Dna (deoxyribonucleic acid) is a nucleic acid that carries genetic information. The study of DNA launched the science of Molecular Biology, transformed the study of genetics, and led to the cracking of the biochemical code of life. Understanding DNA has facilitated Genetic Engineering, the genetic manipulation of various organisms; has enabled cloning, the asexual reproduction of identical copies of genes and organisms; has allowed for genetic fingerprinting, the identification of an individual by the distinctive patterns of his or her DNA; and made possible the use of Genetics to predict, diagnose, prevent, and treat disease.
Discovering Dna
In the late nineteenth century, biologists noticed structural differences between the two main cellular regions, the nucleus and the cytoplasm. The nucleus attracted attention because short, stringy objects appeared, doubled, then disappeared during the process of cell division. Scientists began to suspect that these objects, dubbed chromosomes, might govern heredity. To understand the operation of the nucleus and the chromosomes, scientists needed to determine their chemical composition.
Swiss physiologist Friedrich Miescher first isolated "nuclein"—DNA—from the nuclei of human pus cells in 1869. Although he recognized nuclein as distinct from other well-known organic compounds like fats, proteins, and carbohydrates, Miescher remained unsure about its hereditary potential. Nuclein was renamed nucleic acid in 1889, and for the next forty years, biologists debated the purpose of the compound.
In 1929, Phoebus Aaron Levene, working with yeast at New York's Rockefeller Institute, described the basic chemistry of DNA. Levene noted that phosphorus bonded to a sugar (either ribose or deoxyribose, giving rise to the two major nucleic acids, RNA and DNA), and supported one of four chemical "bases" in a structure he called a nucleotide. Levene insisted that nucleotides only joined in four-unit-long chains, molecules too simple to transmit hereditary information.
Levene's conclusions remained axiomatic until 1944, when Oswald Avery, a scientist at the Rockefeller Institute, laid the groundwork for the field of molecular genetics. Avery continued the 1920s-era research of British biologist Fred Griffiths, who worked with pneumococci, the bacteria responsible for pneumonia. Griffiths had found that pneumococci occurred in two forms, the disease-causing S-pneumococci, and the harmless R-pneumococci. Griffiths mixed dead S-type bacteria with live R-type bacteria. When rats were inoculated with the mixture, they developed pneumonia. Apparently, Griffiths concluded, something had transformed the harmless R-type bacteria into their virulent cousin. Avery surmised that the transforming agent must be a molecule that contained genetic information. Avery shocked himself, and the scientific community, when he isolated the transforming agent and found that it was DNA, thereby establishing the molecular basis of heredity.
Dna's Molecular Structure
Erwin Chargaff, a biochemist at Columbia University, confirmed and refined Avery's conclusion that DNA was complex enough to carry genetic information. In 1950, Chargaff reported that DNA exhibited a phenomenon he dubbed a complementary relationship. The four DNA bases—adenine, cytosine, guanine, and thymine (A, C, G, T, identified earlier by Levene)—appeared to be paired. That is, any given sample of DNA contained equal amounts of G and C, and equal amounts of A and T; guanine was the complement to cytosine, as adenine was to thymine. Chargaff also discovered that the ratio of GC to AT differed widely among different organisms. Rather than Levene's short molecules, DNA could now be reconceived as a gigantic macromolecule, composed of varying ratios of the base complements strung together. Thus, the length of DNA differed between organisms.
Even as biochemists described DNA's chemistry, molecular physicists attempted to determine DNA's shape. Using a process called X-ray crystallography, chemist Rosalind Franklin and physicist Maurice Wilkins, working together at King's College London in the early 1950s, debated whether DNA had a helical shape. Initial measurements indicated a single helix, but later experiments left Franklin and Wilkins undecided between a double and a triple helix. Both Chargaff and Franklin were one step away from solving the riddle of DNA's structure. Chargaff understood base complementarity but not its relation to molecular structure; Franklin understood general structure but not how complementarity necessitated a double helix.
In 1952, an iconoclastic research team composed of an American geneticist, James Watson, and a British physicist, Francis Crick, resolved the debate and unlocked DNA's secret. The men used scale-model atoms to construct a model of the DNA molecule. Watson and Crick initially posited a helical structure, but with the bases radiating outward from a dense central helix. After meeting with Chargaff, Watson and Crick learned that the GC and AT ratios could indicate chemical bonds; hydrogen atoms could bond the guanine and cytosine, but could not bond either base to adenine or thymine. The inverse also proved true, since hydrogen could bond adenine to thymine. Watson and Crick assumed these weak chemical links and made models of the nucleotide base pairs GC and AT. They then stacked the base-pair models one atop the other, and saw that the phosphate and sugar components of each nucleotide bonded to form two chains with one chain spinning "up" the molecule, the other spinning "down" the opposite side. The resulting DNA model resembled a spiral staircase—the famous double helix.
