![]() |
Image: Image © 2010 Henry Bortman |
"This is a surprise," said biochemist Barry Rosen of Florida International University, who was not involved in the research. "Not just for bacteria but for life in general, arsenic is one of the few elements that is considered to be only toxic and has no role in metabolism."
It's "pretty damn surprising," agreed ecologist James Elser of the Arizona State University, who also did not participate in the study. "I've spent my career studying phosphorus limitation, and how organisms use phosphorus, and how nucleic acids always have phosphorus in them, and now there's this exception. That's what's really weird."
Arsenic falls directly below phosphorus on the period table, and thus has many similar chemical properties. In contrast to relatively stable phosphorus-based molecules, however, arsenic compounds are extremely unstable. While phosphorus compounds take years, decades, or even millennia to break down, the rate of hydrolysis of arsenic compounds is usually measured in seconds or minutes.
In fact, its similarity to phosphorus and its instability partly explains why arsenic is so toxic. The body may not be able to distinguish between phosphate -- the most common form of phosphorus in organisms -- and its arsenic equivalent, arsenate. As a result, scientists suspect that arsenate can be incorporated into molecules and pathways that normally use phosphate, causing downstream processes to fail if the arsenate molecules are quick to break down or otherwise don't work properly.
But at least one organism seems to have tackled this problem. Sampling the sediment of Mono Lake in California, a salt lake with high dissolved arsenic concentrations, NASA astrobiologist Felisa Wolfe-Simon of the US Geological Survey and her colleagues identified a bacterium that can grow when cultured with arsenic, but only trace amounts of phosphorus. Under conditions of high arsenic, the bacteria didn't grow as well as when phosphorus was abundantly available, but they grew significantly more than when neither arsenic nor phosphorus was provided.
"That says, to me, that they really are using the arsenic," Rosen said.
To determine how the bacteria used the normally toxic element, the researchers provided the cultures with radiolabeled arsenic, and found it in parts of the cell containing proteins, metabolites, lipids and nucleic acids. Further analysis of the DNA suggested that the arsenic might simply be replacing the phosphorus in the backbone of the molecule atom-for-atom.
![]() |
Image courtesy of Science/AAAS |
"They show that arsenic is in the DNA, but they don't show that it is participating in the backbone, replacing phosphate," Rosen said. "To be truly convincing, I'd like to see an actual molecule that has arsenic that is active and functional."
If arsenic is indeed serving as a surrogate for phosphorus under certain conditions, however, "the result will have sweeping consequences," said Benner, who served on a discussion panel today at a NASA news conference about the study. "It will overturn a century of information about the comparative behavior of phosphates and arsenates."
Another open question is whether or not these bacteria are using arsenic in their natural habitat of Mono Lake, said Elser, also a member of today's discussion panel. The experiments demonstrate that the microbes are capable of growing on arsenic, but these are contrived laboratory experiments. "The only way to answer that question is to get in a field situation and [use] radiolabeled arsenic under more realistic field conditions," he said.
![]() |
Image: Image ? 2010 Henry Bortman |
Another potential application for an arsenic-loving microbe is in phosphorus recycling, Elser said. "Phosphorus for agriculture is going to start running out in a few decades," he said, and bacteria that use arsenic instead could help keep vital ecosystems running. (Click here to read last month's feature about Elser's work on the potential effects of a worldwide phosphorus shortage.)
"Those are just science fiction applications that now pop into mind now that we think there is an organism that might not really need phosphorus," Elser added, "which is just shocking for me to say."
F. Wolfe-Simon, et al., "A bacterium that can grow by using arsenic instead of phosphorus," Science Express, 10.1126/science.1197258, 2010.
Related stories:
[November 2010]
[March 2009]
[14th August 2008]




[Comment posted 2012-02-09 02:12:50]
[Comment posted 2010-12-27 16:50:44]
[Comment posted 2010-12-06 09:47:45]
I do think the article deserved publishing in a peer review journal; albeit, it preliminary data and of course more research is needed but there is a spark that just might be relevant. And that is important. I get the feeling from reading some of the letters that there is a hint of jealousy that if the research pans out, it will be a Nobel Prize consideration.
