Error checking and repair systems in the cell, amazing evidence of design

Extreme Genome Repair (2009): If its naming had followed, rather than preceded, molecular analyses of its DNA, the extremophile bacterium Deinococcus radiodurans might have been called Lazarus. After shattering of its 3.2 Mb genome into 20–30 kb pieces by desiccation or a high dose of ionizing radiation, D. radiodurans miraculously reassembles its genome such that only 3 hr later fully reconstituted nonrearranged chromosomes are present, and the cells carry on, alive as normal 1

T. Devitt (2014): John R. Battista, a professor of biological sciences at Louisiana State University, showed that E. coli could evolve to resist ionizing radiation by exposing cultures of the bacterium to the highly radioactive isotope cobalt-60. “We blasted the cultures until 99 percent of the bacteria were dead. Then we’d grow up the survivors and blast them again. We did that twenty times,” explains Cox. The result were E. coli capable of enduring as much as four orders of magnitude more ionizing radiation, making them similar to Deinococcus radiodurans, a desert-dwelling bacterium found in the 1950s to be remarkably resistant to radiation. That bacterium is capable of surviving more than one thousand times the radiation dose that would kill a human. 2

Simple bacteria can restart their 'outboard motor' by hotwiring their own genes (2015):
Unable to move and facing starvation, the bacteria evolve a replacement flagellum - a rotating tail-like structure which acts like an outboard motor - by patching together a new genetic switch with borrowed parts. When an organism suffers a life-threatening mutation, it can rapidly rewire its genes. The remarkable speed with which old genes take on new tasks suggests that life has unexpected levels of genetic flexibility.  In theory, the bacteria should have starved to death and effectively gone extinct. Yet over the course of a weekend they managed to patch themselves back together with borrowed genes." Scientists made the discovery by accident, while researching ways to use naturally occurring bacteria to improve the yield of crops. A microbe was engineered so that it could not make its ‘propeller-like' flagellum and forage for food. However, when a researcher accidentally left the immotile strain out on a lab bench, the team discovered the bacteria had evolved over just a few days. The new variety of bacteria had resurrected their flagella in the process.

Remarkably, this happened because the mutants had rewired a cellular switch, which normally controls nitrogen levels in the cell, to activate the flagellum. This rescued these bacteria, which faced certain death if they didn't move to new food sources. The bacteria being studied, Pseudomonas fluorescens, are among a group of bacteria scientists are researching for use in agriculture, as a kind of ‘plant probiotic'. These could help crops grow or fight off diseases, leading to higher yields. However, a key problem is that the bacteria lack resilience, as their positive effects can stop working after only a short period of time. Dr Jackson, a microbiologist at Reading, said: "Plant probiotics could make crops grow more reliably in the future, helping to feed the world's growing population. This new study shows that these bacteria are more resilient than previously thought, as they show a remarkable capacity to overcome catastrophic changes and find a way to survive. "This gives us crucial insights into how bacteria could survive and change, and the challenge now is to see if this occurs in their natural soil and plant environment." 3

1. Rodrigo S. Galhardo: Extreme Genome Repair 2012 Apr 4.
2. T. Devitt: In the lab, scientists coax E. coli to resist radiation damage March 17, 2014
3. WEEKEND EVOLUTION: BACTERIA 'HOTWIRE THEIR GENES' TO FIX A FAULTY MOTOR 26 February 2015

Error-check and repair mechanisms in the cell are interdependent

Error-check and repair mechanisms in the cell are interdependent. The cell relies on error-checking and repair mechanisms to maintain the integrity of its genetic material, repair damaged molecules, and ensure proper cellular function. These mechanisms play a crucial role in preserving the accuracy and stability of genetic information, as well as repairing various types of cellular damage.

DNA repair mechanisms, for example, are responsible for identifying and correcting errors or damage in the DNA molecule. Cells have sophisticated systems, such as DNA mismatch repair, base excision repair, nucleotide excision repair, and homologous recombination, among others, to detect and repair DNA lesions, mutations, and breaks. These repair mechanisms help maintain the fidelity of DNA replication and prevent the accumulation of mutations.

Additionally, the cell's error-checking and repair mechanisms are closely linked to cellular processes such as DNA replication, transcription, and translation. These processes themselves have built-in error-checking mechanisms to ensure accurate synthesis of proteins and nucleic acids. For instance, DNA polymerases have proofreading capabilities to detect and correct errors during DNA replication.

Moreover, error-checking and repair mechanisms are often regulated by feedback systems and signaling pathways that monitor the cellular environment and respond to specific cues. These mechanisms can be triggered by cellular stress, DNA damage, or the presence of abnormal or misfolded proteins.

Error-checking and repair mechanisms in the cell are intimately intertwined with cellular processes and are crucial for maintaining genomic integrity and cellular function. They rely on accurate and efficient cellular processes, while also ensuring the fidelity and stability of these processes through error detection and repair.

If error check and repair mechanisms were not in place right from the beginning, several consequences would arise

If error check and repair mechanisms were not in place from the beginning,  the accumulation of DNA mutations would reach catastrophic levels, leading to a phenomenon known as "mutation error catastrophe." In this scenario, the cell's genetic information would become increasingly corrupted, resulting in severe disruption of vital cellular processes. Mutation error catastrophe can have devastating consequences for the cell, including impaired replication, transcription, and translation processes. It can lead to the production of non-functional or toxic proteins, disrupt regulatory pathways, and compromise the overall integrity and stability of the cell's genetic material. The excessive accumulation of mutations without efficient error check and repair mechanisms would likely result in cellular dysfunction, loss of viability, and eventually cell death. This catastrophic outcome emphasizes the critical role that error check and repair mechanisms play in maintaining the integrity of the cell's genetic information and ensuring its survival and proper functioning.

Accumulation of DNA mutations: Without error check and repair mechanisms, DNA mutations would go unchecked and accumulate over time. Mutations are changes in the DNA sequence that can disrupt normal cellular processes, lead to genetic diseases, or even contribute to the development of cancer. The absence of error check and repair mechanisms would result in a higher mutation rate and increased susceptibility to genetic disorders.

Loss of genomic integrity: Error check and repair mechanisms play a crucial role in maintaining the integrity of the genome. They help detect and repair DNA damage caused by various factors such as radiation, chemicals, and metabolic byproducts. Without these mechanisms, DNA damage would persist, leading to chromosomal abnormalities, genomic instability, and a higher likelihood of DNA breakage and rearrangements.

Impaired cellular function: Error check and repair mechanisms are essential for ensuring the accurate replication, transcription, and translation of genetic information. Errors in these processes can lead to the production of faulty proteins, disruption of gene expression, and impairment of critical cellular functions. Without error check and repair mechanisms, the cell's ability to carry out its normal functions would be compromised, potentially leading to cellular dysfunction and organismal abnormalities.

Reduced viability and fitness: The absence of error check and repair mechanisms would reduce the viability and fitness of organisms. Accumulation of DNA damage and mutations would increase the likelihood of cell death, impaired development, and decreased reproductive success. Organisms lacking effective error check and repair mechanisms would have a diminished ability to adapt to environmental changes, survive adverse conditions, and maintain optimal functioning.

Why are unguided naturalistic mechanisms inadequate as an explanation? 

The absence of error check and repair mechanisms from the beginning would result in cell death.  The natural, unguided emergence of highly complex and interdependent error-check and repair mechanisms in the cell would be an extremely unlikely event due to several reasons:

Functional Integration: Error-check and repair mechanisms involve multiple components working together in a coordinated manner. For these mechanisms to function effectively, each component needs to be present and properly integrated into the system. The simultaneous emergence of all the necessary components by chance is statistically improbable to the extreme. The probability of multiple specific components arising simultaneously and being functionally integrated without any guidance or direction is extremely low.

Informational Content: Error-check and repair mechanisms rely on intricate molecular recognition, signaling pathways, and regulatory processes. These mechanisms require specific information encoded in the genome to identify errors, locate damaged DNA, and initiate repair processes. The emergence of such information-rich systems without guidance would require the spontaneous generation of complex functional information, which is highly improbable through unguided processes alone.

Irreducible Complexity: Error-check and repair mechanisms often exhibit irreducible complexity, meaning they require the presence and interaction of multiple components for their proper function. If any of these components were missing or non-functional, the entire system would fail. The simultaneous emergence of all the necessary components, each with their specific functions, would be highly unlikely through random, unguided processes.

Fine-Tuned Regulation: Error-check and repair mechanisms need to be tightly regulated to ensure precise control and coordination. They must be able to distinguish between errors and normal variations, activate repair processes when needed, and avoid unnecessary repairs that could introduce errors themselves. The development of such finely tuned regulation, which requires specific feedback loops and signaling mechanisms, is unlikely to occur by chance alone.

Time and Probability: The spontaneous emergence of highly complex and interdependent error-check and repair mechanisms would require an extraordinary amount of time and a vast number of trial-and-error events. Considering the limited timeframe of natural processes on Earth and the astronomical number of possibilities that would need to be explored, the probability of such a complex system emerging by chance alone becomes exceedingly small.

Considering these factors, the natural, unguided emergence of both error-check and repair mechanisms in the cell together is an extremely unlikely event. The level of complexity, integration, information content, irreducible complexity, fine-tuned regulation, and the immense number of possibilities make the simultaneous development of these mechanisms by chance highly implausible. The existence of these intricate systems strongly suggests the involvement of intelligent design or guidance in their formation.

