Qingxiang Li
Yan Jiang1,2
Yan Chen- 1Department of Pediatrics, Affiliated Hospital of Zunyi Medical University, Zunyi, China
- 2Guizhou Children’s Hospital, Zunyi, China
Liquid-liquid phase separation (LLPS) is a crucial process that influences the spatial organization of cells. Dysregulation of this process can contribute to serious adverse outcomes, including neurodegenerative diseases, developmental disorders, and impaired immune responses. While various studies have explored how factors like physicochemical properties, molecular structures, and post-translational modifications (PTMs) affect the formation of condensates, current knowledge remains fragmented and lacks a cohesive framework. This review aims to systematically compile the principles regulating LLPS, focusing on the interplay between physico-chemical parameters, PTMs, and molecular sequence characteristics. Building on this foundation, we will also examine the significance of physiological phase separation and its connection to pathological phase transitions, such as the conversion from a liquid to a solid state.
1 Introduction
Liquid–liquid phase separation (LLPS) has emerged as a transformative concept for elucidating subcellular compartmentalization through the dynamic formation of membrane-less organelles (Banani et al., 2017). Although the nucleolus was first identified as a liquid-like structure as early as 1898 (Montgomery, 1898) and early microscopic observations had documented the assembly of bio-macromolecular condensates (Montgomery, 1898), the molecular underpinnings of membrane-less organelles remained poorly understood until Brangwynne and colleagues revealed that P granules in C. elegans exhibit liquid-phase separation behavior (Brangwynne et al., 2009). In 2017, Banani et al. (2017) unified these diverse phenomena under the single, physicochemical concept of “Biomolecular Condensates.” By forming microenvironments with a specific composition and unique reaction kinetics, LLPS enables precise spatiotemporal control over biochemical reactions. This allows it to regulate diverse cellular processes such as mRNA metabolism, gene transcription, stress-responsive signaling, and protein quality control (Al-Husini et al., 2020; Liu et al., 2024; Protter and Parker, 2016; Sun et al., 2018; Zhou et al., 2019). For instance, microbial RNP condensates (BR-bodies) represent biomolecular condensates that concentrate RNA degradosome machinery. They act as platforms that enrich long, poorly translated mRNAs, sRNAs, and antisense RNAs to drive partial mRNA degradation, thereby preventing the buildup of toxic intermediates generated by endonucleolytic cleavage (Al-Husini et al., 2020). In addition,the ability of LLPS to compartmentalize transcriptional components also underlies its role in dynamic gene regulation. By concentrating coactivators and core machinery into biomolecular condensates, phase separation enables rapid and reversible control of transcription (Sabari et al., 2018). However, its dysregulation is also linked to severe pathological outcomes, including abnormal embryogenesis, immune dysfunction, and neurodegenerative protein aggregation (Lipiński et al., 2022; Meng et al., 2025; Qin et al., 2022). Mechanistically, LLPS is driven by a competition between intermolecular interactions and hydration. When attractive forces between molecules supersede their interactions with water, the system undergoes demixing, forming dilute and condensed phases (Kumaraswamy, 2017); The resulting condensates act as biochemical compartments that concentrate reactants and sharpen reaction thresholds (Goetz and Mahamid, 2020; Hyman and Simons, 2012). Despite significant progress over the past few decades in identifying diverse regulators of liquid-liquid phase separation (LLPS), the existing literature remains fragmented. There is a notable absence of comprehensive reviews that systematically integrate regulatory principles across different scales, encompassing physicochemical inputs, molecular features, and post-translational modifications. This fragmentation limits our ability to form a coherent model for the controlled assembly and functional modulation of condensates. To address this, our review synthesizes current knowledge through the physical principles of the Flory-Huggins model, with an overarching framework illustrated in Figure 1. We systematically examine how environmental conditions influence phase boundaries; how PTMs alter valency and charge distribution; and how sequence-encoded features govern selective partitioning and mixing behavior. These insights are then connected to functional roles in genome organization, RNA processing, stress response, and proteostasis. We also discuss the physiological regulation of condensate dynamics and how disease mutations disrupt normal phase behavior, thereby revealing potential opportunities for therapeutic intervention through multi-factor modulation.
Figure 1. The regulation, assembly, and physiological and pathological functions of biomolecular condensates. This framework illustrates how biomolecular condensates, emerging from multivalent interactions and described by physical principles like the Flory-Huggins model, are tuned by the cellular environment, post-translational modifications (PTMs), and active interventions. This precise regulation enables their diverse functions in genome organization, RNA metabolism, and proteostasis. The dysregulation of this cycle—through mutation, imbalanced PTMs, or environmental stress—drives a pathogenic transition from dynamic liquids to solid-like aggregates, underpinning numerous human diseases.
2 Core determinants of bio-molecular condensates
2.1 Thermodynamic basis and physicochemical regulation of LLPS
Phase separation minimizes the free energy of a system by partitioning it into two distinct phases. Within the framework of Flory-Huggins theory, the stability of these phases is governed by the balance between the entropy of mixing and the enthalpy of interaction (Flory, 1942; Huggins, 1942; Hyman et al., 2014); The Flory-Huggins theory determines the thermodynamic behavior of a system through the χ parameter, which measures the net difference between solvent and intermolecular interactions. When χ is negative, affinity dominates and the system remains a homogeneous single phase; at χ = 0, the system behaves as an ideal mixture driven solely by entropy; when χ is positive, effective repulsion exists, and phase separation occurs when the concentration exceeds a critical saturation concentration Csat, forming a dilute phase Csat and a dense phase (c_dense) with distinct compositions, between which chemical potential and osmotic pressure equilibria are established (Mittag and Pappu, 2022; Zeng et al., 2020). Phase separation occurs when net attractive intermolecular forces (enthalpic contribution) exceed a critical threshold, thereby overcoming the entropic drive toward a homogeneous mixture (Flory, 1942; Huggins, 1942; Hyman et al., 2014). Determining if a condensate arises from phase separation hinges on satisfying specific conditions. First, a mesoscopic density transition, occurring at scales vastly larger than molecular sizes, must be evident. This is a prerequisite. To then confirm phase separation as the underlying mechanism and the condensate as a coherent thermodynamic phase, two pivotal questions must be addressed: (i) whether the internal density of core components markedly differs from the surroundings, and (ii) whether the observed density fluctuations, resulting from dynamic exchange, match the theoretical expectations based on molecular properties (Mittag and Pappu, 2022). Critically, key cellularly relevant conditions, namely, concentration, temperature, pH, and ionic strength, function as central governing elements that tune this energetic balance by effectively modulating the local χ parameter (Flory, 1942; Huggins, 1942; Hyman et al., 2014; Krainer et al., 2021).
