Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

Is there an evolutionary purpose/advantage of having uracil in RNA

rather than thymine (as seen in DNA)?

 

Why does only thymine get replaced in RNA?

 

 

-cheers

Posted

I think that was answered a couple of times already. Short answer: DNA does have thymine instead of uracil (you actually have to see it that way) because thymine (which is basically methylated uracil) ensures higher fidelity in DNA as compared to using uracil (which is more promiscuous with regards to base pairing, in addition cytosine can deaminate to uracil, which, if uracil instead of thymine was used in DNA, would lead to a mutation).

Fidelity is less a problem in RNA than in DNA.

Posted

I would expect that uracil RNA would be slightly more flexible than thymine RNA, but I am not sure. There are ways to calculate that, though, if you really wanted.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.