Second, I do not agree that the research is PR and Hype. Yes, there is a lot that can be criticized, but that?s why we publish, to gather feedback and ponder future research.
Show me any solitary scientific article and I can with not too much effort rip it apart. That?s why Science needs to be independently collaborated, and future research substantiates or modifies the original claims. We have to start somewhere and this article is a good worthy beginning
Ron Hansing 12.6.10
[Comment posted 2010-12-05 19:26:29]
Microbiology critique,
LINK
chemistry critique,
LINK
[Comment posted 2010-12-04 08:25:50]
[Comment posted 2010-12-03 22:10:40]
Secondly, is there any experiments to show that the more length and breadth of microorganisms are NOT incorporating As? and resist the toxicity? has any one proved that?
Thirdly: if the isolated organism is evolved to take (and replace As) into its cellular components including the DNA, then my common sense tells that no matter what it will NOT revert back to taking P even if there is absence of As and excess of P, (even if Lion gets too old to hunt it will NOT start eating grass!)
Lastly I hope that the claims made are found to be true, it will give the moral boosting to the entire field of (biomedical) science in general and NASA astrobiology programe in particular.
Otherwise (American) science will suffer more, which is already loosing the glory, output and reputation.
[Comment posted 2010-12-03 20:22:32]
[Comment posted 2010-12-03 14:03:25]
Arsenate esters are well known to form spontaneously and reversibly in aqueous media. This fact is used by organic chemists to circumvent the need of synthesizing phosphorylated substrates required by many enzymes like D-fructose-1,6-bisphosphate aldolase. This enzyme requires dihydroxyacetone phosphate (DHAP) as the donor reactant. However, if you simply mix dihydroxyacetone with arsenate?whammo, you get spontaneous and reversible formation of dihydroxyacetone arsenate that can then be utilized by the enzyme. Perhaps the organism is using arsenate in a role such as this but I really don?t see how it could make stable DNA wherein phosphate is replaced with arsenate. If it is used in the organisms DNA, then there is certainly some fascinating counter intuitive chemistry to be learned. Until a few simple and telling experiments are performed, I?ll remain doubtful. Not sure how this article was published without these telling and obvious experiments. Would be cool if I were wrong here.
Carlos F. Barbas
The Scripps Research Institute
For a few of the many examples where spontaneous arsenate ester formation is used to produce unstable yet useful phospho-mimics see:
Durrwachter, J. R.; Drueckhammer, D. G.; Nozaki, K.; Sweers, H.; Wong, C.-H. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1986, 108, 7812-7818.
Drueckhammer, D. G.; Durrwachter, J. R.; Pederson, R. L.;Crans, D. C.; Daniels, L.; Wong, C.-H. J. Org. Chem. 1989, 54, 70-77.
[Comment posted 2010-12-03 13:30:51]
Some aspects of arsenic chemistry that are critical to the interpretation of the results are ignored. Extensive literature exists on the binding of arsenic compounds to cellular protein (through protein sulfhydryls). Such a binding can be expected in any organism exposed to As. It remains unclear what portion of the detected As was in such conjugates (and should be subtracted from all the estimates of the putative P to As substitutions).
It is surprising that some obvious controls are omitted. For example, the efficiency of the cleanup/fractionation procedures to remove merely occluded 75As should be verified. This could be done, e.g., by spiking a lysate from cells without radiolabeled As with appropriate amount of 75As before fractionation/cleanup. Similarly, if arsenic were indeed to substitute phosphorus in the macromolecules, a standard approach would be to do a competition experiment - a control culture with medium containing both 75As and phosphate. Phosphate in the medium should attenuate any specific arsenium incorporation as a phosphorus substitute but would be unlikely to affect the background levels of non-specific radioactivity as well as direct arsenic binding to biomolecules (without substituting for phosphorus).