2.1.1 Concentration
The critical saturation concentration (Csat) serves as a key parameter in thermodynamic modeling of phase separation, quantitatively defining the concentration threshold required for this process to occur. At thermodynamic equilibrium (coexistence), the concentrations of the coexisting phases correspond to the conjugate points on the binodal boundary of the free energy curve, which arises from the interplay between intermolecular forces and solvation effects (Banani et al., 2017; Kumaraswamy, 2017). Physically, Csat represents the concentration of the dilute phase at this boundary. Its value is governed by the overall interaction strength within the system, as quantified by the Flory-Huggins parameter χ: stronger attractive interactions lead to a lower Csat. This relationship is further supported by studies using engineered intrinsically disordered proteins, where increased hydrophobicity significantly reduces the concentration required for phase separation (Dzuricky et al., 2020). Once the total concentration surpasses Csat, multivalent interactions drive rapid phase separation, resulting in a stable multiphase system; below this threshold, the system remains homogeneous (Alberti et al., 2019). Csat is not merely a passive observable but an actively encoded regulatory hub determined by molecular properties. Lin et al. identified Csat as a crucial quantitative threshold for phase separation, demonstrating that it is intrinsically encoded in the “molecular grammar” of sequence information and can be enhanced through multivalent interactions (Wang et al., 2018). Consistent with this, Dzuricky et al. (2020) showed that Csat can be rationally programmed via sequence design, enabling predictive control over condensate formation both in vitro and in vivo (Dzuricky et al., 2020). These findings suggest that biological systems achieve precise spatiotemporal control of phase separation by evolutionarily tuning Csat through sequence-specific interactions. Functionally, the sharp concentration dependence mediated by Csat enables switch-like regulation of cellular processes. For instance, Li et al. reported that N-WASPΔ-induced activation of the Arp2/3 complex exhibits a nonlinear, threshold response at approximately 1,000 nM (Li et al., 2012). This example underscores a fundamental principle of biomolecular condensates: their assembly and functionality depend on a tightly regulated concentration window, with Csat serving as the central determinant of this switch-like behavior.
2.1.2 Temperature
Temperature represents a fundamental physical factor in the regulation of liquid–liquid phase separation (LLPS). The entropy-enthalpy trade-off directly dictates the resulting phase behavior. From a thermodynamic perspective, the mixing free energy ΔG = ΔH–TΔS shows that temperature (T) amplifies the entropic contribution (–TΔS) while also influencing the enthalpic term (ΔH), thereby capable of reversing the tendency for phase separation (Flory, 1942; Huggins, 1942; Hyman et al., 2014). Two classic temperature-dependent patterns emerge: lower critical solution temperature (LCST)-type phase separation occurs at elevated temperatures. The dominant mechanism is hydrophobic interaction, which is entropy-driven: higher temperatures enhance the disorder of water molecules, promoting the aggregation of hydrophobic groups to reduce interfacial area. This LCST behavior is exemplified in engineered systems; for instance, Dzuricky et al. (2020) designed artificial intrinsically disordered proteins (IDPs) that undergo LLPS only above a tunable LCST, demonstrating how sequence-encoded hydrophobicity can be harnessed to create thermoresponsive condensates. Upper critical solution temperature (UCST)-type phase separation takes place at lower temperatures. This is typically governed by enthalpy-driven interactions such as hydrogen bonding or aromatic stacking, which become favorable under cooler conditions and drive molecular association (Dzuricky et al., 2020; Dignon et al., 2019); This principle is reflected in biological systems. For example, the human heat shock factor 1 (HSF1) forms stress-induced nuclear condensates under heat shock that exhibit temperature sensitivity consistent with LCST-type regulation, illustrating how cells exploit thermally responsive phase separation for physiological adaptation (Ren et al., 2025). Notably, the study by Dzuricky et al. (2020) further showed that the LCST of synthetic condensates could be precisely tuned by varying the fraction of hydrophilic residues, offering a design strategy for engineering organelles with programmable thermal responsiveness. Moreover, temperature can drive not only monotonic phase transitions but also multistate or reentrant phase separation. In RNA–polycation assemblies, the mixture remains homogeneous at low temperatures due to electrostatic attraction, undergoes phase separation at intermediate temperatures driven by dehydration entropy, and redissolves at high temperatures as a consequence of ionic screening (Pullara et al., 2022). This multiphase behavior shows that temperature-driven transitions are not controlled by one simple mechanism. Instead, they result from a dynamic rebalancing of molecular interactions. As the temperature changes, the importance of electrostatic, hydrophobic, and hydration forces shifts. This sequential change in their relative weights creates the complex shapes seen in phase diagrams.
