Throughout this semester, I will use this blog to attempt to shed light on not only the vast wealth of historical knowledge about molecular biology, but also contemporary research and discoveries made by modern day scientists. As our society continues to progress scientifically, the study of molecular biology has become essential to our understanding of the world and its inhabitants (both human and nonhuman). Molecular Biology is defined by Science Daily as "the study of molecular underpinnings of the process of replication, transcription and translation of the genetic material". The crux of molecular biology is the central dogma which was defined by the renowned scientist Francis Crick. He is also known for his co-discovery of the molecule DNA with James Watson. This has been disputed and I may elaborate on this controversy further in a later blog post. In 1958,Crick stated "that once ‘information has passed into protein it cannot get out again". He further elaborated that "the transfer of information from nucleic acid to nucleic acid, or from nucleic acid to protein may be possible, but transfer from protein to protein, or from protein to nucleic acid is impossible".Crick basically described the processes of replication, transcription and translation as well as how nucleic acids( DNA and RNA) and proteins work together. The central dogma is the bedrock of molecular biology and genetic research. Watson and Crick's groundbreaking scientific revelations revolutionized the human understanding of life and its underlying processes. It cannot be said enough how essential their work and research was to molecular biology and science as a whole.
Sources:
https://www.sciencedaily.com/terms/molecular_biology.htm
http://dna.caltech.edu/courses/cs191/paperscs191/CrickCentralDogma1970.pdf
I like your style of writing, it seems like you have a sense of the "blog" style and it was fun to read as well as concise without seeming oversimplified. I agree that Cricks proposal as well as Watson and Cricks research were both important milestones in molecular biology and while the discovery of DNAs structure still stirs controversy today their contribution to the field is huge. If you are going to do a post about the Discovery of DNA I definitely suggest you read the " The Double Helix" if you haven't already. It is a personal account by Watson during and after the discovery was made and it is a fun read.
ReplyDeleteI enjoyed reading the post you created mainly due to the fact that I just took genetics and we spent a large amount of time discussing the central dogma and how impactful it has been in the world of science. I think this is a great example of the importance of molecular biology on other realms of science. I hope you do discuss the controversy behind Watson's and crick's "discovery" of this theorem in later post . It sort of plays into what we talked about today in lecture, sexism in science. Personally, I do not believe that they truly deserved the credit that they received for their discovery. It would be great to be given the chance to see how you feel about the subject.
ReplyDeleteI loved your take on this! I think it is so amazing that two men laid out almost everything we go off of when studying genetics or molecular biology. I agree that the work W&C did was a key part in a lot of what we know and their work was very essential in almost every work in the science field. However, I also find it interesting how now people are stating to question everything that Watson and Crick stood for. Further research is questioning the central dogma and that is so crazy!
ReplyDeleteI'd like to read a future post about the controversy over the controversy over Francis Crick's work! As many others have mentioned, I think it's amazing to think about how their publication changed the entire field of biology. I also enjoy your writing style, while informative, it's still personal and enjoyable. I look forward to reading the rest of your posts
ReplyDeleteThis was a great topic to pick. Just Wednesday in my advanced genetics class we spent three hours talking about if we agree or disagree with the central dogma. When you look at the central dogma it is meant to show the transfer of information from DNA to RNA to protein. Yet, overtime they added a new steps, which was DNA and RNA replication. Then it was found that really you can transfer information backwards from RNA to DNA or protein to DNA. The central dogma to me was made as a baseline to the flow of information. There are so many steps that are excluded and exclusions to the original thought. We also found that the model would make a ton more sense if protein was changed to polypeptide. This is because a protein is made of either one or many polypeptides. Its just so hard to think that a model that science was based around is now being doubted.
ReplyDeleteI like how you described the central dogma as being the bed rock of molecular biology and I could not agree any more. It has served as a basis for just about everything we know to do with anything molecular biology. I think it's fascinating how the central dogma, even decades later, is still used in today's labs.
ReplyDeleteGreat start. I'm looking forward to reading more.
ReplyDelete