In December 1979, Alexander Rich and his collaborators described in Nature the structure of a left-handed double helical DNA fragment (Wang et al 1979). This structure differed signifi cantly from the B-DNA structure described 26 years before by Watson and Crick (fi gure 1). It was named ZDNA because the deoxyribose-phosphate backbone follows a zig-zag course instead of the regular one found in the Bstructure. But the last letter of the alphabet was also chosen to indicate that the new form was highly different from the previously described A and B structures. This discovery was not totally unexpected: since Watson and Crick, many other models had been proposed for DNA, including left-handed models, just like Z-DNA. Nevertheless, it was a big shock, and it attracted a lot of attention. From the beginning, Z-DNA was a structure in search of a function. From 1981 to 1983, preliminary results suggested that Z-DNA might exist in physiological conditions, and play a role in the regulation of transcription. No obvious major experimental support was further obtained. In fact, negative results were reported in the following years and interest in Z-DNA progressively declined. The strange fate of Z-DNA raises interesting historical issues. The fi rst concerns the relation between structure and function, a hallmark of molecular biology, in which the structure of macromolecules explains their function. What happens when the determination of the structure precedes the characterization of the potential functions it could fulfi l? This new structure, and its potential roles, fi tted quite well with the expectations of the numerous researchers working on the regulation of gene transcription in those years. But the expectations may have been an illusion, supported by an overly opportunistic vision of nature in which what is possible and what exists have a (too) strong tendency to coincide. Series
Read full abstract