2.1.3 pH
pH stands as a pivotal environmental cue for regulating liquid-liquid phase separation (LLPS), exerting its effects by precisely tuning the protonation states of ionizable amino acid residues. This alteration redistributes net molecular charges, modulates conformational dynamics, and ultimately reshapes the interaction landscapes that drive condensation. A canonical pattern observed across numerous systems is that mild acidification often promotes LLPS by neutralizing negative charges and exposing hydrophobic patches, whereas alkaline conditions tend to suppress it by enhancing electrostatic repulsion (Doshi et al., 2025; Srivastav et al., 2020). The mechanism is elegantly exemplified by histidine residues, which function as naturally evolved molecular switches due to their protonation sensitivity near physiological pH (pKa ∼6.0–7.0). Gradual protonation within the pH range of 6.0–8.0 can dramatically shift LLPS thresholds, effectively tuning the critical saturation concentration and the material properties of the resulting condensates (Jeon et al., 2025; Kim et al., 2024). This sensitivity operates not as a simple binary on/off switch, but rather as a continuous tuning mechanism, allowing cells to convert subtle pH changes into sharp, switch-like transitions in phase behavior. Notably, the relationship between pH and LLPS is not unidirectional but often constitutes a bidirectional regulatory loop. A compelling in vivo example is the nucleolus, where phase-separated condensates themselves act as proton buffers. They establish and maintain an intrinsic pH gradient between the fibrillar center/dense fibrillar component (FC/DFC) and the surrounding nucleoplasm. This spatially constrained, self-generated pH differential is not a passive byproduct but actively promotes selective molecular partitioning and directional trafficking (Adame-Arana et al., 2020). This reveals a profound feedback mechanism: phase-separated compartments can actively sculpt their local physicochemical environment, which in turn reinforces their composition and functional identity, positioning LLPS as an active driver of spatial and metabolic homeostasis.
2.1.4 Ion
Ions regulate protein phase separation dependent on the concentration and specific chemical properties, such as those described by the Hofmeister series. For example, Krainer and colleagues observed that the FUS protein phase-separates at low salt concentrations, forms a homogeneous solution at intermediate concentrations, and re-enters a phase-separated state at very high concentrations. The mechanism involves a shift from co-dominant electrostatic and hydrophobic interactions at low salt to a regime where high salt screens electrostatic forces, allowing hydrophobic and non-ionic interactions to dominate, which is accordance with Hofmeister series (as seen in Figure 2A) (Krainer et al., 2021). Additionally, ion size also critically influences phase behavior, even at a constant low concentration. Smaller ions like Cl− tend to remain in the bulk solvent, whereas larger, weakly hydrated ions like I− can approach the protein surface more closely. This proximity enhances local electrostatic screening, increasing their efficacy in promoting phase separation (salting-out). At high salt concentrations, where electrostatic interactions are fully suppressed, phase behavior is governed by a competition between ion solvation energy and translational entropy. Small, highly charged ions with strong hydration (e.g., Cl−, SO42−) favor salting-out due to high solvation energy. Conversely, large, weakly hydrated ions with low charge density (e.g., SCN−, ClO4−) promote salting-in, driven by translational entropy and possible specific adsorption—behavior that aligns with the classic direct Hofmeister series (as seen in Figure 2B) (Duan and Wang, 2024). Moreover, beyond altering phase boundaries, ions can selectively partition into condensates to tune internal properties like interfacial tension and polarity (Zhu et al., 2024). In addition, specific ion binding such as Mg2+ or Zn2+ introduces a distinct layer of control. These ions coordinate with residues like histidines, acting as selective crosslinkers to stabilize or dissolve condensates independently of classical Hofmeister trends (Sołtys et al., 2023). Finally, such ionic perturbations carry functional and pathological relevance: for instance, they can drive liquid-to-solid transitions in disease-associated condensates (e.g., Tau protein aggregates), directly linking ion regulation to neurotoxic aggregation (Jonchhe et al., 2022). This underscores a direct mechanistic link between ion-specific regulation and disease-associated protein aggregation.
Figure 2. Regulation of phase separation by salt concentration and ion specificity. (A) The phase behavior of FUS is modulated by salt concentration: phase separation at low salt (mediated by electrostatic and hydrophobic interactions), dissolution at intermediate salt (due to electrostatic screening), and re-entrant phase separation at high salt (dominated by hydrophobic forces). The figure was adapted from the work of Krainer et al. (2021). (B) Ion-specific (Hofmeister) regulation mechanism: At low salt concentrations, small, strongly hydrated ions (e.g., Cl−) remain in the bulk solvent, while large, weakly hydrated ions (e.g., I−) approach the protein surface more closely, enhancing local electrostatic screening and promoting salting-out. At high salt concentrations, with electrostatics suppressed, phase behavior is governed by a competition between ion solvation energy and translational entropy. The figure was adapted from the work of Duan and Wang (2024).
2.2 Structural and sequence features driving LLPS
While macroscopic parameters system-wide provide permissive conditions, the sequence-specific molecular determinants ultimately govern the propensity and properties of phase separation. This function is exclusive to a subset of proteins capable of physiological LLPS, conferred by multivalent interaction modules and/or IDRs.
2.2.1 Multivalency-driven LLPS
Multivalency, enabled by repetitive folded domains (e.g., SH3, PDZ, coiled-coil) or short linear motifs (SLiMs; e.g., PRMs, RG/RGG), drives the formation of system-spanning interaction networks when the effective valency-affinity product exceeds a critical threshold. This network percolation shifts the phase boundary and lowers the saturation concentration (csat),as exemplified in reconstituted systems like the Nephrin–NCK–N-WASP axis, where increasing SH3–PRM and SH2–pTyr interactions non-linearly promotes phase separation, consistent with percolation theory (Banani et al., 2017; Banani et al., 2016; Banjade and Rosen, 2014; Banjade et al., 2015; Li et al., 2012). Beyond intrinsic modularity, effective valence can be increased by oligomerization or by post-translational modifications that multiply binding sites. For example, G3BP1 dimerization via its NTF2-like domain expands RNA-binding capacity and strengthens RNA-driven phase separation (Yang et al., 2020), while pentamerization of NPM1’s N-terminal oligomerization domain arrays the A1/A2 acidic tracts to selectively engage partners bearing ≥2 arginine-rich R-motifs, thereby promoting condensation (Mitrea et al., 2016). However, this theoretical model often oversimplifies the dynamic complexity of biological systems, such as the neglect of cellular crowding effects and kinetic variables. Additionally, polyubiquitin chains encode tunable multivalency through linkage and length, engaging receptors such as p62 or RAD23B to assemble degradative condensates (Sun et al., 2018; Yasuda et al., 2020). This tunability of multivalency is not merely a mechanism for initiating phase separation, but more importantly, it provides the fundamental basis for organizing biomolecules within condensates according to their valence and interaction specificity. Consistent with this organizational principle, the scaffold–client model posits that multivalent scaffolds self-associate to build the structural and chemical core, while clients are recruited through unoccupied, physicochemically compatible sites on the scaffold (Banani et al., 2016).
