đ
Biotechnology: Crash Course History of Science #40 - YouTube
Channel: CrashCourse
[5]
As some scientists worked to control life
at the scale of global agriculture, others
[9]
worked in a different direction.
[11]
The mid-1900s was a period of reexamination
of one of our big questions: what, exactly,
[16]
is life?
[17]
Let's talk DNA and Biotech!!!
[21]
[Intro Music Plays]
[29]
Although the story is complex, itâs often
simplified to one big âdiscoveryâ of DNA
[34]
made in 1953 by two dudes who won Nobels.
[37]
⊠There were other people involved.
[40]
By the 1940s, researchers knew that the cell
nucleus contained thread-shaped structures
[44]
called chromosomes that played a critical
role in cell division.
[49]
Chromosomes seemed to be made of a mixture
of protein and other stuff.
[53]
And this other key stuff was a molecule made
out of carbon, hydrogen, nitrogen, and phosphorus.
[59]
This was deoxyribonucleic acid, or DNA.
[62]
Isolated, DNA looks kind of like white powder.
[65]
But no one knew DNAâs structure.
[68]
A moleculeâs structureâthe way it fits
togetherâtells us about how it works, and
[72]
maybe how to redesign it.
[74]
In 1944, Austrian physicist Erwin Schrödingerâthe
cat guyâpublished a short book called What
[80]
is Life?, reviewing this deceptively simple
question.
[84]
Scientists knew that there must be a unit
of heredity, the âgene,â that must be
[88]
part of the chromosomes.
[90]
Schrödinger examined the laws of physics,
determining that the gene must be very small,
[94]
only a few thousand atoms in size.
[97]
It must vary.
[98]
Yet it must be orderly and not give rise to
too many mutations.
[102]
So Schrödinger threw down the challenge:
how does this âgeneâ physically encode
[107]
the information that defines life?
[109]
He argued that this was among the most interesting
questions facing science.
[113]
And he suggested that one of the people best
poised to answer it was biophysicist Max DelbrĂŒck.
[119]
DelbrĂŒck ran a loosely organized network
of researchers at Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory,
[124]
Caltech, and elsewhere called the Phage Group.
[127]
The Group worked with viruses that parasite
bacteria, called bacteriophages.
[132]
Viruses are just nucleic acids in little protein
robot-bodies.
[134]
The Phage Group did important work on how
life works at a small scale, using radioactive
[140]
tracers inside viruses.
[142]
But even they couldnât tell if it was the
DNA part or the protein part of the virus
[147]
that took over the bacterium.
[148]
And no one could explain how either physically
encoded information.
[152]
So by 1950, the pressure to understand DNA
was on⊠even though not everyone was convinced
[158]
that DNA was the physical substrate of heredity
at all!
[161]
Despite this uncertainty, scientists set out
to win this race.
[165]
The most famous was American chemist Linus
Paulingâwho went on to join the short list
[169]
of people with two Nobel Prizes!
[171]
Pauling was an obvious choice because in 1951
he characterized the alpha helix structure
[176]
of common proteins.
[178]
He used an empirical approach, X-ray crystallography:
X-raysâwhich have wavelengths much smaller
[184]
than visible lightâpierce molecules, then
scatter, making a diffraction pattern that
[188]
reveals information about the moleculeâs
shape.
[191]
Crystallography is an incredibly finicky technique.
[194]
But Pauling correctly showed how common proteins
fold up into elegant little spirals.
[199]
He then decided to tackle DNAâguessing incorrectly
that it was made up of three helices.
[204]
Also in the race was James Watson, a brilliant,
young, and brash American biochemist.
[209]
âBrashâ is the historian's euphemism for
âsexist jerk.â
[213]
He was a member of the Phage Group and a fan
of Schrödingerâs What is Life?
[217]
Watson traveled to the University of Cambridgeâs
Cavendish Laboratory.
[220]
There, he partnered with English biophysicist
Francis Crick, who became one of the great
[225]
theorists of modern biology.
[227]
Watson and Crickâs approach was modeling
DNAâasking which atoms went where, based
[233]
on the laws of chemistry and physics.
[234]
Now, if you read Watsonâs best-selling autobiography,
The Double Helix, youâd think he and Crick
[240]
did the heavy lifting in discovering the structure
of DNA.