Perhaps the authors (as well as the manuscript reviewers) were somewhat too eager to get these preliminary observations published quickly.
[Comment posted 2010-12-03 12:51:06]
Thanks,
Alison McCook, News Editor
[Comment posted 2010-12-03 12:36:31]
It is really frightening to think that:
1 - A reputable "peer reviewed" journal would publish the work without adequate supporting data.
2 - The Scientist would report on it with only a minimal nod to the inadequacy of the supporting data (i.e., the quote from Barry Rosen).
3 - Madison-Avenue-style PR determines what kind of "science" the American people learn.
4 - Nobody in the communications media seems to have adequate general understanding of the process of science, nor do any of them seem to care -- so long as they can sell newspapers and TV ads.
AND
5 - the most frightening of all -- that our government labs (in this case, NASA) are staffed with scientists who either don't know what they're doing, or don't care. These are the labs that our legislators and executive branch turn to for advice on policy matters involving science. Truly frightening.
[Comment posted 2010-12-03 12:13:01]
Want to be convincing? Isolate and purify an actual biomolecule (aresenoprotein, arseno-nucleotide or nucleic acid, arsenolipid) and characterize it with an method capable of distinguishing arsenate from an arseno-compound. NMR, XRD, MS, something else conclusive. Please.
Convincing data was collected (XRD, EXAFS on purified protein) to demonstrate the presence of cadmium in the first known cadmium metalloenzyme. A similar approach should be done here, if arseno-biomolecules are really as stable as hypothesized.
[Comment posted 2010-12-03 11:56:32]
Look at the data in Table 2. Where's the negative control showing that 11% radiolabel recovered in the "DNA fraction" won't also happen with phosphorus-fed bugs? Also, "DNA fraction" is in quotations because if you look Figure 2a shows massively different profiles of nucleic acid isolation results between As+ and As- bacteria. You can't possible compare those. For some reason it seems As inhibits recovery of RNA.
Anyway, I agree with others that this bacterium is surviving in the arsenic and likely sequestering it in the giant vacuole found in this treatment; but we're still far off from seeing arsenic's actual incorporation into biomolecules.
[Comment posted 2010-12-03 11:32:55]
[Comment posted 2010-12-03 11:20:36]
[Comment posted 2010-12-03 10:29:39]
Allow me to be the skeptic until all the analyses are complete. I think we all remember how incredulous we were when the "cold fusion breakthrough" was announced a couple of decades ago.
Principles of physics and chemistry cannot be defied so long as those principles have been firmly tested countless times and rooted in our understanding. If arsenate can indeed replace phosphate in the fundamental biomolecules to form a viable organism with humming-along homeostasis, this is the discovery of a generation, maybe two generations.
I missed the link to the peer-reviewed article in which the "DNA" (if it is that) was isolated and characterized as to whether it possesses cytosine, guanine, adenine, and thymine...and even if they are on ribose. We are led to believe there is no phosphate! And what about proteins: are they the 20 amino acids we know of...? And clearly kinases of these proteins arsenylate rather than phosphorylate?
I am inclined to believe that this organism lives in spite of the presence of arsenate, and not because of it, and it finds a way to sequester it, perhaps to exploit it in limited ways.
[Comment posted 2010-12-03 10:10:39]
[Comment posted 2010-12-03 08:44:39]
[Comment posted 2010-12-03 06:15:28]
[Comment posted 2010-12-02 22:01:26]
Forgetting philosophy, life is just a set of chemical reactions (not completely known) which can multiply under certain physical conditions. Hence life based on arsenic or any other element in the periodic table is possible. Carbon can be replaced by silicon, oxygen by sulphur, etc. since they share the same place in the periodic table and therefore have similar properties.
Same is the case for life in any physical or chemical environments. It is just that the chemicals (and hence set of chemical reactions) could be different.
[Comment posted 2010-12-02 14:45:34]
[Comment posted 2010-12-02 14:21:23]
[Comment posted 2010-12-02 13:33:09]