Why does a cell need siRNA?

The name of the pictureThe name of the pictureThe name of the pictureClash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP












1












$begingroup$


My question is about small non-coding RNAs. miRNA and siRNA are both known for mRNA regulation. miRNA can both transcriptionally inhibit and degrade mRNA by cutting it. For inhibition just a small fragment (seed) of miRNA is complementary to the mRNA while for degradation miRNA and mRNA must reach 100% match.
siRNA is almost the same molecule and its only function is to 100% match mRNA and degrade it.



So if siRNA appears to be just a subtype of miRNA, can we confirm that? Or are there any other differences that make these two molecules different kinds of small non-coding RNAs?










share|improve this question









$endgroup$
















    1












    $begingroup$


    My question is about small non-coding RNAs. miRNA and siRNA are both known for mRNA regulation. miRNA can both transcriptionally inhibit and degrade mRNA by cutting it. For inhibition just a small fragment (seed) of miRNA is complementary to the mRNA while for degradation miRNA and mRNA must reach 100% match.
    siRNA is almost the same molecule and its only function is to 100% match mRNA and degrade it.



    So if siRNA appears to be just a subtype of miRNA, can we confirm that? Or are there any other differences that make these two molecules different kinds of small non-coding RNAs?










    share|improve this question









    $endgroup$














      1












      1








      1





      $begingroup$


      My question is about small non-coding RNAs. miRNA and siRNA are both known for mRNA regulation. miRNA can both transcriptionally inhibit and degrade mRNA by cutting it. For inhibition just a small fragment (seed) of miRNA is complementary to the mRNA while for degradation miRNA and mRNA must reach 100% match.
      siRNA is almost the same molecule and its only function is to 100% match mRNA and degrade it.



      So if siRNA appears to be just a subtype of miRNA, can we confirm that? Or are there any other differences that make these two molecules different kinds of small non-coding RNAs?










      share|improve this question









      $endgroup$




      My question is about small non-coding RNAs. miRNA and siRNA are both known for mRNA regulation. miRNA can both transcriptionally inhibit and degrade mRNA by cutting it. For inhibition just a small fragment (seed) of miRNA is complementary to the mRNA while for degradation miRNA and mRNA must reach 100% match.
      siRNA is almost the same molecule and its only function is to 100% match mRNA and degrade it.



      So if siRNA appears to be just a subtype of miRNA, can we confirm that? Or are there any other differences that make these two molecules different kinds of small non-coding RNAs?







      rna mrna noncoding-rna






      share|improve this question













      share|improve this question











      share|improve this question




      share|improve this question










      asked Jan 28 at 14:13









      Polina NovikovaPolina Novikova

      205




      205




















          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          3












          $begingroup$


          So if siRNA appears to be just a subtype of miRNA, can we confirm
          that? Or are there any other differences that make these two molecules
          different kinds of small non-coding RNAs?




          siRNA and miRNA are not identical, but similar. It's not incorrect to consider them similar phenomena in biology, but history places them apart and there exist small differences. Both are processed inside the cell by the enzyme Dicer and incorporated into the RISC complex where their target is degraded ("RNA interference"). However, there are important differences, in case you want to be absolutely correct.



          siRNA is typically exogenous (introduced from outside by viruses or by engineering). It typically has 100% complimentary to its target mRNA, because we want to reduce off-target binding. If designed well, they target only the intended target and are checked to be incompatible with any other potential mRNA targets, i.e. are designed to be specific.



          miRNA is endogenous (occurs naturally within cells) and is single stranded in vivo. Its complimentary is not always 100% perfect, and often has multiple targets. This is the major difference between the two. It pairs with its target mRNA imperfectly; it simply inhibits translation (protein production from the mRNA). In rare cases where it's a perfect match, it causes the cleavage and destruction of the target mRNA just like siRNA. If I remember correctly, plants miRNAs, in contrast to animal miRNAs, usually have perfect complementarity with their targets. miRNAs are also derived from shorter stemloop RNA products than siRNA.



          As you probably know, both are non-coding RNAs and do not enter ribosomes for translation. They have similar effects on gene expression. If you are interested in the very first reports of either kinds of RNA, here goes:



          miRNAs discovered in 1993 in worms.



          siRNAs discovered in 1999 in plants.



          Notice the phrase antisense RNA in both titles. Interesting!



          Further reading, in case you are interested.




