Jim Taylor
Major Contributor
- Joined
- Apr 7, 2024
- Messages
- 1,213
- Likes
- 3,923
I realize it's a poor, nay, inaccurate analogybut the "life sciences" don't work like that.
It's probably a good thing, too, since the harder we look, the weirder things we find.
Cf., e.g., Nobel laureate Carolyn Bertozzi (first one in my line o'work) who stumbled upon (in the best Pasteur-esque sense of the notion!) glycosylated RNA a few years back.
Whoda thunk it?
![]()
Small RNAs are modified with N-glycans and displayed on the surface of living cells - PubMed
Glycans modify lipids and proteins to mediate inter- and intramolecular interactions across all domains of life. RNA is not thought to be a major target of glycosylation. Here, we challenge this view with evidence that mammals use RNA as a third scaffold for glycosylation. Using a battery of...pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
Or retroviruses, not to mention prions, which sort of blew Crick's charmingly straightforward "central dogma" out of the water. Well... forced agonizing reappraisal of it, at any rate.![]()
I
Last edited:
but the "life sciences" don't work like that.