Although theories regarding the role of sequence-specific DNA resonance in biology have abounded for over 40 years, the published evidence for it is lacking. Here, the authors reasoned that for sustained resonance signaling, the number of oscillating DNA sequences per genome should be exceptionally high and that, therefore, genomic repeats of various sizes are good candidates for serving as resonators. Moreover, it was suggested that for the two DNA sequences to resonate, they do not necessarily have to be identical. Therefore, the existence of sequences differing in the primary sequence but having similar resonating sub-structures was proposed. It was hypothesized that such sequences, named HIDERs, would be enriched in the genomes of multicellular species. Specifically, it was hypothesized that delocalized electron clouds of purine-pyrimidine sequences could serve as the basis of HIDERs. The consequent genomic analysis confirmed the enrichment of purine-pyrimidine HIDERs in a few selected genomes of mammals, an insect, and a plant, compared to randomized sequence controls. Similarly, it was suggested that hypothetical delocalized proton clouds of the hydrogen bonds of multiple stacked bases could serve as sequence-dependent hydrogen-bond-based HIDERs. Similarly, the enrichment of such HIDERs was observed. It is suggested that these enrichments are the first evidence in support of sequence-specific resonance signaling in the genome.
Comments: 11 Pages.
[v1] 2019-08-13 14:33:35
Unique-IP document downloads: 2 times
Vixra.org is a pre-print repository rather than a journal. Articles hosted may not yet have been verified by peer-review and should be treated as preliminary. In particular, anything that appears to include financial or legal advice or proposed medical treatments should be treated with due caution. Vixra.org will not be responsible for any consequences of actions that result from any form of use of any documents on this website.
Add your own feedback and questions here:
You are equally welcome to be positive or negative about any paper but please be polite. If you are being critical you must mention at least one specific error, otherwise your comment will be deleted as unhelpful.