          Why does a cell need siRNA?




          This is a very different question. Why? Probably to fine-tune the expression of its genes. Small RNA species can accumulate, aggregate, and regulate mRNA levels in ways that are probably not possible inside the nucleus at the DNA transcription level. Small RNAs are also understood to be epigenetic and function in the cytoplasm and endoplasmic reticulum!






          share|improve this answer











          $endgroup$








          • 1




            $begingroup$
            Perhaps you would want to add a note on endogenous siRNAs and shRNAs. Also, siRNA, as we know it in the context of RNAi, was discovered in C.elegans (1998) (Fire & Mello got Nobel for it). It doesn't matter much anyway and I don't want to debate on who did it first :P
            $endgroup$
            – WYSIWYG
            Jan 28 at 18:33











          Your Answer





          StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
          return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function ()
          StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix)
          StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
          );
          );
          , "mathjax-editing");

          StackExchange.ready(function()
          var channelOptions =
          tags: "".split(" "),
          id: "375"
          ;
          initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

          StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
          // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
          if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
          StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
          createEditor();
          );

          else
          createEditor();

          );

          function createEditor()
          StackExchange.prepareEditor(
          heartbeatType: 'answer',
          autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
          convertImagesToLinks: false,
          noModals: true,
          showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
          reputationToPostImages: null,
          bindNavPrevention: true,
          postfix: "",
          imageUploader:
          brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
          contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
          allowUrls: true
          ,
          noCode: true, onDemand: true,
          discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
          ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
          );



          );













          draft saved

          draft discarded


















          StackExchange.ready(
          function ()
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fbiology.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f80865%2fwhy-does-a-cell-need-sirna%23new-answer', 'question_page');

          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown

























          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes








          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes









          active

          oldest

          votes






          active

          oldest

          votes









          3












          $begingroup$


          So if siRNA appears to be just a subtype of miRNA, can we confirm
          that? Or are there any other differences that make these two molecules
          different kinds of small non-coding RNAs?




          siRNA and miRNA are not identical, but similar. It's not incorrect to consider them similar phenomena in biology, but history places them apart and there exist small differences. Both are processed inside the cell by the enzyme Dicer and incorporated into the RISC complex where their target is degraded ("RNA interference"). However, there are important differences, in case you want to be absolutely correct.



          siRNA is typically exogenous (introduced from outside by viruses or by engineering). It typically has 100% complimentary to its target mRNA, because we want to reduce off-target binding. If designed well, they target only the intended target and are checked to be incompatible with any other potential mRNA targets, i.e. are designed to be specific.



          miRNA is endogenous (occurs naturally within cells) and is single stranded in vivo. Its complimentary is not always 100% perfect, and often has multiple targets. This is the major difference between the two. It pairs with its target mRNA imperfectly; it simply inhibits translation (protein production from the mRNA). In rare cases where it's a perfect match, it causes the cleavage and destruction of the target mRNA just like siRNA. If I remember correctly, plants miRNAs, in contrast to animal miRNAs, usually have perfect complementarity with their targets. miRNAs are also derived from shorter stemloop RNA products than siRNA.



          As you probably know, both are non-coding RNAs and do not enter ribosomes for translation. They have similar effects on gene expression. If you are interested in the very first reports of either kinds of RNA, here goes:



          miRNAs discovered in 1993 in worms.



          siRNAs discovered in 1999 in plants.



          Notice the phrase antisense RNA in both titles. Interesting!



          Further reading, in case you are interested.




          Why does a cell need siRNA?




          This is a very different question. Why? Probably to fine-tune the expression of its genes. Small RNA species can accumulate, aggregate, and regulate mRNA levels in ways that are probably not possible inside the nucleus at the DNA transcription level. Small RNAs are also understood to be epigenetic and function in the cytoplasm and endoplasmic reticulum!






          share|improve this answer











          $endgroup$








          • 1




            $begingroup$
            Perhaps you would want to add a note on endogenous siRNAs and shRNAs. Also, siRNA, as we know it in the context of RNAi, was discovered in C.elegans (1998) (Fire & Mello got Nobel for it). It doesn't matter much anyway and I don't want to debate on who did it first :P
            $endgroup$
            – WYSIWYG
            Jan 28 at 18:33
















          3












          $begingroup$


          So if siRNA appears to be just a subtype of miRNA, can we confirm
          that? Or are there any other differences that make these two molecules
          different kinds of small non-coding RNAs?