A first cell on early Earth, without fully implemented mutation reduction systems, would not be able to survive and die. The increased mutation rate and the absence of efficient error-checking and repair mechanisms would make the cell highly susceptible to errors, malfunctions, and detrimental effects. These effects would compromise essential cellular processes, disrupt protein functionality, and lead to genomic instability. The accumulation of mutations would produce non-functional or toxic proteins, impaired metabolic pathways, and disrupted regulatory mechanisms. The cell's ability to maintain proper function, adapt to changing environments, and sustain long-term survival would be severely compromised. Therefore, the chances of a cell without fully implemented mutation reduction systems surviving and thriving in the long term would be zero.

An argument for Intelligent Design

Premise 1: The error-check and repair mechanisms in the cell, and the cell, are highly complex and interdependent.
Premise 2: The intricate interdependence of these mechanisms with the cell suggests a purposeful design.
Conclusion: The intelligent setup is the best explanation for the interdependence of error-check and repair mechanisms in the cell.

Explanation: The error-check and repair mechanisms in the cell exhibit a high degree of complexity and interdependence. These mechanisms work together to detect and correct errors, maintain genomic integrity, and ensure proper cellular function. The intricate interplay between various repair pathways, signaling networks, and cellular processes indicates a purposeful design.

Premise 1 establishes that error-check and repair mechanisms are highly complex and interdependent. The functionality of these mechanisms relies on precise coordination and cooperation between different components. For example, DNA repair pathways often involve multiple enzymes and proteins that interact in a coordinated manner to identify and repair DNA damage. The interdependence of these mechanisms suggests a carefully designed system rather than a random occurrence. Premise 2 proposes that the interdependence of error-check and repair mechanisms implies a purposeful design. The intricate coordination and regulation required for these mechanisms to function effectively suggest the presence of an intelligent setup. The interdependence ensures that errors are efficiently detected and repaired, promoting genomic stability and cellular health. Therefore, the conclusion states that the intelligent setup is the best explanation for the interdependence of error-check and repair mechanisms in the cell. The complexity, precision, and interplay observed in these mechanisms strongly indicate the involvement of an intelligent designer in their establishment.

Os mecanismos de verificação e reparo de erros na célula são interdependentes

https://reasonandscience.catsboard.com/t2043p25-error-checking-and-repair-systems-in-the-cell-amazing-evidence-of-design

Os mecanismos de verificação e reparo de erros na célula são interdependentes. A célula depende de mecanismos de verificação e reparo de erros para manter a integridade de seu material genético, reparar moléculas danificadas e garantir a função celular adequada. Esses mecanismos desempenham um papel crucial na preservação da precisão e estabilidade da informação genética, bem como na reparação de vários tipos de danos celulares.

Os mecanismos de reparo do DNA, por exemplo, são responsáveis por identificar e corrigir erros ou danos na molécula de DNA. As células possuem sistemas sofisticados, como reparo de incompatibilidade de DNA, reparo por excisão de base, reparo por excisão de nucleotídeo e recombinação homóloga, entre outros, para detectar e reparar lesões, mutações e quebras de DNA. Esses mecanismos de reparo ajudam a manter a fidelidade da replicação do DNA e evitam o acúmulo de mutações.

Além disso, os mecanismos de verificação e reparo de erros da célula estão intimamente ligados a processos celulares, como replicação, transcrição e tradução do DNA. Esses próprios processos possuem mecanismos de verificação de erros integrados para garantir a síntese precisa de proteínas e ácidos nucléicos. Por exemplo, as DNA polimerases têm capacidade de revisão para detectar e corrigir erros durante a replicação do DNA.

Além disso, os mecanismos de verificação e reparo de erros são frequentemente regulados por sistemas de feedback e vias de sinalização que monitoram o ambiente celular e respondem a sinais específicos. Esses mecanismos podem ser desencadeados por estresse celular, dano ao DNA ou presença de proteínas anormais ou mal dobradas.

Os mecanismos de verificação e reparo de erros na célula estão intimamente interligados com os processos celulares e são cruciais para manter a integridade genômica e a função celular. Eles contam com processos celulares precisos e eficientes, além de garantir a fidelidade e estabilidade desses processos por meio da detecção e reparo de erros.

Se os mecanismos de verificação e reparo de erros não estivessem em vigor desde o início, várias consequências surgiriam

Se os mecanismos de verificação e reparo de erros não estivessem em vigor desde o início, o acúmulo de mutações no DNA atingiria níveis catastróficos, levando a um fenômeno conhecido como "catástrofe de erro de mutação". Nesse cenário, a informação genética da célula se tornaria cada vez mais corrompida, resultando em grave interrupção dos processos celulares vitais. A catástrofe do erro de mutação pode ter consequências devastadoras para a célula, incluindo processos de replicação, transcrição e tradução prejudicados. Pode levar à produção de proteínas não funcionais ou tóxicas, interromper as vias regulatórias e comprometer a integridade e estabilidade geral do material genético da célula. O acúmulo excessivo de mutações sem mecanismos eficientes de verificação e reparo de erros provavelmente resultaria em disfunção celular, perda de viabilidade e, eventualmente, morte celular. Esse resultado catastrófico enfatiza o papel crítico que os mecanismos de verificação e reparo de erros desempenham na manutenção da integridade da informação genética da célula e na garantia de sua sobrevivência e funcionamento adequado.

Acúmulo de mutações de DNA: sem verificação de erros e mecanismos de reparo, as mutações de DNA não seriam verificadas e se acumulariam com o tempo. Mutações são alterações na sequência do DNA que podem interromper os processos celulares normais, levar a doenças genéticas ou até mesmo contribuir para o desenvolvimento do câncer. A ausência de verificação de erros e mecanismos de reparo resultaria em uma taxa de mutação mais alta e maior suscetibilidade a distúrbios genéticos.

Perda de integridade genômica: Os mecanismos de verificação e reparo de erros desempenham um papel crucial na manutenção da integridade do genoma. Eles ajudam a detectar e reparar danos ao DNA causados por vários fatores, como radiação, produtos químicos e subprodutos metabólicos. Sem esses mecanismos, o dano ao DNA persistiria, levando a anormalidades cromossômicas, instabilidade genômica e maior probabilidade de quebra e rearranjos do DNA.

Função celular prejudicada: os mecanismos de verificação e reparo de erros são essenciais para garantir a replicação, transcrição e tradução precisas da informação genética. Erros nesses processos podem levar à produção de proteínas defeituosas, interrupção da expressão gênica e comprometimento de funções celulares críticas. Sem verificação de erros e mecanismos de reparo, a capacidade da célula de realizar suas funções normais seria comprometida, levando potencialmente à disfunção celular e anormalidades do organismo.

Viabilidade e aptidão reduzidas: A ausência de verificação de erros e mecanismos de reparo reduziria a viabilidade e aptidão dos organismos. O acúmulo de danos e mutações no DNA aumentaria a probabilidade de morte celular, desenvolvimento prejudicado e diminuição do sucesso reprodutivo. Organismos sem mecanismos eficazes de verificação e reparo de erros teriam uma capacidade diminuída de se adaptar às mudanças ambientais, sobreviver a condições adversas e manter o funcionamento ideal.

A ausência de verificação de erros e mecanismos de reparo desde o início resultaria em aumento de mutações no DNA, perda de integridade genômica, função celular prejudicada e viabilidade e aptidão reduzidas dos organismos. Essas consequências afetariam significativamente a estabilidade e a funcionalidade da célula e poderiam ter implicações graves para a sobrevivência e evolução dos organismos vivos.

Uma primeira célula na Terra primitiva, sem sistemas de redução de mutação totalmente implementados, não seria capaz de sobreviver e iria morrer rapidamente. O aumento da taxa de mutação e a ausência de mecanismos eficientes de verificação e reparo de erros tornariam a célula altamente suscetível a erros, mau funcionamento e efeitos prejudiciais. Esses efeitos comprometeriam processos celulares essenciais, interromperiam a funcionalidade da proteína e levariam à instabilidade genômica. O acúmulo de mutações produziria proteínas não funcionais ou tóxicas, vias metabólicas prejudicadas e mecanismos regulatórios interrompidos. A capacidade da célula de manter o funcionamento adequado, adaptar-se a ambientes em mudança e sustentar a sobrevivência a longo prazo seria gravemente comprometida. Portanto, as chances de uma célula sem sistemas de redução de mutação totalmente implementados sobreviver e prosperar a longo prazo seriam zero.

Por que os mecanismos naturalistas não guiados são inadequados como explicação?

A ausência de verificação de erros e mecanismos de reparo desde o início resultaria em morte celular. O surgimento natural e não guiado de mecanismos altamente complexos e interdependentes de verificação e reparo de erros na célula seria um evento extremamente improvável devido a vários motivos:

Integração Funcional: Os mecanismos de verificação e reparo de erros envolvem vários componentes trabalhando juntos de maneira coordenada. Para que esses mecanismos funcionem efetivamente, cada componente precisa estar presente e devidamente integrado ao sistema. O surgimento simultâneo de todos os componentes necessários por acaso é estatisticamente improvável ao extremo. A probabilidade de vários componentes específicos surgirem simultaneamente e serem funcionalmente integrados sem qualquer orientação ou direção é extremamente baixa.

Conteúdo Informativo: Mecanismos de verificação e reparo de erros dependem de reconhecimento molecular intrincado, vias de sinalização e processos regulatórios. Esses mecanismos requerem informações específicas codificadas no genoma para identificar erros, localizar DNA danificado e iniciar processos de reparo. O surgimento desses sistemas ricos em informações sem orientação exigiria a geração espontânea de informações funcionais complexas, o que é altamente improvável apenas por meio de processos não guiados.

