
Scientists have long believed they understood how life’s genetic code evolved, but new research upends that assumption.
By analyzing ancient protein sequences, researchers discovered that early life preferred smaller amino acids and incorporated sulfur-based compounds much earlier than previously thought. This challenges long-standing experiments and opens the door to the possibility that extinct genetic codes existed before ours.
Cracking the Code of Life’s Origins
Despite awe-inspiring diversity, nearly all life on Earth — from tiny bacteria to massive blue whales — shares the same genetic code. But exactly how and when this code emerged remains a topic of scientific debate.
Sawsan Wehbi, a doctoral student in the Genetics Graduate Interdisciplinary Program at the University of Arizona, has uncovered strong evidence that challenges the widely accepted view of genetic code evolution. In a study published in PNAS, Wehbi, and her team suggest that the order in which amino acids — the fundamental building blocks of the code — were incorporated into the genetic code does not align with the long-standing “consensus” theory. Their findings call for a reevaluation of how life’s universal blueprint came to be.
The Surprisingly Strategic Evolution of the Code
“The genetic code is this amazing thing in which a string of DNA or RNA containing sequences of four nucleotides is translated into protein sequences using 20 different amino acids,” said Joanna Masel, the paper’s senior author and a professor of ecology and evolutionary biology at the U of A. “It’s a mind-bogglingly complicated process, and our code is surprisingly good. It’s nearly optimal for a whole bunch of things, and it must have evolved in stages.”
The study revealed that early life preferred smaller amino acid molecules over larger and more complex ones, which were added later, while amino acids that bind to metals joined in much earlier than previously thought. Finally, the team discovered that today’s genetic code likely came after other codes that have since gone extinct.
Reevaluating Classic Experiments
The authors argue that the current understanding of how the code evolved is flawed because it relies on misleading laboratory experiments rather than evolutionary evidence. For example, one of the cornerstones of conventional views of genetic code evolution rests on the famous Urey-Miller experiment of 1952, which attempted to simulate the conditions on early Earth that likely witnessed the origin of life.
While valuable in demonstrating that nonliving matter could give rise to life’s building blocks, including amino acids, through simple chemical reactions, the experiment’s implications have been called into question. For example, it did not yield any amino acids containing sulfur, despite the element being abundant on early Earth. As a result, sulfuric amino acids are believed to have joined the code much later. However, the result is hardly surprising, considering that sulfur was omitted from the experiment’s ingredients.
Sulfur and the Search for Alien Life
According to co-author Dante Lauretta, Regents Professor of Planetary Science and Cosmochemistry at the U of A Lunar and Planetary Laboratory, early life’s sulfur-rich nature offers insights for astrobiology, particularly in understanding the potential habitability and biosignatures of extraterrestrial environments.
“On worlds like Mars, Enceladus, and Europa, where sulfur compounds are prevalent, this could inform our search for life by highlighting analogous biogeochemical cycles or microbial metabolisms,” he said. “Such insights might refine what we look for in biosignatures, aiding the detection of lifeforms that thrive in sulfur-rich or analogous chemistries beyond Earth.”
A New Approach to Tracing Evolution
The team used a new method to analyze sequences of amino across the tree of life, all the way back to the last universal common ancestor, or LUCA, a hypothesized population of organisms that lived around 4 billion years ago and represents the shared ancestor of all life on Earth today. Unlike previous studies, which used full-length protein sequences, Wehbi and her group focused on protein domains, shorter stretches of amino acids.
“If you think about the protein being a car, a domain is like a wheel,” Wehbi said. “It’s a part that can be used in many different cars, and wheels have been around much longer than cars.”
To get a handle on when a specific amino acid likely was recruited into the genetic code, the researchers used statistical data analysis tools to compare the enrichment of each individual amino acid in protein sequences dating back to LUCA, and even farther back in time. An amino acid that shows up preferentially in ancient sequences was likely incorporated early on. Conversely, LUCA’s sequences are depleted for amino acids that were recruited later but became available by the time less ancient protein sequences emerged.
Discovering the Genetic Echoes of Extinct Codes
The team identified more than 400 families of sequences dating back to LUCA. More than 100 of them originated even earlier and had already diversified prior to LUCA. These turned out to contain more amino acids with aromatic ring structures, like tryptophan and tyrosine, despite these amino acids being late additions to our code.
“This gives hints about other genetic codes that came before ours, and which have since disappeared in the abyss of geologic time,” Masel said. “Early life seems to have liked rings.”
Reference: “Order of amino acid recruitment into the genetic code resolved by last universal common ancestor’s protein domains” by Sawsan Wehbi, Andrew Wheeler, Benoit Morel, Nandini Manepalli, Bui Quang Minh, Dante S. Lauretta and Joanna Masel, 12 December 2024, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
DOI: 10.1073/pnas.2410311121
Never miss a breakthrough: Join the SciTechDaily newsletter.
Follow us on Google and Google News.
33 Comments
Very interesting paper. Is this DNA sequencing and CODE applicable to the Protozoans and Poriferia?
In his very interesting book “The Eerie Silence” Paul Davies suggested an earlier Genesis, a second tree of Life as a precursor on early Earth. One could be related to our DNA or one that could have been completely independent to our genetic code system. It could be still out there in extreme environments as it was likely outcompeted in most places by dominant DNA. DNA could be the ultimate ‘Von Neumann-probe” an thus the dominant system for life in our part of the Galaxy. This raises an ethical question for visiting newly discovered planets since you cannot be sure about DNA being the dominant system in our part of the Galaxy; if not the dominant system then visiting a young virgin planet or even a moon like Europe, and seeding it with our germs intentionally or not will inevitably rob the planet of the opportunity of building its own Genesis of Life thus, we are then determining its fate for billions of years to come. Who are we to make such a decision? We should at least think and discuss about this issue “before” visiting a planet or moon.
