Cited by 107Arsenic contamination and mitigationOrigins and Evolution of LifeMicrobial Community Ecology and Physiology

GFAJ-1 Is an Arsenate-Resistant, Phosphate-Dependent Organism

Erb, Tobias J., Kiefer, Patrick, Hattendorf, Bodo, Günther, Detlef, Vorholt, Julia A.·2012·Science

Abstract

Resisting Arsenic: The discovery of a bacterium living in the extreme conditions of Mono Lake, California, created a major controversy because it was claimed to be able to grow solely on arsenic and could substitute arsenate for phosphate in its key macromolecules, including DNA. Working with the same Halomonas spp. bacterium, known as GFAJ-1, and ultrapure reagents, Erb et al. (p. 467 ) found that the bacterium needed a low level of phosphate (1.6 µM) to grow at all. Rather than significant specific arsenic incorporation, when the organism was grown in 40 mM arsenic, its nucleic acids acquired a trace of arsenic. Similarly, Reaves et al. (p. 470 ) found that GFAJ-1 could not grow in the absence of phosphate and, moreover, that its growth was not stimulated by the addition of arsenate, although a trace amount of arsenic was also detected in DNA. Thus, GFAJ-1 shows no particular facility to substitute arsenic for phosphate, when phosphate is limiting, but it can tolerate high concentrations of the poison while efficiently scavenging phosphate.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1126/science.1218455

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Two independent efforts have failed to replicate the main results in the original manuscript claiming arsenic-substituted DNA.

    “Furthermore, two independent efforts have failed to replicate the main results in the original manuscript (Erb et al., 2012; Reaves et al., 2012).”

    From The Astrobiology Primer v2.0 (2016) · cites this paper as Erb et al., 2012

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 17 · Cited by 107

Authors
Erb, T. J., Kiefer, P., Hattendorf, B., Günther, D., & Vorholt, J. A.
Affiliations
ETH Zurich (CH)
Corresponding author
  • Erb, Tobias J.
  • Kiefer, Patrick
  • Vorholt, Julia A.
Venue
Science
Published
2012-07-27
Volume
337
Issue
6093
Pages
467-470
ISSN
  • 0036-8075 (ISSN-L)
  • 1095-9203
OpenAlex
W2001964103
Cited by
107
References
17
Citations by year
2025: 8 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 12 · 2013: 21 · 2012: 12
FWCI
12.79
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Science (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Environmental Chemistry › Arsenic contamination and mitigation
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Astronomy and Astrophysics › Origins and Evolution of Life
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Microbial Community Ecology and Physiology
Keywords
arsenate resistance, arsenic tolerance, phosphorylated metabolites
MeSH terms
Arsenates, Arsenic, Culture Media, DNA, Bacterial, Glycolysis, Hexosephosphates, Hexoses, Nucleotides, Phosphates, Phosphorus, Phosphorylation, RNA, Bacterial, Mass Spectrometry, Drug Resistance, Bacterial, Halomonadaceae, Metabolome

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