Biology: how the wobble effect explains the degeneracy of the genetic code

AI Thread Summary
The wobble effect allows a single tRNA to pair with multiple codons due to relaxed base pairing rules at the 5' end of the anticodon. This flexibility contributes to the degeneracy of the genetic code, where multiple codons can encode the same amino acid. Understanding the relationship between tRNA and amino acid translation clarifies how the wobble effect leads to this degeneracy. By visualizing the process, it becomes evident that the variability at the tRNA level results in a broader range of codons corresponding to each amino acid. This connection highlights the efficiency and adaptability of genetic coding in protein synthesis.
johnj7
Messages
27
Reaction score
0
Hello,
Here's a conceptual question:

The wobble effect says that 1 tRNA can be used for more than 1 anticodon, as the nucleotide near the 5' position of the anticodon does not need to follow strict base pairing rules.

The degeneracy of the genetic code refers to the fact that more than 1 codon can code for an amino acid.

I learned in class that the wobble effect explains why we have the degeneracy of the genetic code, but I can't understand why the 2 concepts are linked. I'm missing the big picture, could someone help me out and fill in the link?

thank you
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Perhaps what you're missing is how tRNA translates into amino acids?

Try diagramming the whole process. If a tRNA doesn't follow strict base pairing rules, what happens to the protein formed as a result of that?
 
It finally clicked:

1 tRNA for each AA
wobble effect in the 5' end of the anticodon means variable nucleotide in the 3' of the codon, meaning more than 1 codon for an AA

thank you!
 
I don't get how to argue it. i can prove: evolution is the ability to adapt, whether it's progression or regression from some point of view, so if evolution is not constant then animal generations couldn`t stay alive for a big amount of time because when climate is changing this generations die. but they dont. so evolution is constant. but its not an argument, right? how to fing arguments when i only prove it.. analytically, i guess it called that (this is indirectly related to biology, im...
Back
Top