Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 397

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 379 of the 379 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Why nature really chose phosphate

Open access
Kamerlin, Shina C. L., Sharma, Pankaz K., Prasad, Ram B., Warshel, Arieh·2013·Quarterly Reviews of Biophysics

Abstract

Phosphoryl transfer plays key roles in signaling, energy transduction, protein synthesis, and maintaining the integrity of the genetic material. On the surface, it would appear to be a simple nucleophile displacement reaction. However, this simplicity is deceptive, as, even in aqueous solution, the low-lying d-orbitals on the phosphorus atom allow for eight distinct mechanistic possibilities, before even introducing the complexities of the enzyme catalyzed reactions. To further complicate matters, while powerful, traditional experimental techniques such as the use of linear free-energy relationships (LFER) or measuring isotope effects cannot make unique distinctions between different potential mechanisms. A quarter of a century has passed since Westheimer wrote his seminal review, ‘Why Nature Chose Phosphate’ (Science 235 (1987), 1173), and a lot has changed in the field since then. The present review revisits this biologically crucial issue, exploring both relevant enzymatic systems as well as the corresponding chemistry in aqueous solution, and demonstrating that the only way key questions in this field are likely to be resolved is through careful theoretical studies (which of course should be able to reproduce all relevant experimental data). Finally, we demonstrate that the reason that nature really chose phosphate is due to interplay between two counteracting effects: on the one hand, phosphates are negatively charged and the resulting charge-charge repulsion with the attacking nucleophile contributes to the very high barrier for hydrolysis, making phosphate esters among the most inert compounds known. However, biology is not only about reducing the barrier to unfavorable chemical reactions. That is, the same charge-charge repulsion that makes phosphate ester hydrolysis so unfavorable also makes it possible to regulate, by exploiting the electrostatics. This means that phosphate ester hydrolysis can not only be turned on, but also be turned off, by fine tuning the electrostatic environment and the present review demonstrates numerous examples where this is the case. Without this capacity for regulation, it would be impossible to have for instance a signaling or metabolic cascade, where the action of each participant is determined by the fine-tuned activity of the previous piece in the production line. This makes phosphate esters the ideal compounds to facilitate life as we know it.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1017/s0033583512000157

Cites

379 of 379 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

1 retracted

Show all 379 references

Cited by

See all 397

Metadata

Authors
Kamerlin, S. C. L., Sharma, P. K., Prasad, R. B., & Warshel, A.
Venue
Quarterly Reviews of Biophysics
Published
2013-01-15
Volume
46
Issue
1
Pages
1-132
ISSN
  • 0033-5835 (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-8994
OpenAlex
W1984067962
Cited by
397
References
379
FWCI
1.10
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Why nature really chose phosphate. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1017/s0033583512000157
The paper
Kamerlin, S. C. L., Sharma, P. K., Prasad, R. B., & Warshel, A. (2013). Why nature really chose phosphate. Quarterly Reviews of Biophysics. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0033583512000157

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.