Complexidade irredutível: Os mecanismos de verificação e reparo de erros geralmente exibem complexidade irredutível, o que significa que exigem a presença e a interação de vários componentes para seu funcionamento adequado. Se algum desses componentes estivesse faltando ou não funcionasse, todo o sistema falharia. O surgimento simultâneo de todos os componentes necessários, cada um com suas funções específicas, seria altamente improvável por meio de processos aleatórios e não guiados.

Regulação ajustada: Os mecanismos de verificação e reparo de erros precisam ser rigorosamente regulados para garantir controle e coordenação precisos. Eles devem ser capazes de distinguir entre erros e variações normais, ativar processos de reparo quando necessário e evitar reparos desnecessários que possam introduzir erros. É improvável que o desenvolvimento dessa regulação finamente ajustada, que requer loops de feedback e mecanismos de sinalização específicos, ocorra apenas por acaso.

Tempo e probabilidade: O surgimento espontâneo de mecanismos de verificação e reparo de erros altamente complexos e interdependentes exigiria uma quantidade extraordinária de tempo e um grande número de eventos de tentativa e erro. Considerando o prazo limitado dos processos naturais na Terra e o número astronômico de possibilidades que precisariam ser exploradas, a probabilidade de um sistema tão complexo surgir por acaso torna-se extremamente pequena.

Considerando esses fatores, o surgimento natural e não guiado de mecanismos de verificação e reparo de erros na célula é um evento extremamente improvável. O nível de complexidade, a integração, o conteúdo da informação, a complexidade irredutível, a regulação afinada e o imenso número de possibilidades tornam o desenvolvimento simultâneo desses mecanismos ao acaso altamente implausível. A existência desses sistemas intrincados sugere fortemente o envolvimento de design inteligente ou orientação em sua formação.

Argumento em favor do design inteligente

Premissa 1: Os mecanismos de verificação e reparo de erros na célula e na célula são altamente complexos e interdependentes.
Premissa 2: A intrincada interdependência desses mecanismos com a célula sugere um projeto proposital.
Conclusão: A configuração inteligente é a melhor explicação para a interdependência dos mecanismos de verificação e reparo de erros na célula.

Explicação: Os mecanismos de verificação e reparo de erros na célula exibem um alto grau de complexidade e interdependência. Esses mecanismos trabalham juntos para detectar e corrigir erros, manter a integridade genômica e garantir a função celular adequada. A intrincada interação entre várias vias de reparo, redes de sinalização e processos celulares indica um projeto proposital.

A premissa 1 estabelece que os mecanismos de verificação e reparo de erros são altamente complexos e interdependentes. A funcionalidade desses mecanismos depende de coordenação e cooperação precisas entre diferentes componentes. Por exemplo, as vias de reparo do DNA geralmente envolvem várias enzimas e proteínas que interagem de maneira coordenada para identificar e reparar danos ao DNA. A interdependência desses mecanismos sugere um sistema cuidadosamente projetado, em vez de uma ocorrência aleatória. A premissa 2 propõe que a interdependência dos mecanismos de verificação e reparo de erros implica em um design proposital. A intrincada coordenação e regulação necessárias para que esses mecanismos funcionem de forma eficaz sugerem a presença de uma configuração inteligente. A interdependência garante que os erros sejam detectados e reparados com eficiência, promovendo a estabilidade genômica e a saúde celular.
Portanto, a conclusão afirma que a configuração inteligente é a melhor explicação para a interdependência dos mecanismos de verificação e reparo de erros na célula. A complexidade, precisão e interação observadas nesses mecanismos indicam fortemente o envolvimento de um designer inteligente em seu estabelecimento.

Uracil-DNA glycosylase (UDG) is critical in DNA repair, specifically in the base excision repair (BER) pathway. It is a tiny molecular detective, diligently patrolling the winding alleys of the double helix. Its mission? To seek out and remove the notorious uracil bases that occasionally sneak into the DNA, causing mischief in the genetic code. UDG's role in DNA repair is nothing short of heroic. Whenever a rogue uracil is detected in the DNA sequence, this nimble enzyme springs into action with a precision that would make a surgeon envious. It carefully identifies the culprit base, seemingly floating amidst a sea of adenine, cytosine, and guanine, and with a deft movement, it flips the uracil out of the DNA helix, exposing it to the unforgiving scrutiny of its active site. Now, here's where the magic happens. In a molecular sleight-of-hand, UDG unleashes its catalytic prowess, snipping the glycosidic bond that binds the uracil to the DNA's sugar-phosphate backbone. The uracil is set free, like a prisoner escaping its cell, leaving behind an empty spot—an abasic site—where once the mischievous base resided. But UDG's job doesn't end there. Like a true professional, it leaves no loose ends. The AP site it created becomes a calling card for its fellow DNA repair colleagues. These skilled repairers step in, filling in the void with a new, pristine base that perfectly complements the opposite strand. The DNA is restored to its former glory, its genetic message intact and unblemished. Although UDG's work is precise and awe-inspiring, it is by no means a lone wolf in the world of DNA repair. There are multiple isoforms of this vigilant enzyme, each playing a unique role in different organisms. Together, they form a dedicated team, committed to safeguarding the genome's integrity and stability. The importance of UDG in the grand scheme of life cannot be overstated. Without this guardian of the genetic code, our DNA would be vulnerable to the harmful effects of uracil, and mutations would run rampant, threatening the very fabric of our existence.

Uracil-DNA glycosylase (UDG) on average consists of about 160 to 190 amino acids. UDG is relatively small compared to some other enzymes. They use specific amino acid residues in their active site to perform the nucleophilic attack and cleave the glycosidic bond between the uracil base and the DNA backbone. Some UDG enzymes can be metal-dependent. For example, certain UDGs in viruses or bacteriophages may utilize divalent metal ions like zinc or nickel as co-factors. The presence of metal ions in these cases may enhance the catalytic activity or stability of the enzyme.

The complexity and precision of UDG's design suggest it was purposefully engineered to fulfill its essential role in maintaining the integrity of the information-bearing DNA sequence.  Mindless, unguided natural processes cannot account for the development of complex and purposeful biological mechanisms like error-checking and repair enzymes, such as Uracil-DNA glycosylase (UDG). This intricate enzyme has a goal-oriented purpose, which suggests foresight and design. Nature, being devoid of goals or intentions, would not inherently possess the ability to produce such complex solutions to address potential issues like uracil deamination in the genome. The presence of UDG, with its highly specific function of recognizing and removing uracil bases from DNA, points to a deliberate purpose and foresight in the design of living organisms. Such sophisticated and interdependent systems are unlikely to arise through random chance or unguided evolutionary mechanisms. UDG can also be considered an example of irreducible complexity because all its components must be present and functioning simultaneously for it to perform its critical role in DNA repair. Any intermediate stages would not provide an advantage until the enzyme is fully formed.

The heart of UDG's prowess lies in its active site, a specialized region where the magic unfolds. With astonishing precision, it recognizes and binds to the troublesome uracil bases, like a key fitting into a lock. The active site creates a carefully tailored environment, guiding the enzyme's hand in the intricate dance of DNA repair. Alongside the active site are substrate binding pockets, delicate pockets that cradle the uracil base in a complementary embrace. These pockets ensure the uracil is held securely in place, primed for the critical next steps. Hydrogen bonding residues add an elegant touch to the enzyme's mastery. These tiny molecular hands reach out to the uracil, forming essential hydrogen bonds that provide the specificity needed to distinguish uracil from its DNA counterparts. The enzyme's structure is like a well-choreographed ballet. Various domains interlock, providing the sturdy foundation upon which UDG's performance depends. Each domain plays a distinct role, working harmoniously to ensure the enzyme's stability and functionality. And then comes the grand finale—the base-flipping mechanism. UDG is a master of disguise, briefly distorting the DNA helix to "flip" the uracil out of its cozy spot within the DNA. It's like a magical reveal, exposing the uracil to the enzyme's waiting arms, ready to embrace its delicate task. With the precision of a conductor leading a symphony, catalytic residues orchestrate the final act. These special amino acid players act as catalysts, guiding the cleavage of the N-glycosidic bond that binds uracil to the DNA's backbone. The bond breaks, and the uracil is released, its temporary stay within the DNA now at an end. UDG's performance is a feat of ingenuity, an intricate ballet of interdependent parts that ensure the DNA's integrity remains intact. Its role in repairing the genetic code ensures the symphony of life can continue without a discordant note. UDG exhibits high specificity for uracil bases, efficiently recognizing and targeting them even among other DNA bases. The ability to discriminate between different bases and accurately detect uracil implies the presence of design and purpose in the enzyme's structure and function. UDG is found in various organisms, from bacteria to humans, indicating its essential role in DNA repair across diverse life forms.  The activity of UDG must be tightly regulated to prevent excessive uracil removal and potential damage to the DNA. Such precise regulation is unlikely to arise through unguided naturalistic mechanisms, as it requires an intentional arrangement of components to achieve optimal control.

The tasks of error monitoring, checking, and repair are not haphazard occurrences. Instead, they are carried out with a clear purpose and intent. When things break down or malfunctions, it is the mark of intelligent agents equipped with intentions, foresight, and a goal-oriented approach that takes charge of repairing or even creating complex systems that can prevent future breakdowns. Man-made machines are undoubtedly impressive creations, but they rely heavily on the intervention of skilled technicians to identify errors, locate broken parts, and carefully replace them without causing further damage. The intricate process demands a profound understanding of the machine's inner workings and the know-how to handle the task skillfully. Despite our advancements, we have not yet succeeded in creating a fully autonomous machine or factory that can independently monitor and rectify all aspects of the manufacturing process. Such a feat remains beyond our grasp, and we still rely on external intervention to ensure quality standards and restore normalcy when havoc ensues. DNA repair involves a keen understanding and know-how.

