the SAS origin of the two aaRS classes.

Optimization models and the structure of the genetic code

The codon assignment of the quasi-universal genetic code can be assumed to have resulted from the evolutionary pressures that prevailed when the code was still evolving. Here, we review studies of the structure of the genetic code based on optimization models. We also review studies that, from the structure of the code, attempt to derive aspects of the primordial circumstances in which the genetic code froze. Different rationales are summarized, compared with experimental data, discussed in the context of the transition from a RNA world to a DNA-protein world, and linked to the emergence of the last universal common ancestor.

One ancestor for two codes viewed from the perspective of two complementary modes of tRNA aminoacylation

BACKGROUND

The genetic code is brought into action by 20 aminoacyl-tRNA synthetases. These enzymes are evenly divided into two classes (I and II) that recognize tRNAs from the minor and major groove sides of the acceptor stem, respectively. We have reported recently that: (1) ribozymic precursors of the synthetases seem to have used the same two sterically mirror modes of tRNA recognition, (2) having these two modes might have helped in preventing erroneous aminoacylation of ancestral tRNAs with complementary anticodons, yet (3) the risk of confusion for the presumably earliest pairs of complementarily encoded amino acids had little to do with anticodons. Accordingly, in this communication we focus on the acceptor stem.

RESULTS

Our main result is the emergence of a palindrome structure for the acceptor stem's common ancestor, reconstructed from the phylogenetic trees of Bacteria, Archaea and Eukarya. In parallel, for pairs of ancestral tRNAs with complementary anticodons, we present updated evidence of concerted complementarity of the second bases in the acceptor stems. These two results suggest that the first pairs of "complementary" amino acids that were engaged in primordial coding, such as Gly and Ala, could have avoided erroneous aminoacylation if and only if the acceptor stems of their adaptors were recognized from the same, major groove, side. The class II protein synthetases then inherited this "primary preference" from isofunctional ribozymes.

CONCLUSION

Taken together, our results support the hypothesis that the genetic code per se (the one associated with the anticodons) and the operational code of aminoacylation (associated with the acceptor) diverged from a common ancestor that probably began developing before translation. The primordial advantage of linking some amino acids (most likely glycine and alanine) to the ancestral acceptor stem may have been selective retention in a protocell surrounded by a leaky membrane for use in nucleotide and coenzyme synthesis. Such acceptor stems (as cofactors) thus transferred amino acids as groups for biosynthesis. Later, with the advent of an anticodon loop, some amino acids (such as aspartic acid, histidine, arginine) assumed a catalytic role while bound to such extended adaptors, in line with the original coding coenzyme handle (CCH) hypothesis.

Folding at the rhythm of the rare codon beat

The persistent difficulties in the production of protein at high levels in heterologous systems, as well as the inability to understand pathologies associated with protein aggregation, highlight our limited knowledge on the mechanisms of protein folding in vivo. Attempts to improve yield and quality of recombinant proteins are diverse, frequently involving optimization of the cell growth temperature, the use of synonymous codons and/or the co-expression of tRNAs, chaperones and folding catalysts among others. Although protein secondary structure can be determined largely by the amino acid sequence, protein folding within the cell is affected by a range of factors beyond amino acid sequence. The folding pathway of a nascent polypeptide can be affected by transient interactions with other proteins and ligands, the ribosome, translocation through a pore membrane, redox conditions, among others. The translation rate as well as the translation machinery itself can dramatically affect protein folding, and thus the structure and function of the protein product. This review addresses current efforts to better understand how the use of synonymous codons in the mRNA and the availability of tRNAs can modulate translation kinetics, affecting the folding, the structure and the biological activity of proteins.

Evolutionary patterns in the sequence and structure of transfer RNA: a window into early translation and the genetic code

Transfer RNA (tRNA) molecules play vital roles during protein synthesis. Their acceptor arms are aminoacylated with specific amino acid residues while their anticodons delimit codon specificity. The history of these two functions has been generally linked in evolutionary studies of the genetic code. However, these functions could have been differentially recruited as evolutionary signatures were left embedded in tRNA molecules. Here we built phylogenies derived from the sequence and structure of tRNA, we forced taxa into monophyletic groups using constraint analyses, tested competing evolutionary hypotheses, and generated timelines of amino acid charging and codon discovery. Charging of Sec, Tyr, Ser and Leu appeared ancient, while specificities related to Asn, Met, and Arg were derived. The timelines also uncovered an early role of the second and then first codon bases, identified codons for Ala and Pro as the most ancient, and revealed important evolutionary take-overs related to the loss of the long variable arm in tRNA. The lack of correlation between ancestries of amino acid charging and encoding indicated that the separate discoveries of these functions reflected independent histories of recruitment. These histories were probably curbed by co-options and important take-overs during early diversification of the living world.

