The word "exactly" needs clarification and is not correct. The subtle differences associated with the pure scientific formulations and the environment is which they operates (e.g. ph balances) lead to considerable differences in behaviour characteristics. Only by understanding the fundamental properties involved can the observed differences be explained. Comprehensive knowledge of the fundamental scientific properties and the understanding of any differences is key to explaining behaviour characteristics.

This is especially true in professions seemingly based on science (e.g. some engineering fields such as civil engineers dealing with road pavement materials) that has deviated to such an degree from scientific facts that it has become to a large degree focused on empirically derived trail and error approaches - this is (in my opinion) an extreme example where the "back to basics" - back to the scientific roots of chemistry and physics - will be required for the profession to become on par with scientific developments associated with modern technologies. Only then will engineers understand the tremendous benefits that could be achieved by applying applicable "new-age" (post 2000) material technologies, e.g. nanotechnologies, in a macro environment to provide cost-effective infrastructure (desperately required in the developing world). The opposite is also true. The pure scientist often lacks (in my experience) the insight and vision to fully comprehend the potential impact of new-age developments in real world applications in a macro environment.

The word "exactly" needs clarification and is not correct. The subtle differences associated with the pure scientific formulations and the environment is which they operates (e.g. ph balances) lead to considerable differences in behaviour characteristics. Only by understanding the fundamental properties involved can the observed differences be explained. Comprehensive knowledge of the fundamental scientific properties and the understanding of any differences is key to explaining behaviour characteristics.

This is especially true in professions seemingly based on science (e.g. some engineering fields such as civil engineers dealing with road pavement materials) that has deviated to such an degree from scientific facts that it has become to a large degree focused on empirically derived trail and error approaches - this is (in my opinion) an extreme example where the "back to basics" - back to the scientific roots of chemistry and physics - will be required for the profession to become on par with scientific developments associated with modern technologies. Only then will engineers understand the tremendous benefits that could be achieved by applying applicable "new-age" (post 2000) material technologies, e.g. nanotechnologies, in a macro environment to provide cost-effective infrastructure (desperately required in the developing world). The opposite is also true. The pure scientist often lacks (in my experience) the insight and vision to fully comprehend the potential impact of new-age developments in real world applications in a macro environment.

Thanks Prof Gerrit Jordaan for sharing your enlightened thoughts. Is there anything else?

Properties of specific DNAs and RNAs (even within same species) are NOT exactly similar. Most important property of DNA (or RNA) molecule is its nucleotide sequence. Small differences in sequence may lead to large differences in phenotype ("design, fashion, graphics") between individuals.

Many labs are working to figure out how those small differences in DNA sequence lead to differences in organism appearance - basically each Department of Genetics, in every university.

Hope it helps)))

Dear Rabiul,

Technology has always played an important role in driving natural innovation, and will continue to do so, but for many companies technology will move from being a driver of innovation to becoming an enabler of innovation. New drivers of innovation are emerging and gaining importance to become as important as technology once was.

The influence of technology has also had an effect on nature, and it has assisted the human race in exploiting nature to a point where the constituents of nature have been exposed to greater risk than normal. As expected, no one wants to stop learning, hence, each time; there are inquiries into some yet-to-be understood aspects of nature.

Example is biomimetic. Biomimetic refers to human-made processes, substances, devices, or systems that imitate nature. The art and science of designing and building biomimetic apparatus is also known as biomimicry because they mimic biological systems. To meet the challenges businesses are facing, Biomimicry for Creative Innovation (BCI) and The Royal Botanic Gardens Kew (RBG Kew) have formed a unique partnership focused at helping organisations adapt to a more sustainable future, as ‘Business Shaped By Nature’.

The chemical structure of RNA is very similar to that of DNA, but differs in many ways. a single RNA molecule can, by complementary base pairing, form intrastrand double helixes, as in tRNA. The hydroxyl groups in the ribose backbone make RNA more chemically labile than DNA by lowering the activation energy of hydrolysis. The complementary base to adenine in DNA is thymine, whereas in RNA, it is uracil, which is an unmethylated form of thymine. Research on RNA has led to many important biological discoveries and numerous Nobel Prizes. Nucleic acids were discovered in 1868 by Friedrich Miescher, who called the material 'nuclein' since it was found in the nucleus.

DNA and RNA the innovations are unique in the history of molecular genetics. DNA as the active principle in bacterial transformation and hence as genetic material. and James Watson and Francis Crick's discovery of the DNA double helix-illuminate two general problems of cultural history. However, J. Muller of Indiana UniverSity, contributed an essay on the nature of the gene that mentions neither Avery nor DNA. Ever since DNA had been discovered in the cell nucleus by Friedrich Miescher in 1869 it had been suspected of exerting some function in hereditary processes. DNA is a major component of the chromosomes. The then current view of the molecular nature of DNA, however, made it well-nigh inconceivable that DNA could be the carrier of hereditary information. There is always challenges and scope for research in DNA. DNA is actually much higher than the tetra nucleotide hypothesis required, it was still widely believed the tetranucleotide was the basic repeating unit of the large DNA polymer in which the four units mentioned recur in regular sequence. RNA is a protein-store memory. As it happens, the experiments on which the macromolecular theory of memory is based have been difficult to repeat, and the results claimed for them may indeed not be true at all. Some RNA molecules play an active role within cells by catalyzing biological reactions, controlling gene expression, or sensing and communicating responses to cellular signals.

Hope you like it.

Ashish

Thanks Misha Monakhov and Ashish Thakur for your valuable informative comments.

Thank you very much Rabiul.

Interesting question. "Why each & every natural creation unique?” that is why it is called CREATION. In this universe, everything is unique including DNA except in identical twins. The main theme of creation is ‘variation’, without variation it is very difficult to exist and progress. DNA and RNA may be similar ‘structurally (chemical structure)’ in all species but not similar in all organisms. DNA varies from person to person. Your DNA differs from your parents likewise your children’s. That is the main reason for ‘variation’. But, for some characters/genes, DNA is similar, which is called 'inheritance' or inherited.

If you speak about genotype and phenotype that is another interesting topic. One can do a PhD in that still questions exits to answer some other needs to continue.

In 2013 one person asked a question 'What is meant by the Genotype-Phenotype relationship?' (https://www.researchgate.net/post/What_is_meant_by_the_Geneotype-Phenotype_relationship)

Thanks Jetty Ramadevi for your very informative, scientific and intelligent answer.