We describe a very accurate addition (called structure X here) to the B-DNA dodecamer family of X-ray structures. Our results confirm the observation of Drew and Dickerson [(1981) J. Mol. Biol. 151, 535-556] that the spine of hydration in AT tract DNA is two layers deep. However, our results suggest that the primary spine is partially occupied by sodium ions. We suggest that many sequence-dependent features of DNA conformation are mediated by site specific binding of cations. For example, preferential localization of cations, as described here within the minor groove of structure X, is probably the structural origin of AT tract bending and groove narrowing. The secondary spine, which does not interact directly with the DNA, is as geometrically regular as the primary spine, providing a model for transmission of sequence information into solvent regions. A fully hydrated magnesium ion located in the major groove of structure X appears to pull cytosine bases partially out from the helical stack, exposing pi-systems to partial positive charges of the magnesium ion and its outer sphere. A partially ordered spermine molecule is located within the major groove of structure X. Dodecamer structures are derived from crystals of [d(CGCGAATTCGCG)]2 in space group P212121 (a = 25 A, b = 40 A, and c = 66 A). On average, those crystals diffracted to around 2.5 A resolution with 2500 unique reflections. Structure X, with the same space group, DNA sequence, and crystal form as the "Dickerson dodecamer", is refined against a complete, low-temperature, 1.4 A resolution data set, with over 11000 reflections. Structure X appears to be conformationally more ordered than previous structures, suggesting that at least a portion of the conformational heterogeneity previously attributed to DNA sequence in fact arises from experimental error.

The anticancer drugs adriamycin and daunomycin have each been crystallized with the DNA sequence d(CGATCG) and the three-dimensional structures of the complexes solved at 1.7- and 1.5-A resolution, respectively. These antitumor drugs have significantly different clinical properties, yet they differ chemically by only the additional hydroxyl at C14 of adriamycin. In these complexes the chromophore is intercalated at the CpG steps at either end of the DNA helix with the amino sugar extended into the minor groove. Solution of the structure of daunomycin bound to d(CGATCG) has made it possible to compare it with the previously reported structure of daunomycin bound to d(CGTACG). Although the two daunomycin complexes are similar, there is an interesting sequence dependence of the binding of the amino sugar to the A-T base pair outside the intercalation site. The complex of daunomycin with d(CGATCG) has tighter binding than the complex with d(CGTACG), leading us to infer a sequence preference in the binding of this anthracycline drug. The structures of daunomycin and adriamycin with d(CGATCG) are very similar. However, there are additional solvent interactions with the adriamycin C14 hydroxyl linking it to the DNA. Surprisingly, under the influence of the altered solvation, there is considerable difference in the conformation of spermine in these two complexes. The observed changes in the overall structures of the ternary complexes amplify the small chemical differences between these two antibiotics and provide a possible explanation for the significantly different clinical activities of these important drugs.

A consensus classification and nomenclature are defined for RNA backbone structure using all of the backbone torsion angles. By a consensus of several independent analysis methods, 46 discrete conformers are identified as suitably clustered in a qualityfiltered, multidimensional dihedral angle distribution. Most of these conformers represent identifiable features or roles within RNA structures. The conformers are given two-character names that reflect the seven-angle dezabgd combinations empirically found favorable for the sugar-to-sugar ''suite'' unit within which the angle correlations are strongest (e.g., 1a for A-form, 5z for the start of S-motifs). Since the half-nucleotides are specified by a number for dez and a lowercase letter for abgd, this modular system can also be parsed to describe traditional nucleotide units (e.g., a1) or the dinucleotides (e.g., a1a1) that are especially useful at the level of crystallographic map fitting. This nomenclature can also be written as a string with two-character suite names between the uppercase letters of the base sequence (N1aG1gN1aR1aA1cN1a for a GNRA tetraloop), facilitating bioinformatic comparisons. Cluster means, standard deviations, coordinates, and examples are made available, as well as the Suitename software that assigns suite conformer names and conformer match quality (suiteness) from atomic coordinates. The RNA Ontology Consortium will combine this new backbone system with others that define base pairs, base-stacking, and hydrogen-bond relationships to provide a full description of RNA structural motifs.

