Can someone please explain this dot point,
analyse information from secondary sources to outline the evidence that led to Beadle and Tatum’s ‘one gene – one protein’ hypothesis and to explain why this was altered to the ‘one gene – one polypeptide’ hypothesis
For this dot point, its good to know that in the early 20th century, biologists were
unsure about the chemical nature of hereditary material - whether it was proteins or DNA.
George Beadle and Edward Tatum hypothesised that one GENE produced one enzyme (pretty much that DNA/genes were indeed hereditary material).
To prove their hypothesis, they conducted an experiment using a bread mould called
Neurospora crassa.
- They grew the
Neurospora crassa mould on a minimal medium (sugars, salts and vitamins) in test tubes.
- The spores of the mould were then exposed to x-ray radiation which INDUCED mutations (changed sequence of DNA).
- They then found that some mutant strains of the mould could not produce an amino acid essential for its survival, and could not grow.
So from this; they hypothesised that the x-ray mutated the gene that coded for the particular enzyme which was responsible for producing the amino acid (that was no longer produced). Hence, showing that ONE GENE was responsible for the production of ONE ENZYME.
Their hypothesis was altered to 'one gene - one polypeptide' because it was found that genes code for some proteins that dont become enzymes, and proteins are made up of one or more polypeptides.
So now we know that ONE GENE codes for ONE ENZYME.
I hope I just made sense then lol smh