Path 6: Xeno-Nucleic Acids (XNA) & Alternative Genetic Systems

Path Inventory: Rationale: DNA and RNA are just two solutions for genetic material. Could information be stored in a different polymer entirely? This path explores Xeno Nucleic Acids (XNAs) – synthetic genetic polymers with different sugar backbones (or even entirely different backbones) that are not found in nature. Studies have already created XNAs like TNA (threose nucleic acid), FANA (2'-fluoro-arabino nucleic acid), HNA (hexitol nucleic acid), GNA (glycerol nucleic acid), PNA (peptide nucleic acid), etc. The rationale is twofold: (1) to test the universality vs contingency of DNA – did life choose DNA/RNA for fundamental reasons or historical accident? (2) to expand the toolkit for both astrobiology (knowing what to look for) and biotechnology (creating new heredity systems, perhaps safer because they don't mix with natural biology). If an XNA can undergo Darwinian evolution (mutate and replicate with fitness differences), then "life as we don't know it" might use that instead of DNA. Indeed, Pinheiro et al. demonstrated heredity and evolution in six different XNAs by evolving polymerases to copy them. This path addresses unsolved questions about how flexible life's information storage can be. Additionally, it covers expanded genetic alphabets (adding new base pairs beyond A,T,C,G) as another form of alternative system – e.g., "hachimoji" DNA with 8 bases. If life elsewhere or engineered life here uses more than four bases, how would that affect function? Overall, this path pushes the boundaries of what a genetic system can look like while still operating on Darwinian principles.

Prerequisites: The main prerequisite is advanced directed evolution and enzyme engineering techniques. To propagate XNAs, we often need special polymerases (enzymes that copy genetic material) because natural DNA polymerases usually don't accept modified substrates. Pinheiro et al. evolved polymerases that can read XNAs and write back into DNA, enabling XNA replication. So, lab infrastructure for in vitro evolution (e.g., compartmentalized self-replication systems) is needed. Chemical synthesis proficiency is also required: many XNA monomers are not commercially available; they must be synthesized and chemically activated for polymerization. A strong theoretical framework for what makes a polymer suitable for genetics is useful (Benner 2004 outlined that a genetic polymer in water likely needs a repeating charge to avoid tangling, and certain geometries to allow templating). Understanding those design rules helps in choosing which XNAs to test. Additionally, analyzing folding and function: an XNA world might need XNA aptamers or ribozymes, so a prerequisite is demonstrating that XNAs can not only store info but also fold into 3D shapes that catalyze reactions (Pinheiro's work showed some XNA aptamers can bind targets with high affinity). Laboratory tools like X-ray crystallography or cryo-EM might be needed to confirm structures of XNA double helices or aptamers, to ensure they have comparable structural integrity to DNA/RNA. Finally, containment strategies are wise (XNAs should not unintentionally interact with natural genomes, although most XNAs can't be read by cells, which is good from a safety perspective).

Dependencies: This path is relatively self-contained in the lab (we can do XNA experiments on Earth), but it ties into origin-of-life research: if early Earth could have been an "RNA world," could an "TNA world" or others have preceded or competed? Some hypothesize that TNA (with a 4-carbon sugar) might have been a pre-RNA genetic material. So, discoveries here feedback to origin theories (Path 5's interest in early alternatives overlaps a bit). Path 6 also connects to Path 5 and 7: PNA (a type of XNA with a peptide backbone) tests Path 5's no-phosphate scenario and Path 7's chirality scenario, because PNA's backbone is achiral but often synthesized from L- or D-amino acids giving chiral forms. Dependencies on Path 7 (Mirror life) emerge if we attempt mirror-XNA (all building blocks of opposite chirality) – that's a combo of expanding chemistry and changing chirality. There's also synergy with exoplanet biosignature searches: if we know XNAs can work, we shouldn't assume extraterrestrial life will necessarily show DNA/RNA when we search for molecular evidence. Finally, XNA tech depends on computational chemistry and molecular modeling – to predict which analogs are worth trying (because infinite variations exist: different sugars, different backbone linkers like amide, triazole, etc.). So collaboration with computational biochemists (to virtually screen XNA stability and pairing) is beneficial.

Signs of Progress: The field has already seen major signs: In 2012, creation of XNA molecules that evolve was a landmark. Specifically, XNAs were able to store genetic info and undergo selection (e.g., an HNA aptamer was evolved to bind a protein, showing that heredity and function are possible outside DNA). Further progress would include self-sustaining XNA systems – for instance, a cell-like system (perhaps a lipid vesicle) that carries XNA as its genetic material and can reproduce, entirely independent of DNA. We are not there yet; currently XNAs are parasitic on DNA (we use DNA polymerases to mediate XNA copying). A big milestone would be an XNA polymerase made of XNA – a true XNA->XNA self-replication. Another sign of progress is expanding the alphabet: in 2019, scientists created Hachimoji DNA with 4 natural and 4 synthetic bases that still forms proper helices and follows predictable pairing. That shows that even the "language" of heredity could be richer than Earth's. If such extended alphabets can be implemented in living cells (some synthetic biologists have inserted two extra bases into E. coli's DNA, creating a semi-synthetic organism), that's a pathmarker. On the theoretical side, if we can derive a general theory of life's informational polymers – identifying what chemical features are essential for Darwinian systems – that intellectual progress will guide future searches. From an astrobiology perspective, any detection of nucleic-acid-like molecules in meteorites or Titan's chemistry would be intriguing (none yet, but Titan's atmosphere makes complex organics; if we found an informational polymer there, even not DNA, that'd be revolutionary). In summary, signs of success range from lab-created xenobiological systems (a "protocell" running on XNA) to actual evidence that life elsewhere might have a different genetic basis, with the former likely coming first.

