Skip to content
Study Helper
Chapter 11 · Part 1 of 10
  1. Chapter overview
  2. 1Identifying the genetic material
  3. 2Nucleotides: the building blocks
  4. 3Strands and the double helix
  5. 4Discovering the double helix
  6. 5Semiconservative replication
  7. 6Opening the fork and building DNA
  8. 7Leading and lagging strands
  9. 8Accuracy and the ends of chromosomes
  10. 9Packing DNA into nucleosomes and loops
  11. 10Organizing and condensing chromosomes

Identifying the genetic material

0:00 / 7:36
1.0×

Every living thing carries a set of instructions for building and running its body. Today we know those instructions are written in DNA, but for decades most scientists were betting on protein. Settling the question took a clear list of what hereditary instructions must do, plus a few clever experiments with bacteria.

Four jobs of the genetic material

The substance that carries hereditary instructions from one generation to the next is the genetic material. Whatever molecule plays that role has to meet four requirements:

  1. Information. It holds the instructions needed to build a whole organism, from a fertilized egg to an adult.
  2. Replication. It can be copied accurately. Copying DNA is called DNA replication.
  3. Transmission. Once copied, it can be passed from parent to offspring, and from cell to cell when a cell divides.
  4. Variation. Differences in it explain why individuals of a species differ, and why species differ from each other.

Why protein looked like the better bet

By the early 1900s, researchers had traced inheritance to chromosomes, the threadlike structures in cells that are passed on when cells divide. Chromosomes contain two main kinds of large molecules: proteins and DNA.

Protein seemed the obvious choice. Proteins are built from 20 different amino acids and do an enormous range of jobs, so they looked complex enough to encode an organism. DNA is built from only four kinds of repeating units (nucleotides, covered in the next segment), so it looked too simple. Experiments with bacteria overturned that expectation.

Griffith: something can transform bacteria

In the late 1920s, Frederick Griffith worked with two strains (genetically distinct lines) of the bacterium Streptococcus pneumoniae:

Griffith injected mice with different combinations and checked whether they died and whether living bacteria turned up in their blood.

What was injected Mouse Living bacteria in the blood
Live type S Died Type S
Live type R Survived None
Heat-killed type S Survived None
Live type R + heat-killed type S Died Type S

The last row was the surprise. Neither ingredient could kill a mouse alone, yet together they did, and the mouse’s blood held living type S bacteria. Something from the dead S cells had converted the living R cells into S cells. Griffith called this conversion transformation and named the unknown substance the transformation principle.

The result fits all four requirements. The transformed bacteria gained the information to build a capsule. That ability was replicated and transmitted to their offspring as they multiplied in the mouse. And the two strains already showed variation in this trait.

Avery, MacLeod, and McCarty: the answer is DNA

In the 1940s, Oswald Avery, Colin MacLeod, and Maclyn McCarty set out to identify the transformation principle. They separated type S cells into their main classes of large molecules (proteins, DNA, and RNA) and tested each class on type R bacteria. Only the purified DNA turned type R into type S.

A skeptic could object that the DNA sample might carry traces of protein or RNA, and that a contaminant did the transforming. So the team treated portions of the DNA extract with enzymes that each destroy one kind of molecule:

Extract treated with Destroys Did transformation still happen?
Nothing added (nothing) Yes
Protease Protein Yes
RNase RNA Yes
DNase DNA No

As a control, type R cells given no extract at all never became type S.

Check yourselfIn the Avery, MacLeod, and McCarty experiment, why wasn’t it enough to show that a DNA extract could transform type R bacteria?

The extract might not have been perfectly pure, so a small amount of contaminating protein or RNA could have been the real transforming substance. Treating the extract with protease or RNase didn’t stop transformation, but DNase did, which ruled out the contaminants and pointed to DNA.

Check yourselfSome bacteria survive the antibiotic tetracycline and others don’t. How could you show that resistance is carried in the resistant strain’s DNA?

Purify DNA from the resistant strain and mix it with sensitive bacteria, with separate batches treated with protease, RNase, or DNase. Then grow the cells on plates containing tetracycline. If DNA carries the trait, resistant colonies appear in every batch except the DNase one.

Practice questions

  1. 1 of 4

    Before a bacterium divides, it copies its genetic material, and each daughter cell receives one copy. Handing a copy to each daughter cell fulfills which requirement of the genetic material?

  2. 2 of 4

    A researcher finds a molecule that holds the instructions for building an organism and differs from species to species, but cells cannot make accurate copies of it. Which requirement for the genetic material does it fail?

  3. 3 of 4

    Avery, MacLeod, and McCarty treated portions of their DNA extract with protease, RNase, or DNase before mixing it with type R bacteria. What was the purpose of these treatments?

  4. 4 of 4

    Suppose the transforming substance in the Avery, MacLeod, and McCarty experiment had actually been protein. Which result would they have seen?