Journal
JOURNAL OF THEORETICAL BIOLOGY
Volume 480, Issue -, Pages 99-103Publisher
ACADEMIC PRESS LTD- ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jtbi.2019.07.020
Keywords
Molecular fossils; Ancient tRNA genes; Split tRNA genes; tRNA models
Categories
Ask authors/readers for more resources
I respond to criticisms raised by Kim et al. (2018) to my model concerning the origin of the tRNA molecule. In particular, their model would hypothesize the tRNA originated due to the ligation of three hairpin structures followed by two deletions, while my model predicts that this molecule derived from the assembly of only two hairpin-like structures. Thus, using the Ockham razor, the latter model would be chosen because it required fewer hypotheses. Furthermore, the predictions on homology between the different regions of the tRNA molecule as predicted by my model would be statistically more significant than those predicted by their model. Moreover, it would be above all the existence of molecular fossils - i.e. the split tRNA genes - to corroborate the model of the assembly of only two hairpins. These fossils would be completely absent from the Kim et al. (2018) model. (C) 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Authors
I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.
Reviews
Recommended
No Data Available