We present a molecular-level model for the origin and evolution of the translation system, using a 3D comparative method. In this model, the ribosome evolved by accretion, recursively adding expansion segments, iteratively growing, subsuming, and freezing the rRNA. Functions of expansion segments in the ancestral ribosome are assigned by correspondence with their functions in the extant ribosome. The model explains the evolution of the large ribosomal subunit, the small ribosomal subunit, tRNA, and mRNA. Prokaryotic ribosomes evolved in six phases, sequentially acquiring capabilities for RNA folding, catalysis, subunit association, correlated evolution, decoding, energy-driven translocation, and surface proteinization. Two additional phases exclusive to eukaryotes led to tentacle-like rRNA expansions. In this model, ribosomal proteinization was a driving force for the broad adoption of proteins in other biological processes. The exit tunnel was clearly a central theme of all phases of ribosomal evolution and was continuously extended and rigidified. In the primitive noncoding ribosome, proto-mRNA and the small ribosomal subunit acted as cofactors, positioning the activated ends of tRNAs within the peptidyl transferase center. This association linked the evolution of the large and small ribosomal subunits, protomRNA, and tRNA.RNA evolution | translation | origin of life | A-minor interactions T he ribosome retains interpretable molecular records of a world of primordial molecules (1) from around 4 billion years ago (2-9). The records are maintained in rRNA secondary and 3D structures, which are fully conserved throughout the tree of life, and in rRNA sequences, which are more variable (SI Appendix, Fig. S1). Here we use information within ribosomes from each major branch of the tree of life to reconstruct much of the emergence of the universal translational machinery. Large Ribosomal Subunit EvolutionPreviously, we reported a 3D comparative method that revealed a molecular level chronology of the evolution of the large ribosomal subunit (LSU) rRNA (10). Insertion fingerprints are evident when comparing 3D structures of LSU rRNAs of various sizes from various species. These insertion fingerprints mark sites where rRNA expands, recording growth steps on a molecular level.Within the common core of the LSU rRNA, insertion fingerprints were used to identify ancient growth sites. We showed that insertion fingerprints provide a roadmap from the first steps in the formation of the peptidyl transferase center (PTC) (10) located in the ancient heart of the LSU (2-6), culminating in the common core.Small Ribosomal Subunit, LSU, tRNA, and mRNA Evolution Here, using the 3D comparative method, we establish a comprehensive and coherent model for the evolution of the entire ribosome. This model covers the LSU rRNA, small ribosomal subunit (SSU) rRNA, tRNA, and mRNA. The evolution of each of these components is reconciled at the molecular level to a common chronology. This evolutionary model, which we call the "accretion model," ...

The origins and evolution of the ribosome, 3-4 billion years ago, remain imprinted in the biochemistry of extant life and in the structure of the ribosome. Processes of ribosomal RNA (rRNA) expansion can be "observed" by comparing 3D rRNA structures of bacteria (small), yeast (medium), and metazoans (large). rRNA size correlates well with species complexity. Differences in ribosomes across species reveal that rRNA expansion segments have been added to rRNAs without perturbing the preexisting core. Here we show that rRNA growth occurs by a limited number of processes that include inserting a branch helix onto a preexisting trunk helix and elongation of a helix. rRNA expansions can leave distinctive atomic resolution fingerprints, which we call "insertion fingerprints." Observation of insertion fingerprints in the ribosomal common core allows identification of probable ancestral expansion segments. Conceptually reversing these expansions allows extrapolation backward in time to generate models of primordial ribosomes. The approach presented here provides insight to the structure of pre-last universal common ancestor rRNAs and the subsequent expansions that shaped the peptidyl transferase center and the conserved core. We infer distinct phases of ribosomal evolution through which ribosomal particles evolve, acquiring coding and translocation, and extending and elaborating the exit tunnel.RNA evolution | C value | origin of life | translation | phylogeny T he translation system, one of life's universal processes, synthesizes all coded protein in living systems. Our understanding of translation has advanced over the last decade and a half with the explosion in sequencing data and by the determination of 3D structures (1-4). X-ray crystallography and cryoelectron microscopy (cryo-EM) have provided atomic resolution structures of ribosomes from all three domains of life. Eukaryotic ribosomal structures are now available from protists (5), fungi (6), plants (7), insects, and humans (8). Here we describe an atomic level model of the evolution of ribosomal RNA (rRNA) from the large ribosomal subunit (LSU). Our evolutionary model is grounded in patterns of rRNA growth in relatively recent ribosomal expansions, for which there is an extensive, atomicresolution record.The common core LSU rRNA (9, 10), which is approximated here by the rRNA of Escherichia coli, is conserved over the entire phylogenetic tree, in sequence, and especially in secondary structure (11) and 3D structure (12). By contrast, the surface regions and the sizes of ribosomes are variable (13,14). Most of the size variability is found in eukaryotic LSUs (Fig. 1). The integrated rRNA size in the LSU follows the trend Bacteria ≤ Archaea < Eukarya. The added rRNA in eukaryotes interacts with eukaryotic-specific proteins (5, 8, 9) (SI Appendix, Fig. S1 and Dataset S1).Bacterial and archaeal LSU rRNAs are composed entirely of the common core, with only subtle deviations from it. By contrast, eukaryotic LSU rRNAs are expanded beyond the common core. Sacccharomyce...