          siRNA and miRNA are not identical, but similar. It's not incorrect to consider them similar phenomena in biology, but history places them apart and there exist small differences. Both are processed inside the cell by the enzyme Dicer and incorporated into the RISC complex where their target is degraded ("RNA interference"). However, there are important differences, in case you want to be absolutely correct.



          siRNA is typically exogenous (introduced from outside by viruses or by engineering). It typically has 100% complimentary to its target mRNA, because we want to reduce off-target binding. If designed well, they target only the intended target and are checked to be incompatible with any other potential mRNA targets, i.e. are designed to be specific.



          miRNA is endogenous (occurs naturally within cells) and is single stranded in vivo. Its complimentary is not always 100% perfect, and often has multiple targets. This is the major difference between the two. It pairs with its target mRNA imperfectly; it simply inhibits translation (protein production from the mRNA). In rare cases where it's a perfect match, it causes the cleavage and destruction of the target mRNA just like siRNA. If I remember correctly, plants miRNAs, in contrast to animal miRNAs, usually have perfect complementarity with their targets. miRNAs are also derived from shorter stemloop RNA products than siRNA.



          As you probably know, both are non-coding RNAs and do not enter ribosomes for translation. They have similar effects on gene expression. If you are interested in the very first reports of either kinds of RNA, here goes:



          miRNAs discovered in 1993 in worms.



          siRNAs discovered in 1999 in plants.



          Notice the phrase antisense RNA in both titles. Interesting!



          Further reading, in case you are interested.




          Why does a cell need siRNA?




          This is a very different question. Why? Probably to fine-tune the expression of its genes. Small RNA species can accumulate, aggregate, and regulate mRNA levels in ways that are probably not possible inside the nucleus at the DNA transcription level. Small RNAs are also understood to be epigenetic and function in the cytoplasm and endoplasmic reticulum!






          share|improve this answer











          $endgroup$








          • 1




            $begingroup$
            Perhaps you would want to add a note on endogenous siRNAs and shRNAs. Also, siRNA, as we know it in the context of RNAi, was discovered in C.elegans (1998) (Fire & Mello got Nobel for it). It doesn't matter much anyway and I don't want to debate on who did it first :P
            $endgroup$
            – WYSIWYG
            Jan 28 at 18:33














          3












          3








          3





          $begingroup$


          So if siRNA appears to be just a subtype of miRNA, can we confirm
          that? Or are there any other differences that make these two molecules
          different kinds of small non-coding RNAs?




          siRNA and miRNA are not identical, but similar. It's not incorrect to consider them similar phenomena in biology, but history places them apart and there exist small differences. Both are processed inside the cell by the enzyme Dicer and incorporated into the RISC complex where their target is degraded ("RNA interference"). However, there are important differences, in case you want to be absolutely correct.



          siRNA is typically exogenous (introduced from outside by viruses or by engineering). It typically has 100% complimentary to its target mRNA, because we want to reduce off-target binding. If designed well, they target only the intended target and are checked to be incompatible with any other potential mRNA targets, i.e. are designed to be specific.



          miRNA is endogenous (occurs naturally within cells) and is single stranded in vivo. Its complimentary is not always 100% perfect, and often has multiple targets. This is the major difference between the two. It pairs with its target mRNA imperfectly; it simply inhibits translation (protein production from the mRNA). In rare cases where it's a perfect match, it causes the cleavage and destruction of the target mRNA just like siRNA. If I remember correctly, plants miRNAs, in contrast to animal miRNAs, usually have perfect complementarity with their targets. miRNAs are also derived from shorter stemloop RNA products than siRNA.



          As you probably know, both are non-coding RNAs and do not enter ribosomes for translation. They have similar effects on gene expression. If you are interested in the very first reports of either kinds of RNA, here goes:



          miRNAs discovered in 1993 in worms.



          siRNAs discovered in 1999 in plants.



          Notice the phrase antisense RNA in both titles. Interesting!



          Further reading, in case you are interested.




          Why does a cell need siRNA?