[243]
You wouldnât know that Harvard University
Press refused to publish his book because
[247]
of its potentially libelous characterization
of their collaborators!
[251]
ThoughtBubble, shows us another side of the
story:
[253]
Watson cast English chemist Rosalind Franklin
[256]
as the villain.
[257]
Franklin worked at Kingâs College London,
not the Cavendish.
[260]
And she was Jewish.
[262]
And she was⊠also⊠a woman.
[264]
She also went to a talk by Watson and Crick
and tore apart their suggested model of DNA.
[269]
The head of the Cavendish was humiliated, forbidding them from more DNA modeling.
[273]
You see, Franklin was a leading expert in
[276]
X-ray crystallography.
[277]
Her photographs had shown that there were
two forms of DNA: A, which is dry and crystalline,
[282]
and B, which is wetâhow DNA looks in living
cells.
[286]
This discovery was a fundamental step in understanding
DNA.
[289]
(We now know there is a third form, Z-DNA.)
[293]
Then in 1952, Franklin made one of the most
famous photographs in science: Photo 51.
[298]
It shows a clear âXâ patternâthe signature
of a helix, or spiral-stair shape.
[303]
But Franklin didnât know that the deputy
director of her lab,
[306]
Maurice Wilkins, was secretly passing her
notes and images to Watson and Crick.
[311]
The rest became historyâŠ
[315]
In 1953âworking on their model, reviewing
facts about the four nucleic acids in DNA,
[319]
or bases, and looking at Franklinâs imagesâWatson
and Crick realized DNA must be a double helix.
[325]
And that the bases must be paired so that
the As equal the Ts and the Gs match the Cs.
[331]
The zipper shape of the double helix allows
DNA to transmit information from generation
[336]
to generation with few copying errors: a cellular
machine âunzipsâ the staircase down the
[341]
middle, and figures out one half of a base
pair by looking at the other.
[345]
If one base is an A, it must connect to a
T. Simple!
[349]
Watson and Crick invited Franklin to Cambridge
to review their work.
[352]
She immediately acknowledged that it was correct.
[355]
She just didnât know how much they had relied
on her own work!
[359]
Thanks Thoughtbubble,
After publishing their model and the data
[361]
backing it up, Watson and Crick became scientific
celebrities.
[365]
Franklin, however, died prematurely of cancer,
likely due to her work with X-rays.
[369]
And the Nobel Prize is not awarded posthumously.
[372]
So in 1962, Watson, Crick, and Wilkins shared
the Nobel without acknowledging the debt they
[377]
owed to Franklin.
[378]
But, in part because Watson described Franklin
so horribly in his bookâhe called Franklin
[384]
âWilkinsâs assistant!ââhistorians
went back and researched her life, writing
[389]
her back into the role of protagonist in the
story of DNA.
[393]
So a scientific object like DNA is assembled
out of other scientific objects such as X-ray
[399]
images, textbooks, and three-dimensional models
of tin and cardboardâbut also erroneous
[404]
ideas such as Paulingâs triple helix, as
well as relationships and competitive drives
[409]
for fame.
[410]
With DNA revealed, life itself could theoretically
now be not only âreadâ but âprogrammed.â
[416]
Remember, this was around the same time as
the birth of computing!
[419]
So DNA became a machine-language âprogramâ
to make RNA, which became an assembly-language
[425]
âprogramâ for making proteins, which are
what life is made out of.
[428]
This process was thought to be quite computer-like,
moving only in one directionâfrom DNA to
[433]
RNA to proteins.
[435]
This rule, first expressed by Crick, is the
Central Dogma of Genetics.
[439]
We now know itâs more complicated, but the
essential idea is useful.
[443]
The question after 1953 was another howâthe
genetic code.
[447]
DNA has four nucleic acid âlettersââA,
T, G, and C, with a U instead of a T in RNA.
[454]
But how do these code for the twenty amino-acid
âlettersâ of the proteins that weâre
[459]
made out of?
[460]
Some of the DNA discoverers went back to the
theoretical drawing board.
[463]
In 1954, Watson and Soviet-American physicist
George Gamow founded the âRNA
[469]
tie clubâ to figure it out.
[471]
And Gamow, Crick, and others did important
theoretical work.
