Why Are Organic Compounds More Energy Rich Than Inorganic Compounds?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the reasons why organic compounds are considered more energy-rich compared to inorganic compounds. It explores the roles of these compounds in biological processes, particularly in relation to energy generation and cellular component construction.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants suggest that organic compounds serve dual purposes: generating energy and providing raw materials for cellular components, while inorganic compounds are less effective in these roles.
  • One participant notes the existence of chemolithotrophs, organisms that can metabolize inorganic substances to produce energy, indicating that inorganic compounds can also be energy sources under certain conditions.
  • Another participant emphasizes that carbon's ability to form complex molecules is crucial for life, as it can create the diverse structures needed for biological functions.
  • A participant questions the reasoning behind the limited role of inorganic compounds in cellular processes, seeking further clarification on the topic.
  • There is a challenge posed regarding the understanding of why the body does not process inorganic materials, highlighting the carbon-based nature of biological macromolecules.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the roles of organic versus inorganic compounds, with some agreeing on the importance of carbon while others raise questions about the capabilities of inorganic compounds. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the comparative energy richness and utility of these compounds.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the lack of detailed explanations on the biochemical processes involved and the assumptions about the roles of different compounds in energy metabolism and cellular structure.

sinjan.j
Messages
24
Reaction score
0
Is there any particular reason other than "law of nature" for us to consume organic compounds which are high energy compounds. Are inorganic compounds not so energy rich like organic compounds? What are the reasons?

I couldn't really figure out where to post this question, in bio or chem.
 
Biology news on Phys.org
Consuming food molecules serves two purposes: 1) for use in generating energy and 2) to provide raw material for building cellular components. Organic compounds are able to serve both purposes, while inorganic compounds would not be able to help as much in creating cellular components.

That said, there are organisms, known as chemolithotrophs, that metabolize inorganic substances such as iron, ammonia, sulfur, and hydrogen, to produce energy.
 
Ygggdrasil said:
while inorganic compounds would not be able to help as much in creating cellular components.

why is it so?
 
Carbon is the only element known to be capable of forming the type of complex molecules required for life. This has to do with its propensity to form four covalent bonds when it is in compounds.
 
Last edited:
sinjan.j said:
why is it so?

You're "trying to get into medical school" and you don't understand why the body doesn't process inorganic material? What do you think makes up the macromolecules in our body? We're carbon based. Every molecule in our body is carbon based. We can't magically transmute sulfur, for example, into something we can use.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
5K
Replies
1
Views
29K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 46 ·
2
Replies
46
Views
6K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
5K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
Replies
4
Views
3K