          This is a very different question. Why? Probably to fine-tune the expression of its genes. Small RNA species can accumulate, aggregate, and regulate mRNA levels in ways that are probably not possible inside the nucleus at the DNA transcription level. Small RNAs are also understood to be epigenetic and function in the cytoplasm and endoplasmic reticulum!






          share|improve this answer











          $endgroup$




          So if siRNA appears to be just a subtype of miRNA, can we confirm
          that? Or are there any other differences that make these two molecules
          different kinds of small non-coding RNAs?




          siRNA and miRNA are not identical, but similar. It's not incorrect to consider them similar phenomena in biology, but history places them apart and there exist small differences. Both are processed inside the cell by the enzyme Dicer and incorporated into the RISC complex where their target is degraded ("RNA interference"). However, there are important differences, in case you want to be absolutely correct.



          siRNA is typically exogenous (introduced from outside by viruses or by engineering). It typically has 100% complimentary to its target mRNA, because we want to reduce off-target binding. If designed well, they target only the intended target and are checked to be incompatible with any other potential mRNA targets, i.e. are designed to be specific.



          miRNA is endogenous (occurs naturally within cells) and is single stranded in vivo. Its complimentary is not always 100% perfect, and often has multiple targets. This is the major difference between the two. It pairs with its target mRNA imperfectly; it simply inhibits translation (protein production from the mRNA). In rare cases where it's a perfect match, it causes the cleavage and destruction of the target mRNA just like siRNA. If I remember correctly, plants miRNAs, in contrast to animal miRNAs, usually have perfect complementarity with their targets. miRNAs are also derived from shorter stemloop RNA products than siRNA.



          As you probably know, both are non-coding RNAs and do not enter ribosomes for translation. They have similar effects on gene expression. If you are interested in the very first reports of either kinds of RNA, here goes:



          miRNAs discovered in 1993 in worms.



          siRNAs discovered in 1999 in plants.



          Notice the phrase antisense RNA in both titles. Interesting!



          Further reading, in case you are interested.




          Why does a cell need siRNA?




          This is a very different question. Why? Probably to fine-tune the expression of its genes. Small RNA species can accumulate, aggregate, and regulate mRNA levels in ways that are probably not possible inside the nucleus at the DNA transcription level. Small RNAs are also understood to be epigenetic and function in the cytoplasm and endoplasmic reticulum!







          share|improve this answer














          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer








          edited Jan 28 at 18:29









          WYSIWYG

          30.6k747126




          30.6k747126










          answered Jan 28 at 15:40









          S PrS Pr

          1,17010




          1,17010







          • 1




            $begingroup$
            Perhaps you would want to add a note on endogenous siRNAs and shRNAs. Also, siRNA, as we know it in the context of RNAi, was discovered in C.elegans (1998) (Fire & Mello got Nobel for it). It doesn't matter much anyway and I don't want to debate on who did it first :P
            $endgroup$
            – WYSIWYG
            Jan 28 at 18:33













          • 1




            $begingroup$
            Perhaps you would want to add a note on endogenous siRNAs and shRNAs. Also, siRNA, as we know it in the context of RNAi, was discovered in C.elegans (1998) (Fire & Mello got Nobel for it). It doesn't matter much anyway and I don't want to debate on who did it first :P
            $endgroup$
            – WYSIWYG
            Jan 28 at 18:33








          1




          1




          $begingroup$
          Perhaps you would want to add a note on endogenous siRNAs and shRNAs. Also, siRNA, as we know it in the context of RNAi, was discovered in C.elegans (1998) (Fire & Mello got Nobel for it). It doesn't matter much anyway and I don't want to debate on who did it first :P
          $endgroup$
          – WYSIWYG
          Jan 28 at 18:33





          $begingroup$
          Perhaps you would want to add a note on endogenous siRNAs and shRNAs. Also, siRNA, as we know it in the context of RNAi, was discovered in C.elegans (1998) (Fire & Mello got Nobel for it). It doesn't matter much anyway and I don't want to debate on who did it first :P
          $endgroup$
          – WYSIWYG
          Jan 28 at 18:33


















          draft saved

          draft discarded
















































          Thanks for contributing an answer to Biology Stack Exchange!


          • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

          But avoid


          • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

          • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

          Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


          To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




          draft saved


          draft discarded














          StackExchange.ready(
          function ()
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fbiology.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f80865%2fwhy-does-a-cell-need-sirna%23new-answer', 'question_page');

          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown





















































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown

































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown






          Popular posts from this blog

          How to check contact read email or not when send email to Individual?

          Displaying single band from multi-band raster using QGIS

          How many registers does an x86_64 CPU actually have?