The concepts of machine and factory error monitoring, checking, and repair are all tasks performed with goal-directedness, intent, and purpose. 
1. Repairing things that are broken, malfunctioning, or instantiating complex systems that autonomously prevent things to break are always actions performed by agents with intentions, volition, goal-orientedness, foresight, understanding, and know-how.
2. Man-made machines almost always require direct intelligent intervention by technicians to recognize errors, find which parts of a machine are broken, know how to remove and replace them without breaking surrounding parts of the device and know how to construct the part that has to be replaced with fidelity, and re-insert and re-connect it where the part was removed. The entire process is complex, demanding know-how, and depends on a high quantity of intelligence in performing all involved actions.
3. Man has not been able to create a fully autonomous, preprogrammed machine or factory, that is able to quality and error monitor all manufacturing processes and the correct performance of all devices involved, and if the products are up to the required quality standard, and, if something drives havoc, repair and re-establish normal function of what was broken or malfunctioning without external intervention.
4. C.H. Loch writes in the science paper: "Organic Production Systems: What the Biological Cell Can Teach Us About Manufacturing" (2004): Biological cells are preprogrammed to use quality-management techniques used in manufacturing today. The cell invests in defect prevention at various stages of its replication process, using 100% inspection processes, quality assurance procedures, and foolproofing techniques. An example of the cell inspecting each and every part of a product is DNA proofreading. As the DNA gets replicated, the enzyme DNA polymerase adds new nucleotides to the growing DNA strand, limiting the number of errors by removing incorrectly incorporated nucleotides with a proofreading function. Following is an impressive example:  Unbroken DNA conducts electricity, while an error blocks the current. Some repair enzymes exploit this. One pair of enzymes lock onto different parts of a DNA strand. One of them sends an electron down the strand. If the DNA is unbroken, the electron reaches the other enzyme and causes it to detach. I.e. this process scans the region of DNA between them, and if it’s clean, there is no need for repairs. But if there is a break, the electron doesn’t reach the second enzyme. This enzyme then moves along the strand until it reaches the error, and fixes it. This mechanism of repair seems to be present in all living things, from bacteria to man. Know-how is needed: 

a.  To know that something is broken (DNA damage sensing) 
b.  To identify where exactly it is broken 
c.  To know when to repair it (e.g. one has to stop/or put on hold some other ongoing processes, in other words, one needs to know lots of other things, one needs to know the whole system, otherwise one creates more damage…) 
d.  to know how to repair it (to use the right tools, materials, energy, etc, etc, etc ) 
e.  to make sure that the repair was performed correctly. (this can be observed in DNA repair as well)

5. On top of that: Cells do not even wait until a protein machine fails, but replace it long before it has a chance to break down. Furthermore, it completely recycles the machine that is taken out of production. The components derived from this recycling process can be used not only to create other machines of the same type but also to create different machines if that is what is needed in the “plant.” This way of handling its machines has some clear advantages for the cell. New capacity can be installed quickly to meet current demand. At the same time, there are never idle machines around taking up space or hogging important building blocks. Maintenance is a positive “side effect” of the continuous machine renewal process, thereby guaranteeing the quality of output. Finally, the ability to quickly build new production lines from scratch has allowed the cell to take advantage of a big library of contingency plans in its DNA that allow it to quickly react to a wide range of circumstances, as we will describe next.
6. The more sophisticated, advanced, autonomous, complex, and information-driven machines or factories are, the more they carry the hallmark of design. The very concepts of error monitoring, checking, and repair, and replacement in advance to avoid future break-ups are tasks performed with goal-directedness and purpose. Biological cells are far more advanced than any machine and factory ever devised and invented by man. It is therefore rational and warranted to infer, that biological cells were designed. 

Nucleotide Counting and Proofreading: Safeguarding DNA Replication Fidelity

One of the mechanisms employed for error-checking and maintaining the accuracy of DNA sequences involves counting nucleotides. This mechanism is particularly relevant during DNA replication and is closely associated with the proofreading activity of DNA polymerases. DNA polymerases are enzymes responsible for synthesizing new DNA strands by adding complementary nucleotides to the growing strand during DNA replication. Many DNA polymerases possess a specialized 3' to 5' exonuclease activity, which allows them to "proofread" the DNA strand as they add nucleotides. During DNA replication, DNA polymerases identify the correct nucleotide to add by ensuring proper base pairing with the template strand. For example, adenine (A) pairs with thymine (T), and cytosine (C) pairs with guanine (G). Checking for Correct Pairing: Before adding a nucleotide, the DNA polymerase briefly pauses to ensure that the incoming nucleotide is correctly base-paired with the template nucleotide. If there's a mismatch, the DNA polymerase can detect it. If a mismatched nucleotide has been added, the DNA polymerase can use its 3' to 5' exonuclease activity to backtrack along the DNA strand. This exonuclease activity allows the polymerase to remove the incorrect nucleotide. Once the incorrect nucleotide is removed, the DNA polymerase resumes its forward movement and adds the correct nucleotide in its place. This proofreading process helps to maintain the accuracy of the DNA sequence. The key here is that the DNA polymerase is effectively "counting" the nucleotides as it moves along the DNA strand. If a mismatched nucleotide is added, the polymerase recognizes the error and takes corrective action by removing the incorrect nucleotide before continuing the replication process. This proofreading mechanism is a crucial part of DNA replication and contributes to the fidelity of the genetic information passed on to daughter cells during cell division. It's worth noting that while this mechanism is effective, it's not infallible, and occasional errors still occur. However, the combination of proofreading, mismatch repair, and other DNA repair mechanisms helps to ensure the integrity of the genetic code.

The intricate process of error checking and repair in DNA replication is a remarkable example of the precision and complexity present in biological systems. The emergence of this process prior to the beginning of life raises important questions about its origin and challenges explanations solely based on unguided, random naturalistic processes. The error-checking and repair mechanisms in DNA replication involve the recognition of correct base pairing, the detection of errors, and the precise removal and replacement of incorrect nucleotides. This process requires information about the correct sequence and the ability to discern errors from the correct information. Information-rich processes, such as error correction, are a hallmark of intelligent design and purposeful engineering. The error-checking and repair machinery in DNA replication is irreducibly complex, meaning that it requires the coordinated function of multiple components to achieve its function. Removing or altering any of these components would disrupt the entire process, rendering it ineffective. Such irreducible complexity presents a challenge for gradual, step-by-step evolution through natural selection, as intermediate stages would not provide a selective advantage until the entire system is in place. From a naturalistic perspective, the emergence of error-checking and repair mechanisms prior to the beginning of life poses several challenges: The error-checking and repair mechanisms involve a variety of proteins with specific functions, as well as sophisticated molecular interactions. Explaining the simultaneous emergence of these components through unguided processes is a significant challenge. Error correction requires knowledge of the correct sequence. Information-rich processes are typically associated with intelligent design. How could this information-rich system arise without a guiding intelligence? The error-checking and repair mechanisms require functional DNA polymerases for their operation. However, functional DNA polymerases themselves require error-checking and repair to ensure accuracy. This creates a chicken-and-egg dilemma in which neither component could have emerged without the other. In the absence of error-checking and repair mechanisms, errors in replication would accumulate rapidly, leading to a loss of genetic information and functional integrity. This raises questions about the selective advantage of gradual, unguided processes in the early stages of life's emergence.

Molecules like DNA do not possess inherent goals, intentions, or purpose. They are subject to the laws of chemistry and physics. The emergence of complex biochemical systems, including error-checking and repair mechanisms, must be explained in terms of the interactions and properties of these molecules within their environment. While molecules themselves lack inherent purpose, the complexity and functionality observed in biological systems raise important questions about their origins. The intricate mechanisms, such as error checking and repair, are critical for the survival and function of living organisms. These mechanisms enable organisms to maintain genetic fidelity, adapt to changing environments, and reproduce successfully. The argument for intelligent design suggests that the presence of purposeful, information-rich systems points toward a designer or creative force. The probability of such complex systems emerging through unguided processes is statistically close to zero.

Error checking and repair systems in the cell, amazing evidence of design
https://reasonandscience.catsboard.com/t2043-dna-and-rna-error-checking-and-repair-amazing-evidence-of-design

Following is a comprehensive list of DNA error check and repair mechanisms

Proofreading during DNA Replication
Mismatch Repair (MMR)
Translesion DNA Synthesis (TLS)
Photoreactivation (Light Repair)
O6-Methylguanine-DNA Methyltransferase (MGMT) Repair
Base Excision Repair (BER)
Nucleotide Excision Repair (NER)
Double-Strand Break Repair (DSBR):
Non-Homologous End Joining (NHEJ)
Homologous Recombination (HR)
Microhomology-Mediated End Joining (MMEJ)
Transcription-Coupled Repair (TCR)
Global Genome Repair (GGR)
Ribonucleotide Excision Repair (RER)
Chromatin Remodeling and Repair
RNA Editing (not a direct DNA repair mechanism, but can correct errors in genetic information)
Proofreading by RNA Polymerase during Transcription
DNA Damage Bypass Mechanisms
Error-Prone Bypass (SOS Response in bacteria)
Error-Free Bypass (template switching, post-replication repair)
Interstrand Crosslink Repair
Direct Repair (e.g., Alkyltransferases for alkylated DNA)
DNA Damage Checkpoints and Cell Cycle Arrest

Many of the DNA repair mechanisms are essential for maintaining genome integrity in both prokaryotic and eukaryotic cells. The presence and organization of these mechanisms can vary between the two cell types.

