'closely related' is relative, mitochondrial DNA is fairly conservative Replacing mitochondrial DNA might be possible but afaik hasn't been accomplished to date
All of those things are true but nonetheless, the mitochondrion sends RNA to the ribosome just like the nucleus does. It's not 100% clear that moving the DNA to the nucleus would disrupt anything. I'm glad the experiments are being done.
-
-
No, it doesn't. Mitochondria code for their own ribosomes, which are extremely different from nuclear ribosomes.
-
Mitochondria *contain* their own ribosomes. Are their codons in the 13 mitochondrial genes, or the more than 1000 which have already migrated to the nucleus?
-
it does seem vanishingly unlikely that it would transport only the correct RNA across its membrane, and that the cytosomal ribosome would ignore it. So, okay, hard problem.
-
The ribosomal RNAs are transcribed from mitochondrial DNA, the ribosomal proteins are encoded in nuclear DNA.
-
"in vertebrates, all mitochondrial ribosomal proteins are coded and synthesised outside the organelle." cit. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0005272898001613 …
-
The difference in codon interpretation is exciting because it may mean that, say, prepending a stop codon right after the primer might cause an extra tryptophan in the mitochondrion but prevent transcription in the cytosome.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
I mean it seems likely. Maybe the remaining genes just didn't random-walk over to the nucleus, or maybe there's some reason they have to live in the mitochondria. One way to find out
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.