2.2.2 Intrinsically disordered regions regulated LLPS
2.2.2.1 Molecular basis of IDR-driven phase separation
Intrinsically disordered regions (IDRs) are key building blocks of biomolecular condensates, yet disorder per se is insufficient to drive phase separation. IDRs function conforms to the sticker–spacer theory: modular sticker motifs mediate multivalent, weak interactions, while flexible spacers supply conformational entropy to sustain liquid-like dynamics (Martin et al., 2020). This behavior is encoded by low-complexity sequences (LCRs) enriched for charged (R/K; D/E), polar (G/Q/N/S), and aromatic (Y/F) residues that frequently appear as short repeats (e.g., YG/S-, RG-, SY), furnishing targets for multivalent contacts (Nott et al., 2015; Ravindran et al., 2023).
2.2.2.2 IDR sequence-encoded regulation of condensate dynamics
IDRs do not rely on a single force; instead, they deploy a portfolio of weak, short-range interactions—electrostatic, hydrophobic, cation–π, π–π/sp2–π, and hydrogen bonding—that act in parallel to nucleate and stabilize condensates (Das et al., 2020; Murthy et al., 2021; Nott et al., 2015; Qamar et al., 2018). FUS exemplifies IDR-driven LLPS: its N-terminal SYGQ low-complexity segment, central RRM/zinc-finger domains, and C-terminal RGG repeats cooperate to promote condensation. [G/S]Y [G/S] motifs drive liquid-to-gel/solid transitions, while cation–π and hydrophobic interactions lower Csat. The RGG–SYGQ network further stabilizes droplets via hydrogen bonds, sp2–π stacking, and enhanced cation–π contacts (Kato et al., 2012; Murray et al., 2017; Murthy et al., 2021; Qamar et al., 2018; Wang and Li, 2024). These multimodal interactions endow FUS condensates with robustness and plasticity, yet their imbalance can drive pathological solidification. The functional spectrum of IDRs is highly diverse. For instance, in G3BP1, IDR1 acts as an autoinhibitory module that suppresses phase separation through intramolecular interactions, whereas IDR2 counteracts this inhibition to promote phase separation, collectively revealing a bidirectional control mechanism (Yang et al., 2020). Thus, the intricate modularity and regulatability of IDRs offer a promising foundation for developing targeted therapeutic interventions against condensation-associated pathologies.
2.2.2.3 Selective organization and partitioning rules of IDRs
Coexisting condensates in cells always show spatial exclusivity (De La Cruz et al., 2024; King et al., 2024),reflecting sequence-encoded selectivity. In the nucleolus, IDR features (e.g., D/E tracts vs. K-blocks with E-rich segments) and associated RNA/DNA-binding domains bias partitioning among FC/DFC (King et al., 2024). Moreover, experimental swap assays further demonstrate this principle: exchanging MED1’s charged IDR features with glutamine/tyrosine motifs redirected proteins toward FUS condensates, whereas the reciprocal replacement recruited proteins to MED1 condensates (De La Cruz et al., 2024). Another example comes from the distribution of charge and aromatic residues, where dense RGG clusters promote homotypic separation and exclusivity, while dispersed charges favor heterotypic mixing (Jo et al., 2022; Welles et al., 2024). These findings provide a theoretical foundation for modulating and targeting phase-separated condensates. However, the predictive capacity of sequence features for partitioning behavior is constrained by incomplete understanding of multiscale interactions; and the dynamic interplay between IDRs and other cellular components remains underexplored.
2.3 PTM-tunable valence and affinity to regulate LLPS
The variable and disordered nature of the IDRs introduces a dynamic dimension for regulation, as their exposed modification sites may serve as prime targets for PTMs, thereby potentially fine-tuning phase separation (Clifford et al., 2015).
2.3.1 Phosphorylation
Phosphorylation exemplifies the bidirectional nature of PTM regulation. By introducing negative charges, it can increase anionic character and enhance electrostatic attraction, thereby lowering Csat and facilitating droplet assembly (Tsang et al., 2019; Wegmann et al., 2018). Moreover, such effects are frequently threshold-dependent, with over-phosphorylation predisposing proteins toward pathological aggregation (Wegmann et al., 2018). In particular, phosphorylation can enhance condensate stability by stabilizing oligomeric conformations, as seen with S16 phosphorylation reinforcing the dimer structure of C/EBPα (Wang et al., 2023). Conversely, excessive or misplaced phosphorylation may raise repulsion or disrupt critical interfaces, attenuating LLPS. For instance, serine phosphorylation in FUS-LC and G3BP1 weakens phase separation (Monahan et al., 2017; Yang et al., 2020),while S54/S61 phosphorylation in FUS induces a β-to-α transition that suppresses both condensation and amyloidogenesis (Lao et al., 2022). This inherent capacity for precise, reversible, and context-dependent regulation makes phosphorylation an ideal molecular switch for controlling biomolecular condensate dynamics under physiological conditions. This concept is elegantly demonstrated in the regulation of both P granules in C. elegans and synaptic vesicle clusters in neurons, illustrating its role in driving both slow developmental transitions and fast physiological responses across evolutionarily distant systems (Milovanovic et al., 2018; Wang et al., 2014). The significant differences observed in these studies emphasize that the functional outcome is not solely dependent on the post-translational modification (PTM) itself; rather, it is intricately influenced by the specific site, local sequence, and structural context.