[474]
But in 1961, biochemists Marshall Nirenberg
and Heinrich Matthaei cracked
[480]
the first piece of the code.
[481]
And, over the 1960s, other biochemists figured
out the rest, including how RNA works.
[488]
Also in 1953, University of Chicago chemist
Stanley Miller and his advisor Harold Urey
[493]
produced amino acids, the building
blocks of life, out of an electrified broth
[498]
of not-living nutrients.
[500]
The MillerâUrey experiment supported the
idea that all life on earth arose in a primordial
[505]
soup of basic nutrients, billions of years
ago.
[508]
Some scientists, thoughâincluding Crick!âfound
this unlikely, and thought life on earth probably
[513]
came from outer space.
[515]
An idea called panspermia.
[516]
The discoveries of 1953 marked a new era in
biology.
[521]
Evolution now had a molecular basis: mutations
are copy errors in DNA.
[526]
Rare, but inevitable.
[528]
Mutations give rise to the variation that
Darwin and Wallace described.
[532]
Molecular techniques revolutionized the study
of evolution.
[535]
Species were regrouped by the similarity of
their DNA, not their visible physical structures.
[540]
Crabs, for example, evolved several times,
millions of years apart.
[544]
It turns out that having armor-skin and claw
hands, and being able to digest literal trash
[549]
is super useful in different watery environments!
[553]
Another use of the newly deciphered genetic
code was industrial.
[556]
Arguably, biotechnology had been around for
a while.
[558]
Beer, after all, is made using engineered
strains of brewersâ yeast.
[562]
But this process takes a long time and involves
strain selection, or picking types of yeast
[567]
with useful propertiesânot molecular-scale
editing.
[571]
After 1953, scientists started looking for
genes connected to traits of interest.
[576]
The problem was, knowing what genes code for
what traits wasnât useful without having
[581]
a way to move those genes around.
[583]
So biotech took off in the early 1970s in
San Francisco, after Paul Berg, Stanley Cohen,
[589]
and Herbert Boyer published the results of
experiments with recombinant DNA or rDNAânew,
[596]
synthetic sections of DNA made by cloning
sections from one organismâs genome into
[601]
another.
[602]
With rDNA, scientists could splice sequences
of DNA.
[605]
Berg became the first person to join DNA from
two different species in one microbe.
[611]
rDNA allowed scientists to copy the genes
involved in the creation of the important
[616]
hormone insulin, which regulates how much
sugar the body has in its bloodstream, into
[621]
bacteria and yeast.
[622]
Before rDNA, people with diabetes had to get
insulin from pigs or other animals, but synthetic
[628]
insulin is more pure.
[630]
Industrial genetic engineering exploded.
[632]
In 1980, the Supreme Court of the United States
heard a landmark case called Diamond v. Chakrabarty
[638]
The question was whether or not a company
could patent a bioengineered lifeformâa
[643]
microbe designed to eat up spilled oil.
[646]
SCOTUS said yes: if you engineer an organismâs
genome, then it becomes a technology.
[652]
And, by 1980, the biotech industry also had
its first initial public offerings, or IPOs.
[660]
Several companies launched with massive valuations.
[663]
And universitiesâespecially around San Francisco
and Bostonâbegan to view their scientific
[668]
discoveries as major sources of money.
[671]
They set up offices of technology transfer
or licensing.
[675]
Scientific knowledgeâand life itselfâbecame
potential technologies.
[679]
Next timeâweâll look at how biological
technologies changed medicine and agriculture.
[684]
Itâs time for the birth of Big Pharma, GMOs,
and IVF.
[689]
Crash Course History of Science is filmed
in the Dr. Cheryl C. Kinney studio in Missoula,
[693]
Montana and itâs made with the help of all
this nice people and our animation team is
[696]
Thought Cafe.
[697]
Crash Course is a Complexly production.
[699]
If you wanna keep imagining the world complexly
with us, you can check out some of our other
[703]
channels like Nature League, Sexplanations, and Scishow.
[707]
And, if youâd like to keep Crash Course
free for everybody, forever, you can support
[712]
the series at Patreon; a crowdfunding platform
that allows you to support the content you
[716]
love.
[717]
Thank you to all of our patrons for making
Crash Course possible with their continued
[721]
support.
You can go back to the homepage right here: Homepage





