Why Can Hydrophobic Molecules Pass Through the Amphipathic Plasma Membrane?

AI Thread Summary
The amphipathic nature of the plasma membrane allows hydrophobic molecules to pass through more easily than hydrophilic ones due to energetics. Simple diffusion facilitates the movement of small uncharged molecules like CO2 and urea, while larger molecules require channels or transporter proteins. Polar and charged ions are less favored to diffuse across the membrane because they must shed their solvent and interact with the membrane's charged phosphates, which requires energy. In contrast, lipid molecules experience weaker interactions and are not hindered by a solvent shell, allowing them to diffuse more readily. Overall, the selective permeability of the membrane is influenced by the energetics of molecular interactions and concentration gradients.
biophysics
Messages
26
Reaction score
0
if the Plasma membrane is amphipathic (hydrophobic and hydrophilic), why does it only allow hydrophobic stuff to pass thru?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
There are several mechanisms allowing material to cross the cell membrane. Simple diffusion is thought sufficient for small uncharged molecules- CO2, urea, ammonia; channels and trasporter proteins are used for ions and larger molecules like glucose. There is a water channel as well (aquaporin).

Even larger things are transported in via endocytosis.
 
Thanks for the reply,

My question is about diffusion across membrane. Steroid hormones are able to diffuse while peptide hormone can't. If the membrane is amphipathic (hydrophobic and hydrophilic), why does it selectively allow hydrophobic stuff to pass thru? and not hydrophilic. Thanks
 
Well water can diffuse through a membrane and it's pretty hydrophillic.

What you're really looking for though is unfavorable energetics. Polar molecules are far less favored to diffuse through a membrane than a lipid molecule.

And that stems from the fact that they are in solution. Polar and charged ions will be favored to stay in their current solvent or stick to the surface of the bi-layer since, in order to pass through, they would need energy to shed their solvent and their interactions with the charged phosphates on the surface so they could pass through.

Lipid molecules interact much more weakly even with like-minded molecules ... just through van der waal's. Therefore, they're not covered in a solvent shell, and it's not that much more unfavorable for them to pass through the charged phosphate layer than it was for them to pass through the water they were just in on the other side especially if it's down their concentration gradient. The van der waals forces that would "stick" them into the middle of the bilayer are also weak, so if there is a concentration gradient providing energy for diffusion all the way through, they'll diffuse.
 
I don't get how to argue it. i can prove: evolution is the ability to adapt, whether it's progression or regression from some point of view, so if evolution is not constant then animal generations couldn`t stay alive for a big amount of time because when climate is changing this generations die. but they dont. so evolution is constant. but its not an argument, right? how to fing arguments when i only prove it.. analytically, i guess it called that (this is indirectly related to biology, im...
Back
Top