The Polymerase Chain Reaction

Kary B Mullis

ISBN 10: 0817637508 / ISBN 13: 9780817637507

Published by Birkhauser Boston Inc, 1994

About this Item

James D. Watson When, in late March of 1953, Francis Crick and I came to write the first Nature paper describing the double helical structure of the DNA molecule, Francis had wanted to include a lengthy discussion of the genetic implications of a molecule whose struc- ture we had divined from a minimum of experimental data and on theoretical argu- ments based on physical principles. But I felt that this might be tempting fate, given that we had not yet seen the detailed evidence from King's College. Nevertheless, we reached a compromise and decided to include a sentence that pointed to the biological significance of the molecule's key feature-the complementary pairing of the bases. It has not escaped our notice, Francis wrote, that the specific pairing that we have postulated immediately suggests a possible copying mechanism for the genetic material. By May, when we were writing the second Nature paper, I was more confident that the proposed structure was at the very least substantially correct, so that this second paper contains a discussion of molecular self-duplication using templates or molds. We pointed out that, as a consequence of base pairing, a DNA molecule has two chains that are complementary to each other. Each chain could then act . . . as a template for the formation on itself of a new companion chain, so that eventually we shall have two pairs of chains, where we only had one before and, moreover, .

Seller Inventory # 00105132371

Bibliographic Details

• Title: The Polymerase Chain Reaction
• Publisher: Birkhauser Boston Inc
• Publication Date: 1994
• Language: English
• ISBN 10: 0817637508
• ISBN 13: 9780817637507
• Binding: Paperback
• Condition: Good

About this title

Synopsis

James D. Watson When, in late March of 1953, Francis Crick and I came to write the first Nature paper describing the double helical structure of the DNA molecule, Francis had wanted to include a lengthy discussion of the genetic implications of a molecule whose struc­ ture we had divined from a minimum of experimental data and on theoretical argu­ ments based on physical principles. But I felt that this might be tempting fate, given that we had not yet seen the detailed evidence from King's College. Nevertheless, we reached a compromise and decided to include a sentence that pointed to the biological significance of the molecule's key feature-the complementary pairing of the bases. "It has not escaped our notice," Francis wrote, "that the specific pairing that we have postulated immediately suggests a possible copying mechanism for the genetic material." By May, when we were writing the second Nature paper, I was more confident that the proposed structure was at the very least substantially correct, so that this second paper contains a discussion of molecular self-duplication using templates or molds. We pointed out that, as a consequence of base pairing, a DNA molecule has two chains that are complementary to each other. Each chain could then act ". . . as a template for the formation on itself of a new companion chain, so that eventually we shall have two pairs of chains, where we only had one before" and, moreover, " ...