Watson and Crick described their findings in an epochal 1953 paper published in the journal Nature. Watson and Crick had actually solved two knotty problems simultaneously: the structure of DNA and how DNA replicated itself in cell division—an idea they elaborated in a second path breaking paper in Nature. If one split the long DNA molecule at the hydrogen bonds between the bases, then each half provided a framework for assembling its counterpart, creating two complete molecules—the doubling of chromosomes during cell division. Although it would take another thirty years for crystallographic confirmation of the double helix, Crick, Watson, and Rosalind Franklin's collaborator Maurice Wilkins shared the 1962 Nobel Prize in physiology or medicine (Franklin had died in 1958). The study of molecular genetics exploded in the wake of Watson and Crick's discovery.
Once scientists understood the structure of DNA molecules, they focused on decoding the DNA in chromosomes—determining which base combinations created structural genes (those genes responsible for manufacturing amino acids, the building blocks of life) and which combinations created regulator genes (those that trigger the operation of structural genes). Between 1961 and 1966, Marshall Nirenberg and Heinrich Matthaei, working at the National Institutes of Health, cracked the genetic code. By 1967, scientists had a complete listing of the sixty-four three-base variations that controlled the production of life's essential twenty amino acids. Researchers, however, still lacked a genetic map precisely locating specific genes on individual chromosomes. Using enzymes to break apart or splice together nucleic acids, American scientists, like David Baltimore, helped develop recombinant DNA or genetic engineering technology in the 1970s and 1980s.
Genetic engineering paved the way for genetic map-ping and increased genetic control, raising a host of political and ethical concerns. The contours of this debate have shifted with the expansion of genetic knowledge. In the 1970s, activists protested genetic engineering and scientists decried for-profit science; thirty years later, protesters organized to fight the marketing of genetically modified foods as scientists bickered over the ethics of cloning humans. Further knowledge about DNA offers both promises and problems that will only be resolved by the cooperative effort of people in many fields—medicine, law, ethics, social policy, and the humanities—not just molecular biology.
Dna and American Culture
Like atomic technology, increased understanding of DNA and genetics has had both intended and unintended consequences, and it has captured the public imagination. The popular media readily communicated the simplicity and elegance of DNA's structure and action to nonscientists. Unfortunately, media coverage of advances in DNA technology has often obscured the biological complexity of these developments. Oversimplifications in the media, left uncorrected by scientists, have allowed DNA to be invoked as a symbol for everything from inanimate objects to the absolute essence of human potential.
DNA's biological power has translated into great cultural power as the image of the double helix entered the iconography of America after 1953. As Dorothy Nellkin and M. Susan Lindee have shown, references to DNA and the power of genetics are ubiquitous in modern culture. Inanimate objects like cars are advertised as having "a genetic advantage." Movies and television dramas have plots that revolve around DNA, genetic technology, and the power of genetics to shape lives. Humorists use DNA as the punch line of jokes to explain the source of human foibles. Consumer and popular culture's appropriation of DNA to signify fine or poor quality has merged with media oversimplifications to give rise to a new wave of hereditarian thinking in American culture.
The DNA technology that revolutionized criminology, genealogy, and medicine convinced many Americans that DNA governed not only people's physical development, but also their psychological and social behavior. Genetic "fingerprints" that allow forensics experts to discern identity from genetic traces left at a crime scene, or that determine ancestralties by sampling tissue from long-dead individuals, have been erroneously touted as foolproof and seem to equate peoples' identities and behavior with their DNA. Genomic research allows scientists to identify genetic markers that indicate increased risk for certain diseases. This development offers hope for preventive medicine, even as it raises the specter of genetic discrimination and renewed attempts to engineer a eugenic master race. In the beginning of the twenty-first century, more scientists began to remind Americans that DNA operates within a nested series of environments—nuclear, cellular, organismic, ecological, and social—and these conditions affect DNA's operation and its expression. While DNA remains a powerful cultural symbol, people invoke it in increasingly complex ways that more accurately reflect how DNA actually influences life.
Without question, in the 131 years spanning Miescher's isolation of nuclein, Crick and Watson's discovery of DNA's structure, and the completion of the human genome, biologists have revolutionized humanity's understanding of, and control over, life itself. American contributions to molecular biology rank with the harnessing of atomic fission and the landing of men on the moon as signal scientific and technological achievements.
Bibliography
Chargaff, Erwin. Heraclitean Fire?: Sketches from a Life before Nature. New York: Rockefeller University Press, 1978. Bitter but provocative.
Judson, Horace Freeland. The Eighth Day of Creation: Makers of the Revolution in Biology. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1979. Readable history of molecular biology.
Kay, Lily E. Who Wrote the Book of Life?: A History of the Genetic Code. Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University Press, 2000.
Kevles, Daniel J., and Leroy Hood, eds. The Code of Codes: Scientific and Social Issues in the Human Genome Project. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1992.
Lagerkvist, Ulf. DNA Pioneers and Their Legacy. New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 1998.
Nelkin, Dorothy, and M. Susan Lindee. The DNA Mystique: The Gene as Cultural Icon. New York: W. H. Freeman, 1995. Excellent cultural interpretation of DNA in the 1990s.
Watson, James D. The Double-Helix. New York: Atheneum, 1968. Crotchety account of discovery.
Watson, James D., and F. H. C. Crick. "Molecular Structure of Nucleic Acid: A Structure for Deoxyribonucleic Acid." Nature 171 (1953): 737–738.
—Gregory Michael Dorr