What is the difference between RNA and DNA?

[aommaster]

Well, i know it is a very simple question. But, i never was told what is their difference

 

Well, all i know is that:

 

DNA: De-oxy ribo nucleic acid

 

RNA: Ribo nucleic acid (correct?)

 

What else can u guys tell me about it?

[Crash]

Well RNA is single stranded and it dosent have Thymaine , instead it has Uracil (U). are the most obvious

[aommaster]

so, RNA is not a double helix?

[iglak]

and in organisms that have DNA, RNA is used to translate DNA into protiens

[aommaster]

so.... we use RNA to make them into proteins?

[Hades]

basically. rna copies the code off dna and sends it to ribosomes and such

[aommaster]

oh ok. Thanx alot! That cleared up my confusion!

[Crash]

tis is done so( because) DNA dosent leave the cell, (some say its to large to) because it might get destroyed.

I think its Ribose not ribo.

After the T-RNA comes to meet the RNA they start forming polypeptide chains which eventually leads to proteins or new cells, i forgot what M-RNA does.

[Skye]

mRNA is what is transcribed by RNA polymerases from your DNA, which is then translated into proteins by ribosomes and tRNA.

[Crash]

ah right thnx, i always get protein synthesis confused with DNA replication

[fafalone]

aommaster said in post # :

so, RNA is not a double helix?

 

No, only in a handful of rare viruses.

[Skye]

The double stranded RNA viruses are called reoviruses, they aren't that rare as they are the main cause of diarrheoa :/

[aommaster]

whoa! thanx alot for the facts guys. Really helpful!

[flexbusterman]

i was reading the posts...RNA does form double strands, actually these are becoming more and more important regarding the understanding of our evolution (complex RNA structures can take on a variety of functions traditionally assigned to proteins). actually, i am working with something that seems to suggest that the 3' end of translated RNA can have an autoregulatory function on that species of RNA but i have yet to begin work on this project. it has been shown that the untranslated region upstream of promoters can have a similar effect on autogenous RNA so why not the translated acid corresponding to the C' of the protein???

[Fluent in Lies]

RNA or Riboflavicdisolenoidalnutronanaphase as it is less commonly know, is an active ingreediant in the production of Corvus Corax . One must not (and it is easily done) mistake RNA for DNA (as there is only one character different it may be easy for people with visualdispersive or cognoprocessal imparement to confuse the two). DNA is the brand name for the solvute used to disintegrate the eggs in Corvus production.

 

Hope this helps,

[YT2095]

Evidence?

 

[edit] and you`ll have nothing to CROW about either, you`ve been spotted!

 

[Fluent in Lies]

I need not answer, for i am safe in my correctness and to quote the insightful Mrs. Landers :

 

"No one has the right to destroy another person's belief by demanding empirical evidence."

[YT2095]

ok fine, gimme just ONE scrap of evidence then

 

c`mon, the least ya can do is throw me a bone!

[Fluent in Lies]

ok here is a picture from the companies website, which oncidently seems to be down at the moment. I think they may be experencing server problems.

[YT2095]

and that proves/demonstrates what....?

[Fluent in Lies]

that proves and demonstrates that:

 

there is a real company that produces real products with the name 'solvute'

 

that therfore validifies at leat part of my original statement

 

and hence your request for, and i quote "ONE scrap of evidence" has been actualised.

[Sayonara]

Fluent in Lies said in post # :

ok here is a picture from the companies website, which oncidently seems to be down at the moment. I think they may be experencing server problems.

Or maybe it is because that's not a registered domain?

[flexbusterman]

the previous few post are pretty funny, but isnt the original question referring to the stuff found inside living cells and not to commercial products??:stupid:

[Dov]

(1) A not-too-old RNA review should not be missed by RNA fans:

 

http://www.nature.com/horizon/rna/background.html

 

=====================================================

(2) Structural analysis of components of the complex that generates mRNA (m=messanger) templates from pre-RNA molecules, the so-called spliceosome, suggests that it is RNA molecules rather than proteins in the complex that catalyze the reaction, report US biophysicists.

 

The spliceosome oversees the process of alternative splicing, which involves cutting out non-coding portions from the pre-mRNAs, selecting from various alternative coding segments, and sticking the fragments back together to create mature mRNAs. It's a process that enables approximately 40,000 human genes to produce the 100,000 proteins found in human cells, explains Samuel Butcher, assistant professor in the Biochemistry Department at the University of Wisconsin at Madison.

 

======================

 

(3) Per my "armchair scientist" conception of Evolution, even prior to

any browsing through the above review, each RNA is both a basic pre-DNA

archaic edition of a DNA gene and the DNA's tool. In pre-DNA

life the RNAs lived independently and/or cooperatively with other RNAs.

With passage of time more complex DNA life evolved from the archaic RNA

genes into novel symbiotically-associated genes, and the original basic primary RNA forms have been retained as tools for their consequent DNA edition...

===========================

 

This is my gut feeling...

[flexbusterman]

so why did more complex life arise after the swith to dna from rna?

the reason obviously is that dna is more stable inthe enviornment. a more profound question is what came first...the prtein or the rna? if you believe in a primordial soup, for which there is no evidence for, how did the rna come to code for protein? these are questions i would like to have seen anwered in my lifetime!