2.3.2 Acetylation
Acetylation generally restrains LLPS through neutralizing lysine charge and weakens the electrostatic interactions that drive condensation, as observed in hyper-acetylated IRF3/IRF7 complexes or the SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid protein (Qin et al., 2022; Wang S. et al., 2021). Conversely, acetylation can promote condensate assembly when it stabilizes key scaffolding proteins; for instance, K276 acetylation on RB1CC1 prolongs scaffold availability and enhances autophagy-related phase separation (Yi et al., 2023). Notably, the functional outcome of acetylation is also determined by site and sequence context, as demonstrated in tau protein where acetylation at K311 promotes LLPS while K369 acetylation suppresses it (Powell et al., 2024). This site-specific mechanism, which parallels the findings in phosphorylation, enables precise and bidirectional regulation of LLPS, allowing a single post-translational modification to orchestrate distinct cellular processes.
2.3.3 Methylation
Methylation further illustrates this duality by reprogramming interactome networks to dictate condensate state and function, primarily through modulating interaction strength and specificity. On one hand, hypomethylation of arginine residues strengthens Arg–Tyr cation–π interactions, driving aberrant gel-like or β-sheet-rich states as observed in FUS or MSX1 (Meng et al., 2025; Qamar et al., 2018). On the other hand, asymmetric dimethylation of FUS weakens homotypic LLPS but creates docking sites for SMN Tudor domains, establishing heterotypic FUS–SMN–RNA droplets with normal RNP function (Wang and Li, 2024). Extending beyond proteins, m6A RNA methylation increases transcript valency to nucleate selective condensates enriched with YTHDF proteins, which in turn regulate downstream processes such as mRNA fate and tumour suppression (Zhao et al., 2024).
2.3.4 Ubiquitylation
Ubiquitylation provides a particularly versatile example of programmable multivalency and thereby gate condensate assembly (Du et al., 2022; Sun et al., 2018; Yasuda et al., 2020). Accordingly, in protein quality control, K48-linked tetraUb chains direct the assembly of degradation condensates by recruiting clients like RAD23B and proteasomal subunits (Yasuda et al., 2020). In contrast, K63-linked chains drive the formation of autophagic condensates through p62 oligomerization (Sun et al., 2018). Beyond degradation, these same K63 linkages can also nucleate NEMO condensates to activate IKK and NF-κB signaling (Du et al., 2022). Conversely, monoubiquitin or short/sparsely distributed chains can saturate UBDs without crosslinking, capping IDR-based hubs and dissolving pre-formed droplets (Dao et al., 2018). Similar to ubiquitination, the SUMO-ubiquitin cascade represents a central mechanism for protein stability control, as demonstrated in PML nuclear bodies where stress-triggered SUMO2/3 modification directly templates ubiquitination to orchestrate stem cell fate (Sarah et al., 2022).
The interplay between PTM type, specific site, and cellular context dictates diverse phase separation outcomes, as synthetically summarized in Table 1.
Table 1. Summary of how post-translational modifications (PTMs) bidirectionally regulate liquid-liquid phase separation (LLPS).
2.4 The regulatory roles of RNA and molecular crowding in LLPS
As one of the most abundant multivalent macromolecules in the cell, RNA acts not only as a “client” but also as a key regulator of phase separation, dynamically modulating its occurrence, material properties, and biological functions through diverse mechanisms (Patel et al., 2015; Zhang et al., 2015). Specifically, RNA exhibits a notable concentration-dependent biphasic effect on phase separation. At lower concentrations, RNA can promote phase separation by serving as a molecular bridge via nonspecific electrostatic interactions between its negatively charged backbone and positively charged intrinsically disordered regions (IDRs) of proteins. In contrast, at higher concentrations, excess RNA molecules compete for binding interfaces on proteins, disrupting the multivalent interaction network and thereby inhibiting phase separation or even dissolving preformed condensates. This re-entrant phase behavior underscores that RNA concentration is a central determinant of the dynamics and state of biomolecular condensates (Patel et al., 2015; Zhang et al., 2015). Beyond concentration, the sequence and structural specificity of RNA also contribute to the regulation of liquid–liquid phase separation (LLPS). For instance, enhancer RNAs (eRNAs) and long non-coding RNAs (lncRNAs) can engage in precise molecular recognition with specific proteins, enabling spatially defined recruitment of components and guiding the assembly of functionally distinct biomolecular condensates (Sabari et al., 2018). However, the crowding agents such as PEG are commonly used to mimic the crowded intracellular environment and reconstitute phase separation in vitro, high concentrations of inert polymeric crowders may non-specifically induce phase separation or drive the formation of poorly dynamic assemblies-phenomena that may not occur or be physiologically relevant under native cellular conditions (Mittag and Pappu, 2022).
2.5 Condensates as functional modules in cellular organization
Given that biomolecular condensates are dynamically and precisely regulated, a critical question arises: what specific cellular functions do they organize? This organization governs a wide range of biological processes, from gene expression to proteostasis.
