Skip to main content

What is ATP and how does it function? What would happen if we did not have ATP?

ATP is short for adenosine triphosphate. It is the universal unit of energy used by biological cells, and it is produced in the mitochondria.  When a cell needs energy, it gets it from ATP.  The name itself tells a great deal about the structure of ATP.  A single ATP is composed of three parts.  The first part is a base.  In this case, the base is adenine.  The second part of the molecule is a sugar.  The sugar is a ribose.  The third part of the ATP molecule is a phosphate chain.  As the name implies, ATP contains three phosphates.  


The phosphate bonds are important because it is the phosphate bonds that carry a lot of potential energy.  When a cell needs energy, a phosphate is removed from the chain. When the bond breaks, the potential energy is released.  Some of my students have a hard time understanding how something "breaking" can release energy.  I illustrate it by stretching a rubber band until it breaks.  The potential energy of the stretched rubber band releases a lot of kinetic and sound energy when the rubber band snaps.  It's a decent analogy for how breaking the ATP molecule into an ADP molecule releases energy. 


I'm not sure which direction to go with the second part of the question.  "What would happen if we did not have ATP."  The short, simple answer is we would die.  Without ATP, cells wouldn't have their "energy currency" and would die.  All living things are made of cells, and as their cells die, the organism dies.  


On the flip side, if ATP never did exist, but life did manage to begin and exist anyway, I would have to say that life must be using some other form of molecular energy.  Then we would be studying that amazing molecule instead of ATP.  

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Is there a word/phrase for "unperformant"?

As a software engineer, I need to sometimes describe a piece of code as something that lacks performance or was not written with performance in mind. Example: This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. Based on my Google searches, this isn't a real word. What is the correct way to describe this? EDIT My usage of "performance" here is in regard to speed and efficiency. For example, the better the performance of code the faster the application runs. My question and example target the negative definition, which is in reference to preventing inefficient coding practices. Answer This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. In my opinion, reads more easily as: This coding style leads to unmaintainable and poorly performing code. The key to well-written documentation and reports lies in ease of understanding. Adding poorly understood words such as performant decreases that ease. In addressing the use of such a poorly ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Is 'efficate' a word in English?

I routinely hear the word "efficate" being used. For example, "The most powerful way to efficate a change in the system is to participate." I do not find entries for this word in common English dictionaries, but I do not have an unabridged dictionary. I have checked the OED (I'm not sure if it is considered unabridged), and it has no entry for "efficate". It does have an entry for "efficiate", which is used in the same way. Wordnik has an entry for "efficate" with over 1800 hits, thus providing some evidence for the frequency of use. I personally like the word and find the meaning very clear and obvious when others use it. If it's not currently an "officially documented" word, perhaps its continued use will result in it being better documented.
Post a Comment
Read more