The Combinatorial Fusion Cascade to Generate the Standard Genetic Code

Primordial aminoacyl-tRNA synthetases preferred minihelices to full-length tRNA

Aminoacyl-tRNA synthetases (AARS) and tRNAs translate the genetic code in all living cells. Little is known about how their molecular ancestors began to enforce the coding rules for the expression of their own genes. Schimmel et al. proposed in 1993 that AARS catalytic domains began by reading an 'operational' code in the acceptor stems of tRNA minihelices. We show here that the enzymology of an AARS urzyme•TΨC-minihelix cognate pair is a rich in vitro realization of that idea. The TΨC-minihelixLeu is a very poor substrate for full-length Leucyl-tRNA synthetase. It is a superior RNA substrate for the corresponding urzyme, LeuAC. LeuAC active-site mutations shift the choice of both amino acid and RNA substrates. AARS urzyme•minihelix cognate pairs are thus small, pliant models for the ancestral decoding hardware. They are thus an ideal platform for detailed experimental study of the operational RNA code.

Base Pairing Promoted the Self-Organization of Genetic Coding, Catalysis, and Free-Energy Transduction

How Nature discovered genetic coding is a largely ignored question, yet the answer is key to explaining the transition from biochemical building blocks to life. Other, related puzzles also fall inside the aegis enclosing the codes themselves. The peptide bond is unstable with respect to hydrolysis. So, it requires some form of chemical free energy to drive it. Amino acid activation and acyl transfer are also slow and must be catalyzed. All living things must thus also convert free energy and synchronize cellular chemistry. Most importantly, functional proteins occupy only small, isolated regions of sequence space. Nature evolved heritable symbolic data processing to seek out and use those sequences. That system has three parts: a memory of how amino acids behave in solution and inside proteins, a set of code keys to access that memory, and a scoring function. The code keys themselves are the genes for cognate pairs of tRNA and aminoacyl-tRNA synthetases, AARSs. The scoring function is the enzymatic specificity constant, kcat/kM, which measures both catalysis and specificity. The work described here deepens the evidence for and understanding of an unexpected consequence of ancestral bidirectional coding. Secondary structures occur in approximately the same places within antiparallel alignments of their gene products. However, the polar amino acids that define the molecular surface of one are reflected into core-defining non-polar side chains on the other. Proteins translated from base-paired coding strands fold up inside out. Bidirectional genes thus project an inverted structural duality into the proteome. I review how experimental data root the scoring functions responsible for the origins of coding and catalyzed activation of unfavorable chemical reactions in that duality.

Screening for Primordial RNA–Peptide Interactions Using High-Density Peptide Arrays

RNA–peptide interactions are an important factor in the origin of the modern mechanism of translation and the genetic code. Despite great progress in the bioinformatics of RNA–peptide interactions due to the rapid growth in the number of known RNA–protein complexes, there is no comprehensive experimental method to take into account the influence of individual amino acids on non-covalent RNA–peptide bonds. First, we designed the combinatorial libraries of primordial peptides according to the combinatorial fusion rules based on Watson–Crick mutations. Next, we used high-density peptide arrays to investigate the interaction of primordial peptides with their cognate homo-oligonucleotides. We calculated the interaction scores of individual peptide fragments and evaluated the influence of the peptide length and its composition on the strength of RNA binding. The analysis shows that the amino acids phenylalanine, tyrosine, and proline contribute significantly to the strong binding between peptides and homo-oligonucleotides, while the sum charge of the peptide does not have a significant effect. We discuss the physicochemical implications of the combinatorial fusion cascade, a hypothesis that follows from the amino acid partition used in the work.