Base Camp 6A: Polymerase Engineering for XNAs

Scope: Develop enzymes capable of synthesizing and copying XNA polymers. A major hurdle in XNA research is that natural polymerases are very specific for DNA/RNA. This base-camp focuses on the directed evolution and design of polymerases that can handle XNA substrates. Achieving robust XNA polymerases is key to making XNA heredity self-sufficient.

Stepping Stones: (i) Start with a known polymerase (like a family B DNA polymerase or an RNA replicase) and create mutant libraries. Apply selection on those libraries to extend an XNA strand. Pinheiro et al. (2012) did exactly this with a compartmentalized self-replication method to evolve polymerases for e.g. HNA, FANA. Repeating such experiments for other XNAs (like one not tried yet, or improving fidelity) is a goal. (ii) Characterize the evolved polymerases: measure their error rates, substrate range (can the HNA polymerase also handle FANA?), and efficiency. Step up challenges gradually – first get polymerase to make short XNA, then entire genes. (iii) Attempt XNA replication in a cell-free system: Combine an XNA polymerase and XNA nucleotides in a cell-like environment to see if it can replicate XNA from XNA template (Pinheiro mostly did XNA -> DNA -> XNA conversions; the next step is eliminating the DNA intermediary). (iv) Transition to in vivo expression: try to express an evolved XNA polymerase inside a cell (maybe a cell that also has XNA building blocks available) to test continuous XNA propagation.

Base Camp 6B: Hachimoji and Expanded Genetic Alphabets

Scope: Investigate systems with more than the canonical four nucleotide bases. The "hachimoji" DNA with 8 bases (4 natural + 4 synthetic) showed that an expanded alphabet can still form stable double helices and encode information. This base-camp explores the biochemical and biological implications of expanded genetic codes: Can polymerases reliably handle extra bases? Do additional bases confer advantages (e.g., more information density or finer control of secondary structure)? Could a living organism be made to use 6 or 8 bases (semi-synthetic organisms are a starting point)?

Stepping Stones: (i) Characterize base-pairing: ensure the new bases pair specifically (like P–Z and B–S pairs in hachimoji). Study how robust these pairs are in presence of the natural ones (no cross-pairing, similar melting temperatures, etc.). (ii) Test enzymatic processing: use DNA polymerases, RNA polymerases, and reverse transcriptases to see if they incorporate and read the new bases accurately. For instance, Benner's team did some of this for their bases P, Z, etc., ensuring polymerases could amplify sequences containing them. If errors or slow rates occur, evolve or engineer polymerases as in Base-Camp 6A but now to accept expanded alphabets. (iii) Introduce expanded code into a replication system: e.g., PCR amplify a piece of DNA with 8-letter code and sequence it to confirm fidelity. Or do an in vitro transcription with extra bases in the template to see if mRNA contains them properly. (iv) In vivo experiment: attempt to maintain a plasmid with an unnatural base pair in bacteria (Romesberg's group did 6-letter E. coli, but bases had to be imported). Evaluate how stable it is over cell generations, and if any cross-talk (like metabolism modifying the unnatural base) happens.

Base Camp 6C: One Polymer vs Two Polymer World

Scope: Examine whether life truly needs separate information (nucleic acids) and catalyst (proteins) polymers, or if a single type of polymer could do both – i.e., an "all-RNA" or all-peptide life. This is relevant to XNA because perhaps an alternative life might simplify (e.g., have only one biopolymer that self-replicates and catalyzes – like an RNA world scenario extended to a whole organism). Alternatively, could life have more than two polymer types (we have DNA/RNA + proteins; maybe alien life could have a third major polymer)? Scope includes reviewing evidence from the RNA world (ribozymes performing enzymatic roles) and extreme cases like viroids (RNA molecules that replicate without coding proteins) as partial analogs of one-polymer life. Also, consider proposals of "proteins-first" life (less mainstream, but think if a protein-only replicator could exist via amyloid templating, etc.).

Stepping Stones: (i) Summarize functions of ribozymes known: can any RNA or XNA catalyze a wide range of reactions, or are they limited? So far ribozymes can do peptide bond formation (ribosome), splicing, some metabolism, but not as versatile as the whole proteome. Note attempts to evolve ribozymes with broader functions – success or limits. (ii) Try to evolve a ribozyme or XNAzyme for a reaction normally done by proteins (like polymerase ribozyme – already done to some extent, or an XNA polymerase from XNA). The goal would be a self-replicating RNA or XNA. We have not yet got a self-replicating RNA polymerase ribozyme that can copy itself fully, but progress is steady. Achieving that would be a base-camp milestone itself (it's an open challenge in origin-of-life research). (iii) Investigate minimal life models like Spiegelman's monster or viroids – these are just RNA, no proteins. Could they be considered alive if in the right environment (with replicase enzyme present for them, they parasitize)? Try to conceive an environment where an RNA organism could sustain itself – perhaps if the environment provides a simple peptide that acts as a replicase for the RNA. If one polymer life is possible, it might need some environmental help. (iv) Conversely, study protein-only inheritance: prions are proteins that induce their shape in other proteins (like PrP Sc causes PrP C to misfold). This is a form of information transfer without nucleic acids. Could a network of different prions carry out metabolism and information? It's speculative, but worth analyzing the limitations: prions carry little information (essentially a yes/no state), not a rich sequence. But maybe a whole suite of them (like a hypercycle of prions?) – likely not flexible enough. Document these thoughts clearly.

Bibliography (Path 6)

← Back to Mont Blanc – Alternative Biochemistries