Is DNA Animation Truly Real-Time?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the accuracy of a DNA animation that claims to depict real-time processes in molecular biology, specifically focusing on gene transcription and protein translation. Participants explore the implications of molecular scale and motion, as well as the potential discrepancies between animation and actual biological processes.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants question the claim that the animation is in real-time, suggesting that actual molecular processes occur much faster due to the minuscule size of molecules.
  • One participant notes that transcription takes about 10 minutes per gene and protein translation takes around 1 minute per protein, referencing a scientific article.
  • Another participant argues that at one million times magnification, the time for gene transcription would be equivalent to 20 years, suggesting that random thermal motion slows down molecular processes.
  • There is a debate about the relevance of magnification to the speed of molecular processes, with some asserting that closer proximity of molecules would lead to faster assembly, while others argue that magnification is merely an optical effect and does not influence physical speed.
  • Participants express uncertainty about the accuracy of the animation's speed, with some noting that the depiction of gene transcription appears quick and referencing Brownian motion as a possible explanation for molecular vibrations.
  • One participant highlights that enzymes typically release molecules into the cytoplasm, allowing random thermal motion to transport them, which may not be the fastest method but is cost-effective.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the relationship between magnification and molecular speed, and multiple competing views remain regarding the accuracy of the animation's representation of real-time processes.

Contextual Notes

Some claims depend on specific definitions of magnification and speed, and there are unresolved assumptions about the nature of molecular motion and the accuracy of the animation.

Hornbein
Gold Member
Messages
3,791
Reaction score
3,061


Nicely done. Supercomputer?

They say the animation is real time but wouldn't the real thing be much quicker?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: pinball1970
Biology news on Phys.org
Hornbein said:
They say the animation is real time but wouldn't the real thing be much quicker?
Why's that?
 
Drakkith said:
Why's that?
Because molecules are minuscule. Things happen much faster way down there.
 
Hornbein said:
Because molecules are minuscule. Things happen much faster way down there.
Without a clear indication of how fast things are happening in the video I can't say anything either way. The speed looked plausible to my mostly untrained eye but that doesn't mean much.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: jim mcnamara
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: DeBangis21 and Drakkith
And keep in mind that the cell can do things to different parts of the DNA at the same time. It's not limited to translating one protein at a time for example.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Frabjous
Frabjous said:
If I look at this, it says that transcription takes about 10min/gene and that protein translation takes around 1min/protein (for mammalian cell lines)
https://www.cell.com/cell/pdf/S0092-8674(16)30208-2.pdf
At one million times magnification that's equivalent to 20 years for a gene transcription. I guess that's the cellular equivalent of building a cathedral. Depending so heavily on random thermal motion slows things down. Two years for protein translation, no wonder they need so many copies of everything in order to get anything done.

I once had a little group of a dozen unusual red beetles appear in my Bali kitchen. Their motion appeared to be completely random. But they moved as a group. Very slowly. It took them an hour to get across the living room. So about 1% of what they did was purposeful.
 
Hornbein said:
At one million times magnification that's equivalent to 20 years for a gene transcription.
What does magnification have to do with the time it takes for transcription?
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: BillTre
Drakkith said:
What does magnification have to do with the time it takes for transcription?
It is a measure of how small the things in question actually are. One million times smaller than what we see on the screen. Things are a million times closer together and weigh a quintillion times less than things of the size we see on the screen. So I'd expect construction to go a million times faster. If it were purposeful I suppose it would. So depending so heavily on random thermal motion slows things down a million times. That's the rough idea.
 
  • #10
Hornbein said:
It is a measure of how small the things in question actually are. One million times smaller than what we see on the screen. Things are a million times closer together and weigh a quintillion times less than things of the size we see on the screen. So I'd expect construction to go a million times faster.
That's not how it works. Magnification has nothing to do with how fast something takes.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: BillTre
  • #11
Drakkith said:
That's not how it works. Magnification has nothing to do with how fast something takes.
Oh come on. If two things are a million times closer together, they can be assembled much more quickly. I'm not going to respond to this bald assertion again.
 
  • #12
Hornbein said:
Oh come on. If two things are a million times closer together, they can be assembled much more quickly. I'm not going to respond to this bald assertion again.
What? Magnification is an optical effect, not a physical one. If I zoom in on some ants with my camera they don't suddenly slow down because they are bigger.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: BillTre
  • #13
Hornbein said:


Nicely done. Supercomputer?

They say the animation is real time but wouldn't the real thing be much quicker?

I liked the video, I have no idea how accurate it is in terms of speed.

Gene transcription looks pretty quick, see the molecules whizzing past in the cytoplasm?

I was wondering why everything was vibrating like that then remembered Brownian motion, I suppose that is it?

I assume all the colours are added.

I loved the sounds, who noticed the Bee sound during epigenetic tagging!
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Drakkith
  • #14
pinball1970 said:
I liked the video, I have no idea how accurate it is in terms of speed.

Gene transcription looks pretty quick, see the molecules whizzing past in the cytoplasm?

I was wondering why everything was vibrating like that then remembered Brownian motion, I suppose that is it?

I assume all the colours are added.

I loved the sounds, who noticed the Bee sound during epigenetic tagging!
Yep, Brownian motion all right. Colors added just to help distinguish what's what.

When an enzyme produces a molecule it usually just dumps it into the cytoplasm and lets random thermal motion carry it to any site that needs it. It may not be the quickest but the molecule gets there complete free of charge. Costs not one iota.
 
  • #15
Hornbein said:
If two things are a million times closer together
Separation is not magnification - length is the relevant unit.
 

Similar threads

Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
8K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
4K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
5K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K