2.5.1 DNA-associated functions of LLPS
2.5.1.1 LLPS in genomic stability
Liquid-liquid phase separation (LLPS) stabilizes the genome by modulating key processes such as DNA damage signaling, heterochromatin organization, telomere maintenance and assembly of critical cellular structures. While studies show that condensates like TopBP1 amplify ATR–Chk1 signaling and stabilize replication forks (Frattini et al., 2021); and that 53BP1 compartments modulate repair pathway choice (Zhang et al., 2022),a crucial question remains: how do these hubs prevent spurious activation? The enormous capacity for amplification could potentially lead to excessive signaling from minor lesions. The finding that SLX4-SUMO condensates regulate the timely resolution of repair intermediates (Alghoul et al., 2023) hints at built-in termination mechanisms. At telomeres, shelterin components such as TRF1 and TRF2 facilitate the formation of telomric condensates that promote higher-order compaction and T-loop formation. Furthermore, the role of LLPS extends to the assembly of critical cellular structures. A prime example occurs during mitosis, where the phase separation of NuMA, regulated by Aurora A kinase, drives the precise assembly of the mitotic spindle (Mengjie et al., 2021). In heterochromatin maintenance, LLPS driven by HP1 proteins, reinforced by H3K9me3 deposition and ATRX–DAXX–mediated H3.3 incorporation, facilitates the compaction and functional partitioning of heterochromatic regions. Notably, 53BP1–HP1α condensates contribute to heterochromatin stability largely independent of canonical double-strand break repair, suggesting a structural role in genome organization beyond acute damage handling (Larson et al., 2017; Zhang et al., 2022). These compartments function not only structurally but also protectively by limiting spurious engagement of DNA damage response factors, thereby preventing illegitimate repair and preserving chromosome ends (Jack et al., 2022). This critical perspective suggests that LLPS functions as a double-edged sword in heterochromatin, balancing compaction with accessibility, a tension that is not yet fully explored. Notably, aberrant transcriptional condensates can drive tumorigenesis by inducing chromosomal structural abnormalities. For instance, in leukemia, the aberrant transcriptional condensates formed by the NUP98-HOXA9 fusion protein orchestrate tumorigenesis through a dual mechanism: mimicking super-enhancer functionality to hyperactivate proto-oncogenes while concurrently remodeling the 3D chromatin architecture through anomalous looping, ultimately leading to uncontrolled cellular proliferation (Jeong Hyun et al., 2021).
2.5.1.2 LLPS in gene transcription regulation
Liquid-liquid phase separation (LLPS) has emerged as a pivotal mechanism in gene transcription regulation, functioning as a bidirectional switch that dynamically assembles membrane-less compartments to control genomic output. On the activating front, coactivators like BRD4 and Mediator form condensates at super-enhancers that enrich the transcriptional machinery, facilitating Pol II initiation and productive elongation, with Pol II-CTD modifications further tuning engagement within these hubs to promote promoter escape (Boehning et al., 2018; Boija et al., 2018; Sabari et al., 2018). Conversely, repressive condensates regulate gene silencing by compacting chromatin and reducing its accessibility. Polycomb assemblies (e.g., PRC1/CBX2) undergo phase separation to achieve acute compaction, which is then stabilized by sustained H3K27me3 deposition to maintain long-term repression. Additionally HP1α droplets nucleate at H3K9me3 sites to reinforce heterochromatin organization (Larson et al., 2017; Plys et al., 2019). Beyond the behavior of individual protein complexes, the material state of chromatin itself is increasingly recognized as an active participant in this process; the condensation of nucleosome arrays, driven by histone tails or modulated by small molecules like Ru1, alters viscoelasticity, reconfigures enhancer-promoter communication, and ultimately shifts transcriptional output (Gibson et al., 2019; W. J. Wang et al., 2021). These findings offer more dynamic perspective than traditional static models for understanding chromatin reorganization. Future efforts should focus on the integration of LLPS biophysics with mechanistic studies of transcriptional control.
2.5.2 RNA associated phase separation
RNA-related membrane-less organelles, such as the nucleolus, nuclear speckles, and stress granules, serve as prime models for liquid-liquid phase separation (LLPS). These condensates assemble reversibly via multivalent weak interactions at physiological concentrations, coupling processes like transcription, splicing, translational repression, and quality control, while enabling rapid molecular reallocation under stress (Brangwynne et al., 2009; Feric et al., 2016; Lafontaine et al., 2021; Mitrea et al., 2018; Yang et al., 2020).
2.5.2.1 LLPS as an organizer of dynamic RNP organelles
Despite distinct compositions, major RNA–protein condensates share a common assembly principle: multivalent interactions mediated by intrinsically disordered regions (IDRs) and RNA initiate core formation, while interfacial energy differences drive multiphase organization. For instance, the nucleolus nucleates via high rRNA transcription, organizing into a tripartite condensate (FC, DFC, GC) scaffolded by electrostatic/π-interaction networks involving NPM1, rRNA, and arginine-rich proteins like SURF6; compartmentalization is refined by interfacial tension, facilitating ordered rRNA processing (Feric et al., 2016; Ferrolino et al., 2018; Lafontaine et al., 2021; Mitrea et al., 2018). Similarly, nuclear speckles form through LLPS driven by IDR-rich scaffolds like SON and SRRM2, with phosphorylation dynamically regulating architecture (Ilik et al., 2020; Prashant et al., 2024; Xu et al., 2022). In contrast, stress granules (SGs) assemble via multi-step condensation of untranslated mRNPs, stabilized by G3BP1, CAPRIN1, and TIA1 networks (Jain et al., 2016; Wheeler et al., 2016; Yang et al., 2020).
2.5.2.2 RNA condensates as functional nodes in cellular metabolism and stress adaptation
Functionally, RNA condensates modulate cellular metabolism and stress responses through the selective concentration and release of RNAs and ribonucleoproteins (RNPs). In the nucleus, the nucleolus exemplifies this principle by forming a biomolecular condensate that provides a viscoelastic environment enhancing pre-rRNA processing efficiency (Feric et al., 2016; Lafontaine et al., 2021). Under stress conditions, cells employ phase separation to reconfigure the splicing machinery, precisely tuning mRNA output through widespread intron retention. A key illustration of this is the CLK1/2 kinase–driven remodeling of nuclear speckles, which promotes intron retention to fine-tune mRNA output (Prashant et al., 2024; Wang B. et al., 2024; Xu et al., 2022), highlighting how phase separation integrates transcriptional and post-transcriptional control. In the cytoplasm, stress granules (SGs) transiently sequester mRNAs to arrest translation. DYRK3-mediated dissolution of SGs enables translational recovery upon stress alleviation (Jeon et al., 2024). However, the functional implications of SGs remain context-dependent, as persistent SGs do not always correlate with cellular rescue, suggesting complex regulation beyond mere condensation. At a systems level, RNA concentration bidirectionally regulates condensates: low levels stabilize via electrostatic complementarity to enhance transcription, while high levels dissolve them (Henninger et al., 2021). Beyond translational control, emerging evidence indicates that SGs act as immunomodulatory hubs by linking translational arrest to innate immune signaling. For instance, TRIM25–G3BP1 co-condensation facilitates the tuning of the RIG-I/MDA5 pathway (Onomoto et al., 2014; Shang et al., 2024). Nevertheless, the specificity of immune modulation through phase separation is debated, particularly in viral infections, where pathogens may exploit LLPS to evade immune detection.