On the origin of the genetic code: signatures of its primordial complementarity in tRNAs and aminoacyl-tRNA synthetases

If the table of the genetic code is rearranged to put complementary codons face-to-face, it becomes apparent that the code displays latent mirror symmetry with respect to two sterically different modes of tRNA recognition. These modes involve distinct classes of aminoacyl-tRNA synthetases (aaRSs I and II) with recognition from the minor or major groove sides of the acceptor stem, respectively. We analyze the anticodon pairs complementary to the face-to-face codon couplets. Taking into account the invariant nucleotides on either side (5' and 3'), we consider the risk of anticodon confusion and subsequent erroneous aminoacylation in the ancestral coding system. This logic leads to the conclusion that ribozymic precursors of tRNA synthetases had the same two complementary modes of tRNA aminoacylation. This surprising case of molecular mimicry (1) shows a key potential selective advantage arising from the partitioning of aaRSs into two classes, (2) is consistent with the hypothesis that the two aaRS classes were originally encoded by the complementary strands of the same primordial gene and (3) provides a 'missing link' between the classic genetic code, embodied in the anticodon, and the second, or RNA operational, code that is embodied mostly in the acceptor stem and is directly responsible for proper tRNA aminoacylation.

Transfer RNA and the origins of diversified life

The evolution of the transfer RNA (tRNA) molecule is controversial but embeds the history of protein biosynthesis, the genetic code, and the origins of diversified life. A new phylogenetic method based on RNA structure that we developed provides new lines of evidence to support the genome tag hypothesis and confirms that the 'top half' of tRNA is more ancient than the 'bottom half'. Timelines of amino acid charging function generated from constraint analyses showed that selenocysteine, tyrosine, serine, and leucine specificities were ancient, while those related to asparagine, methionine, and arginine were more recent. The timelines also uncovered an early role of the second and then first codon bases, identified codons for alanine and proline as the most ancient, and revealed important evolutionary take-overs related to the loss of the long variable arm of tRNA. Furthermore, organismal timelines showed Archaea was the oldest superkingdom, followed by viruses, and superkingdoms Eukarya and Bacteria in that order supporting conclusions from recent phylogenomic studies of protein architecture. Strikingly, results showed that the origin of viruses was not only ancient but was linked to Archaea, supporting the notion that the archaeal lineage is the most ancient on earth and its origin predated diversification of tRNA function and specificity.

The origin and evolution of tRNA inferred from phylogenetic analysis of structure

The evolutionary history of the two structural and functional domains of tRNA is controversial but harbors the secrets of early translation and the genetic code. To explore the origin and evolution of tRNA, we reconstructed phylogenetic trees directly from molecular structure. Forty-two structural characters describing the geometry of 571 tRNAs and three statistical parameters describing thermodynamic and mechanical features of molecules quantitatively were used to derive phylogenetic trees of molecules and molecular substructures. Trees of molecules failed to group tRNA according to amino acid specificity and did not reveal the tripartite nature of life, probably due to loss of phylogenetic signal or because tRNA diversification predated organismal diversification. Trees of substructures derived from both structural and statistical characters support the origin of tRNA in the acceptor arm and the hypothesis that the top half domain composed of acceptor and pseudouridine (TPsiC) arms is more ancient than the bottom half domain composed of dihydrouridine (DHU) and anticodon arms. This constitutes the cornerstone of the genomic tag hypothesis that postulates tRNAs were ancient telomeres in the RNA world. The trees of substructures suggest a model for the evolution of the major functional and structural components of tRNA. In this model, short RNA hairpins with stems homologous to the acceptor arm of present day tRNAs were extended with regions homologous to TPsiC and anticodon arms. The DHU arm was then incorporated into the resulting three-stemmed structure to form a proto-cloverleaf structure. The variable region was the last structural addition to the molecular repertoire of evolving tRNA substructures.

Partitioning of aminoacyl-tRNA synthetases in two classes could have been encoded in a strand-symmetric RNA world

The "chicken-or-egg" dilemma dictates that archaic tRNAs be aminoacylated by ribozymic aminoacyl-tRNA synthetases, rAARSs, with protein synthetases (pAARSs) emerging later and, strikingly in two versions. However, the distribution of these two versions among the codons also suggests their involvement in development of the genetic code. Here we propose a solution to this controversy, which relies on a primordial complementarity hypothesis that in a strand-symmetric RNA world both complementary replicas of many genes could encode the first proteins. Accordingly, if one rearranges the code table in a manner that puts complementary codons directly against each other, an almost perfect mirror symmetry in tRNA aminoacylation by the two groups of synthetases is revealed. Specifically, the pairs of complementary anticodons from the same pAARS class tend to contain RR and YY dinucleotides at first and second versus third and second positions, whereas in pairs of pAARSs from the different classes these positions are occupied by YR and RY, including CG, GC, UA, and AU palindromes. The latter are indistinguishable in complementary anticodons, thus leading to erroneous aminoacylation (note that there is no such problem for RR- and YY-containing complementary anticodons). This can be averted by "spreading out" tRNA recognition by two rAARSs away from the anticodons in the opposite directions, giving two complementary rAARSs. The principle of evolutionary continuity suggests that their protein successors also arose on complementary strands. Our analyses support this hypothesis.