“I think we have now very solid evidence that the metabolism of GFAJ-1 is as dependent on phosphorus, as are all other known forms of organic life,” says Vorholt. “These very robust and very well-adapted microbes appear to be able to efficiently extract nutrients from their extremely phosphorus-poor environments.”

The samples that Wolfe-Simon’s team had used for their original experiments apparently contained larger concentrations of phosphorus than was first thought, Vorholt adds.

In a statement, Science said: “The new research shows that GFAJ-1 does not break the long-held rules of life, contrary to how Wolfe-Simon had interpreted her group’s data.”

"The original GFAJ-1 paper emphasized tolerance to arsenic, but suggested the cells required phosphorus, as seen in these two new papers," says Wolfe-Simon. "However, our data implied that a very small amount of arsenate may be incorporated into cells and biomolecules, helping cells to survive in environments of high arsenate and very low phosphate. Such low amounts of arsenic incorporation may be challenging to find and unstable once cells are opened."

The story of GFAJ-1 is far from over, she adds. "The key questions are: how do these cells thrive in lethal concentrations of arsenic? And where does the arsenic go?"

This article is reproduced with permission from the magazine Nature. The article was first published on July 9, 2012.

Wolfe-Simon, F. et al. Science 332, 1163–1166 (2011).

Cotner, J. B. & Hall, E. K. Science http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.1201943 (2011).

Benner, S. A. Science http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.1201304 (2011).

Schoepp-Cothenet, B. et al. Science http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.1201438 (2011).

Foster, P. L. Science http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.1201551 (2011).

Csabai, I. & Szathmáry, E. Science http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.1201399 (2011).

Borhani, D. W. Science http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.1201255 (2011).

Redfield, R. J. Science http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.1201482 (2011).

Oehler, S. Science http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.1201381 (2011).

Reaves, M. L., Sinha, S., Rabinowitz, J. D., Kruglyak, L. & Redfield, R. J. Science http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.1219861 (2012).

Erb, T. J., Kiefer, P., Hattendorf, B., Günther, D. & Vorholt, J. A. Science http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.1218455 (2012).

3 Comments

1. 1. Zexks 02:52 PM 7/9/12

   And this is why if you want anyone to take what you're saying seriously it needs to be published in a peer reviewed journal so others can either verify or invalidate your findings. That is the beauty of science.

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

2. 2. RJChurchill 11:42 AM 7/11/12

   I am somewhat surprised that the article got as far as it did. Mass spectroscopy would have been one of the most elementary tools to use in order to prove the assertion that arsenic could be a substitute for phosphorous in terrestrial life in this particular case.

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

3. 3. Carlyle in reply to Zexks 09:19 AM 7/14/12

   Yes. Genuine peer review, not all members of the same sewing circle.

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this