Employed in Prokaryotic Cells

Proofreading during DNA Replication: This mechanism is present in both prokaryotes and eukaryotes, as accurate DNA replication is crucial for all cells.
Mismatch Repair (MMR): Found in both prokaryotes and eukaryotes, MMR corrects errors that occur during DNA replication, enhancing the fidelity of genetic information.
Photoreactivation (Light Repair): Generally more relevant in organisms exposed to sunlight, photoreactivation is not as common in prokaryotes.
Translesion DNA Synthesis (TLS)
O6-Methylguanine-DNA Methyltransferase (MGMT) Repair
Proofreading by RNA Polymerase during Transcription
Error-Prone Bypass (SOS Response in bacteria)
Error-Free Bypass (template switching, post-replication repair)
Interstrand Crosslink Repair

Employed in Eukaryotic Cells

Base Excision Repair (BER): Eukaryotes employ BER to correct small, non-bulky DNA lesions.
Nucleotide Excision Repair (NER): NER corrects a wide range of DNA lesions and is more complex in eukaryotes due to their larger genomes and chromatin structure.
Double-Strand Break Repair (DSBR):
Homologous Recombination (HR): Eukaryotes use HR to accurately repair double-strand breaks during cell division.
Microhomology-Mediated End Joining (MMEJ): While both prokaryotes and eukaryotes can use MMEJ, it's more prevalent in eukaryotic cells.
Non-Homologous End Joining (NHEJ): Present in both cell types, NHEJ is a more important repair mechanism in eukaryotes due to their complex genome architecture.
Transcription-Coupled Repair (TCR): TCR is specific to eukaryotes and is involved in repairing DNA lesions that block transcription.
Global Genome Repair (GGR): Eukaryotic cells use GGR to detect and repair DNA lesions throughout the genome.
Ribonucleotide Excision Repair (RER): Eukaryotes have RER to remove ribonucleotides mistakenly incorporated into DNA during replication.
Chromatin Remodeling and Repair: The chromatin structure in eukaryotes necessitates specialized mechanisms for DNA repair in the context of chromatin.
DNA Damage Checkpoints and Cell Cycle Arrest: Eukaryotic cells have complex checkpoint mechanisms that coordinate DNA repair with the cell cycle, helping to prevent the propagation of damaged DNA during cell division.
Both prokaryotic and eukaryotic cells may utilize DNA Damage Bypass Mechanisms, RNA Editing (eukaryotes), and DNA Damage Checkpoints and Cell Cycle Arrest (prokaryotes and eukaryotes) to varying extents.
Translesion DNA Synthesis (TLS)
O6-Methylguanine-DNA Methyltransferase (MGMT) Repair
Proofreading by RNA Polymerase during Transcription
Error-Free Bypass (template switching, post-replication repair)
Interstrand Crosslink Repair

It's important to note that the distinction between prokaryotic and eukaryotic cells isn't always clear-cut, as there's significant diversity within each group. Additionally, some mechanisms, while more prevalent in one cell type, might still occur to some degree in the other. The specific organization and utilization of these repair mechanisms can vary based on an organism's lifestyle, environment, and evolutionary history.

Likely to Have Emerged Early in Primitive Life Forms

These processes are all fundamental for cellular survival and DNA maintenance:

Proofreading during DNA Replication
Mismatch Repair (MMR)
Photoreactivation (Light Repair): As long as the organisms had some sensitivity to light, basic photoreactivation mechanisms could have evolved relatively early.
Transcription-Coupled Repair (TCR): The need to ensure accurate transcription and repair of DNA lesions could have emerged early.

Likely to Have Emerged After the Emergence of Basic Life Forms

Base Excision Repair (BER)
Nucleotide Excision Repair (NER)
Ribonucleotide Excision Repair (RER)
Chromatin Remodeling and Repair: As cellular complexity increased, the need for mechanisms to deal with chromatin-associated DNA damage likely arose.
RNA Editing: While not a direct DNA repair mechanism, RNA editing could have emerged as a mechanism to correct genetic information errors in the early stages of life.
Proofreading by RNA Polymerase during Transcription: As transcription became a fundamental process, mechanisms to ensure transcriptional accuracy could have started.
Error-Prone Bypass (SOS Response in bacteria): As life faced more complex environments and encountered various types of DNA damage, the SOS response might have emerged to allow for survival in the face of extreme stress.
Error-Free Bypass (template switching, post-replication repair): More sophisticated mechanisms for DNA damage tolerance could have developed as organisms became more complex.
Interstrand Crosslink Repair: Addressing crosslinks between DNA strands likely emerged as DNA-replicating organisms faced the challenge of repairing such damage.
DNA Damage Checkpoints and Cell Cycle Arrest: Coordination between DNA repair and the cell cycle became increasingly important as cellular division and complexity increased.

At the core of life's intricate machinery lies DNA, the genetic blueprint that ensures the continuity and functionality of organisms. However, the process of replicating DNA is not infallible. Mistakes, if not corrected, can lead to significant problems, from minor cellular dysfunctions to severe diseases. This underscores the critical importance of the cell's error-checking and repair mechanisms, which act as guardians of genetic integrity.

During DNA replication, the bacterium E. coli, for example, has an error rate of about one in a billion nucleotides, an impressively low figure given the speed and complexity of the process. This accuracy is achieved through a multi-tiered system of proofreading. Initially, the enzyme DNA polymerase identifies errors with an accuracy rate of one in 100,000. Recognizing these errors, the enzyme halts replication, allowing other molecules to correct the mistake, enhancing the accuracy by 100 to 1,000 times.

Even with this initial proofreading, some errors manage to slip through. A second round of proofreading is initiated by a trio of proteins. This system identifies errors, marks them, and then replaces the faulty section with the correct sequence. This secondary mechanism alone boasts a 99% efficiency, further refining the overall accuracy.

Such meticulous proofreading mechanisms are not exclusive to E. coli. Human cells also possess advanced error-checking systems, with multiple polymerases and enzymes that rectify mistakes. Malfunctions in these human systems, like in the MutL protein, can lead to severe consequences, such as cancer.

So, why are these error-check and repair mechanisms so crucial? The answer lies in the concept of "error catastrophe." Without these rigorous checking systems, the error rate would skyrocket with each replication cycle. As errors accumulate, they compound, leading to a cascade of mutations. This would render the genome unstable, resulting in non-functional proteins and, ultimately, cell death. For life to persist and thrive, the fidelity of genetic information must be maintained across generations.

Given the complexity and precision of these systems, it's evident that they are indispensable for cellular life. Their existence from the onset of life is a logical necessity. Without them, the error rate would have been too high for life to sustain itself, leading to an error catastrophe. This intricate design and functionality suggest that these systems were not a product of gradual evolution but were integral from the beginning. Their sophistication and the dire consequences of their absence lend credence to the idea that they were consciously designed with foresight. Simply put, for life to exist and flourish, the meticulous mechanisms that guard against genetic errors were essential from the outset.

Mechanisms of Cellular Quality Control and Maintenance: Indications of Design and Forethought in Biological Systems

1. Systems with intricate error-checking, monitoring, and repair mechanisms that can self-assess, auto-correct, and show predictive, preventive, and preservative features are indicative of intelligent design.
2. Both human-engineered systems and biological systems possess intricate error-checking, monitoring, and repair mechanisms that can self-assess, auto-correct, and show predictive, preventive, and preservative features.
3. John F. Herschel (1830): If the analogy of two phenomena be very close and striking, while, at the same time, the cause of one is very obvious, it becomes scarcely possible to refuse to admit the action of an analogous cause in the other, though not so obvious in itself.
4. Therefore, both human-engineered systems and biological systems are indicative of intelligent design.

Error-checking and repair mechanisms: They stand as a beacon of forethought and detailed planning. Such systems aren't mere reactionary tools but are proactive measures built to ensure continuous and optimal performance. Their very existence indicates an understanding of possible shortcomings and an inbuilt strategy to address them, suggesting an intentionally and purposefully instantiated monitoring system, and prompt repair mechanism when needed.  Whenever we encounter systems capable of self-diagnosis and subsequent repair, it speaks of a design that's intricate and well-thought-out. These attributes don't align with the randomness of unguided events. Instead, they are evidence having the characteristics of intelligent set up where each part, process, and function has been integrated with a specific intent for peak performance. Within our human experiences, systems embedded with self-regulation and maintenance features immediately point toward intelligent design. These systems, laden with multi-functional capabilities, undeniably stem from deep understanding, clear intentions, and goal-oriented designs. The precision of these mechanisms, coupled with the foresight to anticipate issues and the readiness to rectify them, strongly indicates a design driven by logic, intelligence, and intent, rather than mere coincidence or happenstance.
Design in Monitoring: Observing intricate monitoring mechanisms, we're reminded of the sophisticated designs evident in human-engineered systems. These mechanisms, precise and targeted, are challenging to attribute to mere randomness. The capability to not just detect but also aptly rectify issues points towards a foundational design principle, a principle that's evident in our own human-made systems, driving us to consider a purposeful design rather than random occurrences. Systems that can self-assess and auto-correct are undeniably products of intensive planning and foresight. Be it in computer systems or machinery, when such features are observed, an intelligently and intentionally designed setup is always discernible. Recognizing similar, often superior, mechanisms in other systems, it's persuasive to attribute them to a design that's not just reactive but predictive, preventive, and preservative, showcasing a design that's driven by purpose and planning. Mechanisms that ensure precision, continuity, and efficiency in systems go beyond simple fixes. The notion that such multifaceted systems, with their ability to detect and rectify, could emerge from random events is implausible. Every human parallel traces back to a source of intelligence and design. Observing these parallels elsewhere, especially in more advanced forms, they appear as clear markers of overarching design rather than mere random occurrences.

