A nucleoside can be defined as a nucleotide without its phosphate group. Thus, a nucleoside triphosphate (NTP) is a nucleoside bound to 3 phosphates.

This in turn must be equivalent to a nucleotide (whose name implies the inclusion of one phosphate already) plus an additional 2 phosphates. Thus, would it be appropriate to refer to an NTP as a nucleotide diphosphate?

  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I don't think this is technically incorrect, but why on earth would you want to give it a deliberate confusing name? $\endgroup$ – James Apr 11 '17 at 8:13
  • $\begingroup$ Did you check on Wikipedia or in Biochemistry at NCBI bookshelf before posting? Posters to this list are expected to make a reasonable attempt to find an answer from a standard source. Or are you trying to make some sort of clever point? If so, it is not "appropriate" here. $\endgroup$ – David Apr 11 '17 at 10:02

Nucleoside is nucleotide without a phosphate group. That is something we say to understand and correlate nucleotide and nucleoside. But if followed Terminology by IUPAC a nucleotide should contain only one phosphate group, not more than that. Though NTP is a type of nucleotide, however, for the sake of technical terminology, nucleotides are given classifications as nucleosides with a suffix describing the number of phosphates present in a specific unit. For example, if a nucleotide has one phosphate, it is a nucleoside monophosphate (NMP). If the nucleotide has two phosphates, then it is called a nucleoside diphosphate (NDP), and for three, it is a nucleoside triphosphate (NTP). So you can say NTP as nucleotide diphosphate, but considering the fact that nomenclature also indicate the chemical property of the compound, it would not be right.



Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.