2.5.3 Protein associated LLPS
Protein-associated LLPS generates membrane-less condensates that enrich reactants and tune kinetics, thereby organizing signaling, cytoskeletal dynamics, and proteostasis.
2.5.3.1 LLPS in signal transduction
Membrane-less condensates establish high-activity reaction hubs that amplify signaling outputs and sharpen response thresholds. At the plasma membrane, multivalent receptor–adaptor assemblies (e.g., EGFR–Grb2) exhibit condensate-like properties that potentiate downstream activity, suggesting a general mechanism for signal amplification (Lin et al., 2022). This principle extends to the nucleus, where YAP-derived condensates enrich transcription factors like TEAD1 to drive proliferative programs (Cai et al., 2019). Innate immune responses are similarly regulated through opposing LLPS modalities: while polyubiquitin-driven condensation of NEMO amplifies NF-κB signaling, STING forms inhibitory condensates that prevent hyperactivation (Du et al., 2022; Yu et al., 2021). These findings reveal that LLPS enables bidirectional control of signaling pathways. However, a key limitation across these studies is the heavy reliance on overexpression systems and engineered constructs, leaving open the question of whether such condensates form at endogenous expression levels and under physiological conditions. This gap is particularly relevant in disease contexts: although LLPS-enabled super-enhancers (e.g., containing LSD1, BRD4, and FOXA1) sustain oncogenic signaling in castration-resistant prostate cancer (Li et al., 2023), and aberrant glycogen phase separation promotes hepatocarcinogenesis via YAP activation (Liu et al., 2021), the direct causal role of phase separation in tumorigenesis, versus its role as a correlative epiphenomenon, remains inadequately tested. Thus, while IDR-driven phase separation is proposed to constitute a central layer of signaling control, the field must critically evaluate its mechanistic necessity in vivo.
2.5.3.2 LLPS in the cytoskeleton
LLPS directly orchestrates the spatial organization of the cytoskeleton by unifying force-producing components. For instance, reconstituted PSD condensates promote F-actin bundling and spine growth through charged surface interactions on Homer EVH1 (Chen et al., 2023). This finding is complemented by studies on abLIM1, whose condensates integrate actin nucleation and crosslinking to assemble tension-bearing cortical networks under low-salt conditions (Sen et al., 2022). A parallel logic applies to microtubule regulation: TPX2–tubulin co-condensation enhances branching nucleation on pre-existing microtubules, while importin-α/β suppresses condensation to impose spatiotemporal precision (King and Petry, 2020). Collectively, these examples illustrate how phase separation links upstream signals to the architectural programming of the cytoskeleton. This mechanism paves the way for innovative drug development targeting major diseases such as cancer metastasis and neurodegenerative disorders and facilitates the creation of novel smart biomaterials.
2.5.3.3 LLPS in proteostasis
LLPS plays a dual role in proteostasis, facilitating both the targeted degradation of ubiquitinated substrates and the formation of adaptive stress-responsive compartments. p62/SQSTM1 undergoes K63-ubiquitin–driven phase separation to initiate selective autophagy (Sun et al., 2018), while in the nucleus, p62 condensates function as proteasomal “reactors” that enrich K48-ubiquitylated substrates to accelerate degradation (Yasuda et al., 2020). Under stress, the proteasome itself forms reversible nuclear condensates (SIPANs) that co-assemble substrates, receptors, and machinery into a single functional unit (Uriarte et al., 2021). Similarly, RNP granules such as P-bodies and stress granules triage misfolded clients and silenced mRNPs, with their dysfunction leading to proteotoxic stress (Nostramo et al., 2019). The material properties of these granules are actively maintained by chaperone systems like HSPB8–BAG3–HSP70, which prevent pathological solidification (Ganassi et al., 2016); and regulated by factors such as NS1-BP, which stabilizes stress granules to enable their autophagic clearance (Jeon et al., 2024). These studies collectively position LLPS as a central organizer of protein quality control. However, they also reveal a critical, unresolved tension: the same physicochemical forces that promote adaptive compartmentalization can, under dysregulated conditions, drive a liquid-to-solid transition that underlies neurodegenerative pathology. This underscores the need to better understand the physiological checks and balances that maintain functional phase separation and prevent its collapse into disease-associated aggregates.
LLPS serves as a universal organizing principle across the central dogma, coordinating genome stability, transcriptional regulation, dynamic RNP organelle assembly, and protein homeostasis, as integrated in Figure 3.
Figure 3. Schematic model depicting the organization of key cellular processes by biomolecular condensates via liquid-liquid phase separation (LLPS). DNA associated regulation:LLPS stabilizes heterochromatin and facilitates DNA repair. In addition, LLPS bidirectionally controls transcription through forming activating hubs at super-enhancers or repressive hubs for gene silencing. RNA associated regulation: Liquid-liquid phase separation (LLPS) mediates the assembly of dynamic ribonucleoprotein (RNP) organelles (nucleolus, nuclear speckles, cytoplasmic stress granules). Protein associated regulation: LLPS coordinates signaling, cytoskeleton, and proteostasis.
2.5.4 From liquid to solid: Physiological spectra and pathological transformations
The mechanisms governing condensate formation and function converge on a critical question: what are the physiological characteristics of these compartments? Understanding the spectrum of their material states—from liquid to solid—and their physiological transitions is paramount, as dysregulation of these dynamics represents a cornerstone of disease pathogenesis.