The following mechanisms are primarily related to cellular quality control, error check, and repair processes. They encompass various systems within the cell that ensure the correct functioning, folding, and degradation of proteins, as well as the integrity and proper processing of RNA molecules. They also include responses to cellular damage, stress, or nutrient imbalances. Collectively, these mechanisms help maintain the health and functionality of the cell by addressing and rectifying errors or damages that may occur in its components.

In Eukaryotic Cells

1. ABC Transporters: While primarily involved in transport across the cell membrane, some members play roles in the efflux of toxins and drugs. 1
2. Apoptosis: Apoptosis or programmed cell death eliminates damaged, infected, or malignant cells in an orderly manner. 2
3. Cell Cycle Checkpoints: Cell cycle checkpoints monitor the completion of critical events. Damage triggers arrest allowing repair before the cell cycle progresses. 3
4. Chaperone Proteins: Molecular chaperones are key components of the cellular network of protein quality control. They promote the correct folding of proteins, target misfolded proteins for degradation, and prevent aggregation. 4
5. Cytoskeleton Regulation: The actin cytoskeleton is dynamically regulated to enable versatile cell shape changes. 5
6. Endosomal Sorting: Involved in sorting and degradation of misfolded proteins. 6
7. Endoplasmic Reticulum Quality Control: Only properly folded and assembled proteins exit the ER; misfolded proteins are retained and eventually degraded by ER-associated degradation. 7
8. Exosome-mediated RNA Surveillance: Degradation of aberrant RNAs. 8
9. Heat Shock Response: Heat shock proteins induced by cellular stress refold damaged proteins and aid the degradation of irreparable proteins. 9
10. HSP90 Chaperone System: Assists in protein folding and can help refold misfolded proteins.10
11. Lysosome Quality Control: Lysosomes degrade extracellular material internalized by endocytosis and membrane proteins delivered by endosomal sorting. 11
12. miRNA Regulation: MicroRNAs (miRNAs) interact with complementarity elements in target mRNAs to induce mRNA degradation or repress protein translation. 12
13. Mitochondrial Quality Control: Mitochondria contain proteases and molecular chaperones involved in protein quality control. Damaged mitochondria can also undergo selective autophagic degradation (mitophagy). 13
14. mRNA Surveillance: Eukaryotic cells recognize and destroy mRNAs that contain premature stop codons or lack termination codons in a process called nonsense-mediated mRNA decay (NMD). 14
15. Nonsense-mediated Decay: Degrades mRNAs containing premature stop codons to prevent the production of truncated proteins.15
16. Nutrient Homeostasis: Cells tightly regulate levels of key nutrients like glucose and amino acids through transporters, metabolic enzymes, and signaling. 16
17. Organelle Quality Control: Cells maintain organelle quality and function through autophagic degradation of damaged proteins and organelles followed by biogenesis. 17
18. Phagocytic Clearance: Phagocytic cells like macrophages engulf and digest pathogens, apoptotic cells, and cellular debris. 18
19. Proteasomes: The ubiquitin–proteasome system is the primary cytosolic proteolytic system in eukaryotic cells. It targets damaged proteins for destruction, thereby implementing irreplaceable protein quality control functions. 19
20. Proteostasis Network: Maintains protein homeostasis by ensuring proper protein folding and degrading misfolded proteins.20
21. RNA Editing: Modifies RNA sequences to correct errors.21
22. RNA Interference: Degrades foreign or aberrant RNA sequences.22
23. RNA Surveillance and Decay: Eukaryotic RNA turnover removals faulty transcripts, such as those with premature stop codons or processing defects, using specialized RNA decay machineries. 23
24. Senescence: A cellular response to damage or stress, leading to a permanent state of cell cycle arrest.24
25. SUMOylation: Can be involved in the response to certain cellular stresses.25
26. tRNA Proofreading: A second major proofreading checkpoint eliminates mismatches by a process called tRNA proofreading, where the ribosome discriminates against non-cognate ternary complexes. 26
27. Ubiquitination: Tags damaged or unneeded proteins for degradation.27
28. Unfolded Protein Response: The unfolded protein response restores ER homeostasis by attenuating translation, enhancing chaperones, and degrading misfolded proteins. 28

In Prokaryotic Cells

29. Argonaute-mediated mRNA Regulation: While this mechanism is more renowned in eukaryotes, some prokaryotes possess Argonaute proteins that may have roles in RNA interference-like processes. 29
30. ATP-dependent Proteases: These proteases, such as Lon and ClpXP, degrade misfolded or damaged proteins in the cell, thereby acting as a protein quality control mechanism.30
31. Cas Proteins for Degradation of Foreign DNA: As a part of the CRISPR/Cas system, these proteins target and degrade foreign DNA sequences, providing adaptive immunity to bacteria.31
32. ClpXP Protease System: This system degrades misfolded or damaged proteins, ensuring protein quality control.32
33. CRISPR/Cas Adaptive Immunity: It provides bacteria with a mechanism to remember and defend against foreign genetic elements, like viruses.33
34. LexA Regulon in DNA Damage Response: This is a key regulator of the SOS response to DNA damage in bacteria.34
35. Lon Protease System: Similar to ClpXP, this system is involved in degrading damaged or misfolded proteins.35
36. SOS Response to DNA Damage: This is a global response in bacteria to DNA damage where the cell cycle is halted and DNA repair genes are upregulated.36
37. Transcription Coupled Repair: This is a mechanism where the repair of damaged DNA is coupled to transcription.37
38. Trans-translation: This rescues ribosomes that are stalled on mRNAs, which can be due to errors or damage.38
39. tRNA Proofreading and Repair: Ensures the fidelity of tRNA molecules which are crucial for proper protein synthesis.39


