RNA May 'Run' Genetic Coding

leonbrooks writes "First a Stanford Medicine Magazine article speaks about RNA 'produced by plants that turn genes on and off', and now a Science Magazine issue says 'For a long time, RNA has lived in the shadow of its more famous chemical cousin DNA and of the proteins that supposedly took over RNA's functions in the transition from the 'RNA world' to the modern one. The shadow cast has been so deep that a whole universe [of RNA] has remained hidden from view, until recently' and speaks of 'an order of magnitude more transcripts than genes', suggesting that more actual coding is done through RNA than DNA. Is everything we know about genetics off-base? (no pun intended)"

Comments

WTF?

[Randseed]

RNA can't code for more than DNA, because the RNA is produced from the DNA. DNA -> RNA -> protein. Now, some RNA is catalytically active, and some of it kicks back and exercises regulatory functions, and that kind of thing, but the RNA doesn't code for anything itself.

If the /. editor is trying to claim that RNA codes for things in and of itself, then that opens an interesting possibility: Mainly that RNA, in addition to DNA, must be transferred to produce a clone (for example) because some of the RNA is unique and not coded for by DNA.

And no, I didn't RTFA because I was afraid I might barf after reading the Slashdot leader.