In the case of Mars or Europe our arrival will most like raise havoc and trigger a mass extinction if life is there (no matter how simple) since its almost, if not actually impossible to sterilize an object or spacesuit 100%
Sorry for the typo, I meant Porifera. Specifically, the early glass sponges .
Sponges are metazoan animals. They contain connective tissue structural proteins…collagens. Collagens require 22 amino acids, not just 20. The same is true for the extensins in the Metaphytes…higher plants. That’s why the evolution of complex life took so long.
In his very interesting book “The Eerie Silence” Paul Davies suggested an earlier Genesis, a second tree of Life as a precursor on early Earth. One could be related to our DNA or one that could have been completely independent to our genetic code system. It could be still out there in extreme environments as it was likely outcompeted in most places by dominant DNA. DNA could be the ultimate ‘Von Neumann-probe” an thus the dominant system for life in our part of the Galaxy. This raises an ethical question for planets since you cannot be sure about this; if not the dominant system then visiting a young virgin planet or even a moon like Europe, and seeding it with our germs intentionally or not will inevitably rob the planet of the opportunity of building its own Genesis of Life.
In the case of Mars or Europe our arrival will most like raise havoc and trigger a mass extinction there since its almost, if not actually impossible to sterilize an object or spacesuit 100%
“…the genetic code resolved by last universal common ancestor’s protein domains.”
LUCA makes no sense. It’s the FIRST universal ancestor, not the last who had to evolve proteins derived from 20 amino acids under primordial conditions that would be different. Something like Aquifex…a hyperthermophile and microaerophile.
it’s first if you move backward in time, but the name refers to moving forward in time, it’s the last from that perspective
Didn’t Ridley Scott answer this conundrum with his movie Prometheus?
With the stars fill with light made from God ….I too think too much
experiment on human
Human were created by angels, created with earth like matters and light which is the air or spirit within every cells organs of the body…that s the oxygen. Adonai is God. Seek to do good in doing no vevil, less karma.
Since information can not be destroyed, could than mean the human sole is preserved after death? Quantum theory hints of existence of God
No, I am afraid it does not. Information conservation is like energy conservation. Energy is conserved but degrades (increasing entropy) which is why non-adiabatic processes cannot be reversed. In the same way, information degrades, giving out heat in the process . Quantum mechanics has nothing whatsoever to say about God or gods.
If actually looks like this stone egg they have in south America in a museum that is I believe suggested to be 11000 years old. It has a design in it but it is raised suggesting advanced tools were needed, it’s beveled…. The design on the creation egg is suggested to be DNA .. but it looks identical to this picture of DNA, not modern DNA .
You people ! You search the universe restlessly and endlessly, at a cost of billions of dollars, desperately looking for any explanation of life that doesn’t involve God….. (if you acknowledged His hand in creation, you would realise that you are not random free agents. You had a creator, one who holds you responsible for your beliefs and life. Scary isn’t it.)
How was your Creator created?
And how was first cell came into being by chance?
1st biological cell came into being by chance and not by Providence.
This was already stated by Celsus year 178 BC.
He said that some chance meeting of atoms has made so many species of life and that no designing Reason caused them to exist and that they did not originate from a Mind surpassing all admiration. Page 244 Contra Celsum.
Nah
string of DNA or RNA containing sequences of FOUR nucleotides is translated into protein sequences?
This really looks like a major discovery.
It’s like one of the oldest discoveries…
It was one of the oldest discoveries regarding dna/rna….
I hope everyone noticed it was a female who disco:ered this amazing proto-DNA. Congratulations, to her! Isn’t there a, award for outstanding women in one of the Sciences? I hereby nominate her for this prestigious award! This, a comment from a woman who made friends with a Mushroom Biologist tenured the University and I made the case to him, as one of his students, that he should try ingesting psychedelic mushrooms because it would give him a greater knowledge about his subject of expertise. He was 58 and had never done any drugs except for a)cool and cigarettes. I found out he was able to provide us some perfect fresh specimens very quickly. He loved the experience and will tell about it to his students in the future.
That WAS my comment. Didn’t it show up?
Human were created by angels, created with earth like matters and light which is the air or spirit within every cells organs of the body…that s the oxygen. Adonai is God. Seek to do good in doing no vevil, less karma. Angels are created by God.
What an amazing discovery! Thank you for your hard work. And please avoid wasting your valuable time with people who harass scientists. Maybe we can figure out how to encourage open mindedness and scientific thinking. All the best to your future discoveries.
This principle which orders the standard code by amino acid complexity and orderly use of sulfur was already discovered and detailed cited by a scientist in February 2021. The study can be found here: https://theethicalskeptic.com/2021/02/24/the-peculiar-schema-of-dna-codons-second-letter/
The ordering matrix can be seen here: https://i0.wp.com/theethicalskeptic.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/02/Codon-2nd-Digit-to-Amino-Nucleon-Count-2021-opaque-Alt-1-10.png?w=847&ssl=1
He or she cites that the code’s more recent amino acids were vital in the original forms of life on Earth – that is where he or she disagrees with this study.
I’m not opposed to the idea that a God created the universe, but I find it curious that the people who leave these negative comments seem so against finding out how. If someone wants to know God, why wouldn’t you want to know how they did what they did?
When you come up with a reproducible test, let us know. Theological libraries are full of books written by people trying to convince themselves using bad arguments. It’s over.
Yes people should embrace knowledge and stop feeling threatened by it. Just because we dig into our origins doesn’t mean we are trying to discount the God theory.
there is not such a god theory. that is mythology
THANK YOU
Wonderful achievement.. Many stories still waiting to be unfolded..
So it just explains a single source creator leaving call sign across creation.