1. Locher KP. (2016). Mechanistic diversity in ATP-binding cassette (ABC) transporters. Nat Struct Mol Biol, 23(6), 487-493. Link. (Reviews the diversity of ABC transporters including their roles in toxin efflux.)
2. Elmore S. (2007). Apoptosis: a review of programmed cell death. Toxicol Pathol, 35(4), 495-516. Link. (A comprehensive review of apoptosis and programmed cell death.)
3. Branzei D, Foiani M. (2010). Maintaining genome stability at the replication fork. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol, 11(3), 208-219. Link. (An exploration into the mechanisms of maintaining genome stability during replication.)
4. Hartl FU, Bracher A, Hayer-Hartl M. (2011). Molecular chaperones in protein folding and proteostasis. Nature, 475(7356), 324-332. Link. (This comprehensive article delves into the role of molecular chaperones in protein folding and the maintenance of cellular protein balance.)
5. Pollard TD, Cooper JA. (2009). Actin, a central player in cell shape and movement. Science, 326(5957), 1208-1212. Link. (A discussion on the role of actin in cell shape and movement.)
6. Huotari J, Helenius A. (2011). Endosome maturation. EMBO J, 30(17), 3481-3500. Link. (Discusses endosomal sorting and degradation of proteins.)
7. Dong X, Wang Y. (2021). Organelle Quality Control and Homeostasis. Trends Cell Biol, 31(3), 208-220. Link. (A review on the mechanisms of organelle quality control and homeostasis.)
8.  Chlebowski A et al. (2013). The exosome contains domains with specific endoribonuclease, exoribonuclease and cytoplasmic mRNA decay activities. Nat Struct Mol Biol, 20(1), 56-62. Link. (Characterizes exosome complex involved in RNA decay.)
9. Morimoto RI. (2011). The heat shock response: systems biology of proteotoxic stress in aging and disease. Cold Spring Harb Symp Quant Biol, 76, 91-9. Link. (An exploration into the heat shock response and its role in proteotoxic stress.)
10.  Taipale M et al. (2010). HSP90 at the hub of protein homeostasis: emerging mechanistic insights. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol, 11(7), 515-528. Link. (Reviews HSP90 system functions including protein refolding.)
11. Pu J, Gracz AD, Bassham DC. (2021). Autophagy in Plant Immune Responses. Plant Physiol, 185(1), 25-37. Link. (A study on the role of autophagy in plant immune responses.)
12. Jonas S, Izaurralde E. (2015). Towards a molecular understanding of microRNA-mediated gene silencing. Nat Rev Genet, 16(7), 421-433. Link. (An in-depth look at microRNA-mediated gene silencing at the molecular level.)
13. Lin MT, Beal MF. (2006). Mitochondrial dysfunction and oxidative stress in neurodegenerative diseases. Nature, 443(7113), 787-795. Link. (An overview of mitochondrial dysfunction and its link to neurodegenerative diseases.)
14. Isken O, Maquat LE. (2008). The multiple lives of NMD factors: balancing roles in gene and genome regulation. Nat Rev Genet, 9(9), 699-712. Link. (An exploration into the role of nonsense-mediated mRNA decay in gene and genome regulation.)
15. Llorca, O. (2013). Structural insights into nonsense-mediated mRNA decay (NMD) by electron microscopy. Current Opinion in Structural Biology, 23(1), 161-7. Link.
16. Hülsmeier AJ, Hennet T. (2016). Deglycosylation and reglycosylation as a mechanism to modulate glycoprotein function. Glycobiology, 26(10), 920-928. Link. (A review on the role of deglycosylation and reglycosylation in glycoprotein function.)
17. Smith MH, Ploegh HL, Weissman JS. (2011). Road to ruin: targeting proteins for degradation in the endoplasmic reticulum. Science, 334(6059), 1086-1090. Link. (A discussion on targeting proteins for degradation in the endoplasmic reticulum.)
18. Schröder M, Kaufman RJ. (2005). The mammalian unfolded protein response. Annu Rev Biochem, 74, 739-89. Link. (A comprehensive review of the mammalian unfolded protein response.)
19. Finley D. (2009). Recognition and processing of ubiquitin-protein conjugates by the proteasome. Annu Rev Biochem, 78, 477-513. Link. (This detailed review explores how the proteasome recognizes and processes ubiquitin-protein conjugates, essential for protein degradation and cellular regulation.)
20. Balch WE et al. (2008). Adapting proteostasis for disease intervention. Science, 319(5865), 916-919. Link. (Discusses regulation of proteostasis through protein folding and degradation.)
21. Tariq A, Jantsch MF. (2012). Transcript diversification in the nervous system: A to I RNA editing in CNS function and disease development. Front Neurosci, 6, 99. Link. (Describes the process and importance of RNA editing.)
22. Ipsaro JJ, Joshua-Tor L. (2015). From guide to target: molecular insights into eukaryotic RNA-interference machinery. Nat Struct Mol Biol, 22(1), 20-28. Link. (Reviews the mechanisms of RNAi and mRNA degradation.)
23. Schmid M, Jensen TH. (2018). Controlling nuclear RNA levels. Nat Rev Genet, 19(8 ), 518-529. Link. (A comprehensive review on the control of nuclear RNA levels.)
24. Kuilman T, Peeper DS. (2009). Senescence-messaging secretome: SMS-ing cellular stress. Nat Rev Cancer, 9(2), 81-94. Link. (Describes senescence as a stress response and tumor suppressor mechanism.)
25. Flotho A, Melchior F. (2013). Sumoylation: a regulatory protein modification in health and disease. Annu Rev Biochem, 82, 357-385. Link. (Reviews protein SUMOylation and its roles in stress response.)
26. Zaher HS, Green R. (2009). Fidelity at the molecular level: lessons from protein synthesis. Cell, 136(4), 746-762. Link. (A study on molecular fidelity, focusing on protein synthesis.)
27. Jacob, F., & Monod, J. (1961). Genetic regulatory mechanisms in the synthesis of proteins. Journal of Molecular Biology, 3(3), 318-356. Link. (This groundbreaking paper introduced the concept of operons, discussing their role in the coordinated expression of genes.)
28. Hochreiter-Hufford A, Ravichandran KS. (2013). Clearing the dead: apoptotic cell sensing, recognition, engulfment, and digestion. Cold Spring Harb Perspect Biol, 5(1), a008748. Link. (A detailed review on the mechanisms of apoptotic cell clearance.)
29. Argonaute-mediated mRNA Regulation: Swarts DC et al. (2014). Argonaute of the archaeon Pyrococcus furiosus is a DNA-guided nuclease that targets cognate mRNAs. Nucleic Acids Res, 42(9), 5471-5486. Link. (Characterizes archaeal Argonaute which may target foreign RNA.)
30. ATP-dependent Proteases: Langklotz S et al. (2012). ATP-dependent proteases in bacterial pathogens: elaborate machines for protein quality control. Gut Microbes, 3(6), 570-576. Link. (Reviews ATP-dependent proteases in bacteria.)
31. Cas Proteins for Degradation of Foreign DNA: Hochstrasser ML et al. (2017). CasA mediates Cas3-catalyzed target degradation during CRISPR RNA-guided adaptive immunity. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA, 114(18), E3652-E3660. Link. (Examines Cas protein-mediated DNA degradation.)
32. ClpXP Protease System: Alexopoulos JA et al. (2013). ClpP: A Structurally Dynamic Protease Regulated by AAA+ Proteins. J Struct Biol, 183(4), 503–510. Link. (Reviews the ClpXP protease complex.)
33. CRISPR/Cas Adaptive Immunity: Wright AV et al. (2016). Structures of the CRISPR genome integration complex. Science, 357(6347), 1113-1118. Link. (Characterizes the CRISPR/Cas bacterial immune system.)
34. LexA Regulon in DNA Damage Response: Butala M et al. (2009). Double locking of an Escherichia coli promoter by two repressors prevents premature colicin gene expression and cell lysis. Mol Microbiol, 71(1), 129-139. Link. (Examines LexA regulation of the SOS response.)
35. Lon Protease System: Lee I et al. (2013). Regulation of proteolysis by human Lon is vital to mitochondrial homeostasis. Cell Metab, 17(6), 891-902. Link. (Reviews the role of Lon protease in protein quality control.)
36. SOS Response to DNA Damage: Baharoglu Z, Mazel D. (2014). SOS, the formidable strategy of bacteria against aggressions. FEMS Microbiol Rev, 38(6), 1126-1145. Link. (Provides an overview of the SOS response to DNA damage.)
37. Transcription Coupled Repair: Ganesan S et al. (2012). Transcription shapes DNA repair. Transcription, 3(2), 106-111. Link. (Reviews how DNA repair is coupled to transcription.)
38. Trans-translation: Keiler KC. (2015). Mechanisms of ribosome rescue in bacteria. Nat Rev Microbiol, 13(5), 285-297. Link. (Describes trans-translation and its roles in rescuing stalled ribosomes.)
39. tRNA Proofreading and Repair: Phizicky EM, Hopper AK. (2010). tRNA biology charges to the front. Genes Dev, 24(17), 1832-1860. Link. (Reviews tRNA processing and quality control mechanisms.)

DNA Error Check and Repair Mechanisms

In Eukaryotic Cells

1. Base Excision Repair (BER): Eukaryotes employ BER to correct small, non-bulky DNA lesions. 1
2. Nucleotide Excision Repair (NER): NER corrects a wide range of DNA lesions and is more complex in eukaryotes due to their larger genomes and chromatin structure. 2
3. Double-Strand Break Repair (DSBR): Homologous Recombination (HR): Eukaryotes use HR to accurately repair double-strand breaks during cell division. 3
4. Homologous Recombination (HR): Eukaryotes use HR to accurately repair double-strand breaks during cell division. 4
5. Microhomology-Mediated End Joining (MMEJ): While both prokaryotes and eukaryotes can use MMEJ, it's more prevalent in eukaryotic cells. 5
6. Non-Homologous End Joining (NHEJ): Present in both cell types, NHEJ is a more important repair mechanism in eukaryotes due to their complex genome architecture. 6
7. Transcription-Coupled Repair (TCR): TCR is specific to eukaryotes and is involved in repairing DNA lesions that block transcription.7
8. Global Genome Repair (GGR): Eukaryotic cells use GGR to detect and repair DNA lesions throughout the genome.8
9. Ribonucleotide Excision Repair (RER): Eukaryotes have RER to remove ribonucleotides mistakenly incorporated into DNA during replication. 9
10. Chromatin Remodeling and Repair: The chromatin structure in eukaryotes necessitates specialized mechanisms for DNA repair in the context of chromatin. 10
11. DNA Damage Checkpoints and Cell Cycle Arrest: These are critical mechanisms that ensure a cell does not progress through the cell cycle with damaged DNA. Eukaryotic cells, in particular, have complex checkpoint mechanisms that work in tandem with DNA repair pathways. This coordination helps to prevent the propagation of damaged DNA during cell division.11
12. DNA Damage Bypass Mechanisms: Both prokaryotic and eukaryotic cells can employ mechanisms to continue DNA replication in the presence of DNA lesions. These mechanisms can either be error-prone, introducing mutations, or error-free.12
13. RNA Editing (eukaryotes): In eukaryotes, specific enzymes can modify RNA nucleotides after transcription, which can result in a protein that is different from what would be predicted by the DNA sequence.13
14. Translesion DNA Synthesis (TLS): A specialized process that allows DNA synthesis to continue past a lesion or damage in the DNA, which might otherwise stall the replication fork. This can be error-prone, introducing mutations.14
15. O6-Methylguanine-DNA Methyltransferase (MGMT) Repair: An enzyme that repairs alkylated DNA by transferring the alkyl group from the O6 position of guanine to its own cysteine residue, preventing mismatch and mutations during replication.15
16. Proofreading by RNA Polymerase during Transcription: RNA polymerase has an intrinsic proofreading activity that ensures the fidelity of RNA transcription by correcting any mistakes made during RNA synthesis.16
17. Error-Free Bypass (template switching, post-replication repair): A mechanism that involves using the undamaged sister chromatid as a template to bypass DNA lesions, ensuring replication continues without mutations.17
18. Interstrand Crosslink Repair: Targets and repairs DNA structures where the two strands are covalently linked, which prevents strand separation and hampers processes like transcription and replication.18

In Prokaryotic Cells

19. Proofreading during DNA Replication: This mechanism is present in both prokaryotes and eukaryotes, as accurate DNA replication is crucial for all cells. 19
20. Mismatch Repair (MMR): Found in both prokaryotes and eukaryotes, MMR corrects errors that occur during DNA replication, enhancing the fidelity of genetic information. 20
21. Photoreactivation (Light Repair): Generally more relevant in organisms exposed to sunlight, photoreactivation is not as common in prokaryotes. 21
22. Translesion DNA Synthesis (TLS): This process allows the DNA replication machinery to bypass lesions or errors in the DNA, albeit at the cost of introducing mutations. 22.
23. O6-Methylguanine-DNA Methyltransferase (MGMT) Repair: MGMT repairs alkylated DNA by removing the alkyl group from the O6 position of guanine, preventing mismatch and mutations during replication. 23.
24. Proofreading by RNA Polymerase during Transcription: During transcription, RNA polymerase can correct mistakes in RNA synthesis by its intrinsic proofreading activity, which ensures the accuracy of RNA transcripts.24
25. Error-Prone Bypass (SOS Response in bacteria): In response to significant DNA damage, bacteria can invoke the SOS response, which includes a set of genes that allows DNA replication to proceed past lesions, but often at the cost of introducing mutations.
26. Error-Free Bypass (template switching, post-replication repair): This mechanism involves switching to the undamaged sister chromatid as a template to bypass the DNA lesion, ensuring that replication continues without introducing mutations.26
27. Interstrand Crosslink Repair: This pathway repairs DNA structures where the two strands are covalently linked, preventing strand separation and blocking critical processes like transcription and replication.27

The distinction between prokaryotic and eukaryotic cells isn't always clear-cut, as there's significant diversity within each group. Additionally, some mechanisms, while more prevalent in one cell type, might still occur to some degree in the other. The specific organization and utilization of these repair mechanisms can vary based on an organism's lifestyle, environment, and evolutionary history.

References

1. Krokan HE, Bjørås M. (2013). Base excision repair. Cold Spring Harb Perspect Biol, 5(4), a012583. Link. (Provides an overview of BER mechanisms.)
2. Schärer OD. (2013). Nucleotide excision repair in eukaryotes. Cold Spring Harb Perspect Biol, 5(10):a012609. Link. (Reviews NER mechanisms in eukaryotic cells.)
3. Chang HHY et al. (2017) Non-homologous DNA end joining and alternative pathways to double-strand break repair. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol, 18, 495–506. Link. (Discusses DSBR pathways including NHEJ and HR.)
4. Heyer WD et al. (2010). Regulation of homologous recombination in eukaryotes. Annu Rev Genet, 44, 113-139. Link.
5. Sinha S, Villarreal D, Shim EY. (2016). Risky business: Microhomology-mediated end joining. Mutat Res Genet Toxicol Environ Mutagen, 788, 17-24. Link.
6. Deriano L, Roth DB. (2013). Modernizing the nonhomologous end-joining repertoire: alternative and classical NHEJ share the stage. Annu Rev Genet, 47, 433-455. Link.
7. Vermeulen W, Fousteri M. (2013). Mammalian transcription-coupled excision repair. Cold Spring Harb Perspect Biol, 5(8 ), a012625. Link.
8. Lans H, Marteijn JA, Schumacher B, Hoeijmakers JHJ, Jansen G, Vermeulen W. (2010). Involvement of Global Genome Repair, Transcription Coupled Repair, and Chromatin Remodeling in UV DNA Damage Response Changes during Development. PLoS Genet, 6(5), e1000941. Link. (A comprehensive study on the UV DNA damage response mechanisms and their changes during development.)
9. Reijns MA et al. (2012). Enzymatic removal of ribonucleotides from DNA is essential for mammalian genome integrity and development. Cell, 149(5), 1008-1022. Link.
10. Lazzaro F et al. (2017). Histone methyltransferase Dot1 and Rad9 inhibit single-stranded DNA accumulation at DSBs and uncapped telomeres. EMBO J, 36(10):1502-1517. Link.
11. Yam CQX, Lim HH, Surana U. (2022). DNA damage checkpoint execution and the rules of its disengagement. Front Cell Dev Biol, 10, 1020643. Link. (An in-depth examination of the DNA damage checkpoint mechanisms and the regulations governing its disengagement.)
12. Sale JE, Lehmann AR, Woodgate R. (2012). Y-family DNA polymerases and their role in tolerance of cellular DNA damage. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol, 13(3), 141-152. Link. (Reviews DNA damage bypass mechanisms.)
13. Tariq A, Jantsch MF. (2012). Transcript diversification in the nervous system: A to I RNA editing in CNS function and disease development. Front Neurosci, 6, 99. Link. (Describes the process and importance of RNA editing.)
14. Sale JE. (2013). Translesion DNA synthesis and mutagenesis in eukaryotes. Cold Spring Harb Perspect Biol, 5(3):a012708. Link. (Reviews TLS polymerase mechanisms.)
15. Zawahir Z, Dayam R, Deng J. (2015). The emerging role of methyguanine DNA glycosylase in cancer. Carcinogenesis, 36(11), 1187-1197. Link. (Reviews MGMT repair of alkylated DNA.)
16. Sydow D, Cramer P. (2009). RNA polymerase fidelity and transcriptional proofreading. Curr Opin Struct Biol, 19(6), 732-739. Link. (Discusses proofreading during transcription.)
17. Vaisman A, Woodgate R. (2017). Translesion DNA polymerases in eukaryotes: what makes them tick? Crit Rev Biochem Mol Biol, 52(3), 274-303. Link. (Reviews error-free bypass mechanisms.)
18. Clauson C, Schärer OD, Niedernhofer L. (2013). Advances in understanding the complex mechanisms of DNA interstrand cross-link repair. Cold Spring Harb Perspect Biol, 5(10):a012732. Link. (Examines interstrand crosslink repair mechanisms.)
19. McCulloch SD, Kunkel TA. (2008). The fidelity of DNA synthesis by eukaryotic replicative and translesion synthesis polymerases. Cell Res, 18(1), 148-161. Link. (Reviews proofreading mechanisms during DNA replication.)
20. Mismatch Repair (MMR): Jiricny J. (2006). The multifaceted mismatch-repair system. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol, 7(5), 335-346. Link. (Provides an overview of mismatch repair.)
21. Translesion DNA Synthesis (TLS): Sale JE. (2013). Translesion DNA synthesis and mutagenesis in eukaryotes. Cold Spring Harb Perspect Biol, 5(3):a012708. Link. (Reviews TLS polymerase mechanisms.)
22. Photoreactivation (Light Repair): Sancar A. (2003). Structure and function of DNA photolyase and cryptochrome blue-light photoreceptors. Chem Rev, 103(6), 2203-2237. Link. (Discusses light-dependent DNA repair by photolyases.)
23. O6-Methylguanine-DNA Methyltransferase (MGMT) Repair: Zawahir Z, Dayam R, Deng J. (2015). The emerging role of methyguanine DNA glycosylase in cancer. Carcinogenesis, 36(11), 1187-1197. Link. (Reviews MGMT repair of alkylated DNA.)
24. Sydow D, Cramer P. (2009). RNA polymerase fidelity and transcriptional proofreading. Curr Opin Struct Biol, 19(6), 732-739. Link.
25. Katarzyna H. Maslowska, Karolina Makiela‐Dzbenska, and Iwona J. Fijalkowska. (2019). Environ Mol Mutagen, 60(4), 368–384. Link. (Discusses the SOS response system's intricate regulation in response to DNA damage.)
26. Karras GI, Jentsch S. (2010). Cell, 141(2), 255-267. Link. (Discusses template switching mechanisms for error-free lesion bypass.)
27. Clauson C, Schärer OD, Niedernhofer L. (2013). Cold Spring Harb Perspect Biol, 5(10):a012732. Link. (Reviews the various pathways involved in repairing interstrand DNA crosslinks.)

Marvels of error check and repair mechanisms in the cell: How they point to a designed set up

The ribosome, a highly complex nanomachine found in every cell, and in the trillions of cells in your human body, is a marvel of biological engineering. It functions as a critical information translator, converting instructions from messenger RNA, transcribed from DNA, into proteins, which are vital components of cellular function. This process is a cornerstone of molecular biology's central dogma and is essential for life. The assembly and operation of ribosomes involve the coordinated efforts of nearly 200 molecular machines dedicated to error checking, repair, recycling, and discarding processes, ensuring minimal errors during protein synthesis.

The ribosome's complexity and the precision required in its operation challenge the notion of its emergence solely through unguided processes. It represents a system where minimal error tolerance is not just a feature but a necessity for life. Furthermore, eukaryotic cells contain at least 28 other mechanisms involved in overseeing various molecular machines and processes, all working within strict error limits. Additionally, there are 18 distinct mechanisms dedicated to ensuring DNA remains unharmed.

This intricate system of checks and balances in cellular processes raises the question: Do molecules inherently possess goals, driving operations with high fidelity and low error rates? While nature operates without foresight or intention, intelligent agents do. This leads to the inference that such sophisticated machinery is with high certainty the result of design by an immensely intelligent creator. The intricate complexity and precision of biological systems are a testament to God's unfathomable intelligence, and its ability to create a biological world that sustains life across generations without intervention.

Mechanisms of Cellular Quality Control and Maintenance: Indications of Design and Forethought in Biological Systems
https://reasonandscience.catsboard.com/t2043p25-error-checking-and-repair-systems-in-the-cell-amazing-evidence-of-design#11261

Error check and repair during protein synthesis
https://reasonandscience.catsboard.com/t2984-error-check-and-repair-during-messenger-rna-translation-in-the-ribosome-by-chance-or-design#11264

August 15, 2024 Newly discovered protein stops DNA damage
https://phys.org/news/2024-08-newly-protein-dna.html