2.5.4.1 Physical basis and regulation of LLPS phase transitions
On short timescales (t < τ_relax), biomolecular condensates predominantly display elastic responses; over longer periods (t > τ_relax), viscous flow becomes dominant. This macroscopic behavior can be provisionally captured by classical Maxwell-type viscoelastic models. Importantly, condensate “aging” involves more than a simple rise in viscosity. Research indicates that aging is principally driven by time-dependent internal network remodeling, governed by sequence-specific intermolecular interactions—such as hydrogen bonds and π–π stacking—that function as physical crosslinks (Alshareedah et al., 2024). These interactions directly strengthen network connectivity and elevate the elastic modulus (G′), rather than merely increasing macroscopic viscosity. Consequently, aging manifests as a marked extension of the relaxation time (τ_relax), slowed fusion and rounding dynamics, and systematic shifts in rheological moduli as well as fluorescence recovery after photobleaching (FRAP) kinetics (Jawerth et al., 2020; Mukherjee et al., 2024); Such network remodeling has direct functional repercussions. Aging can reduce molecular exchange rates and substrate accessibility within condensates, leading to time-dependent declines or alterations in biochemical activities, including catalytic function (Kang et al., 2025). This indicates that the balance between stability and dynamics, maintained through metastable free-energy landscapes and multivalent interactions, is inherently dynamic and precarious. Notably, aging may progress toward irreversible transitions. Under pathological conditions, liquid-liquid phase separation (LLPS) itself can serve as a platform for aberrant aggregation. For example, α-synuclein undergoes LLPS to form condensates that dramatically concentrate the protein, creating a local environment conducive to irreversible conformational changes and drives the irreversible solidification of liquid condensates into amyloid fibrillar aggregates (Ray et al., 2020). Beyond internal interactions and aging, condensate phase behavior is modulated by a spectrum of factors including interfacial effects, viscoelastic relaxation, the competition between nucleation and spinodal decomposition pathways, local crowding, and chaperone activity (Visser et al., 2024).
2.5.4.2 Phase transition of LLPS
Proteins and RNA can drive phase transitions through multivalent interaction modules. These typically consist of sticker motifs, such as aromatic or arginine residues, and flexible or disordered spacer linkers. The sticker–spacer framework proposes that reversible associations between stickers can drive two distinct yet often coupled transitions: liquid–liquid phase separation, governed by net attraction as quantified by a renormalized chi parameter and occurring above a saturation concentration (Csat); and a percolation transition, driven by network connectivity and defined by a percolation threshold (c_perc), which leads to the formation of a system spanning physical gel. When Csat is lower than c_perc, and c_perc in turn lies below the concentration in the dense phase, phase separation and percolation become tightly coupled. The resulting condensates thus form reversible physical microgels that exhibit time dependent viscoelastic properties rather than irreversible solidification (as seen in Figure 4) (Choi et al., 2020; Harmon et al., 2017; Mittag and Pappu, 2022). Since 2015, studies have revealed that the pathological aggregation of many neurodegenerative disease related proteins, such as tau, α synuclein, and TDP 43, is closely associated with phase transitions (Cao et al., 2019; Fitzpatrick et al., 2017; Li et al., 2018). These proteins can form fibrils through two primary nucleation pathways: classical nucleation in homogeneous solution (percolation transition), and condensate mediated nucleation. The latter is governed by a two threshold model in which liquid–liquid phase separation (LLPS) is initiated at a lower concentration, generating protein rich condensates. A subsequent, higher concentration threshold within these condensates then triggers the liquid to solid transition, dramatically accelerating fibril formation (Mathieu et al., 2020; Molliex et al., 2015; Patel et al., 2015; Ray et al., 2020; Wegmann et al., 2018). Notably, biomolecular condensates can exert dual regulatory effects on nucleation. For example, full length α synuclein, due to its amphipathic nature, accumulates at condensate interfaces where elevated local concentrations reduce the nucleation energy barrier and promote fibrillation. In contrast, truncated variants of α synuclein can experience nucleation suppression within certain condensates, likely due to stabilizing molecular interactions (Lipiński et al., 2022). In hematology, pathological liquid phase separation acts as a critical nucleation precursor that accelerates the aberrant polymerization and fibrillation of sickle cell hemoglobin (HbS), thereby driving the core pathology of erythrocyte rigidification and vaso occlusion (Galkin et al., 2002). In oncology, mutant p53 undergoes nuclear LLPS, forming prion like condensates that solidify into amyloid aggregates and facilitate gain of function tumorigenesis (Petronilho et al., 2021). Moreover, oligomerization may lower nucleation barriers and reduce saturation thresholds (Dao et al., 2018). Although the resulting inclusions can transiently buffer toxic oligomers and exert a short lived neuroprotective effect, sustained proteostasis stress or failure of quality control pathways ultimately drives their maturation into fibrillar deposits that perpetuate aggregation and toxicity (Alberti and Dormann, 2019; Tompkins and Hill, 1997). This dynamic highlights a central conceptual tension in the field: the dual role of phase transitions as both adaptive mechanisms and drivers of pathology. Critically, it raises the fundamental question of when and how a physiological response shifts toward becoming pathological.
Figure 4. The sticker–spacer framework and the coupling of phase separation to percolation. Multivalent interactions between repeated “sticker” domains (e.g., SH3 and PRMs) drive a percolation transition above a threshold concentration, c_perc. Linker-dependent solubility dictates the outcome: if the saturation concentration Csat < c_perc (right), percolation couples with phase separation; if c_perc < Csat (left), a percolated network forms without demixing. (Adapted from Harmon et al., 2017). Abbreviations: LLPS, liquid-liquid phase separation; RNP, ribonucleoprotein; SG, stress granule; IDR, intrinsically disordered region; Pol II, RNA polymerase II; CTD, C-terminal domain; H3K9me3, histone H3 lysine 9 trimethylation; rRNA, ribosomal RNA; mRNA, messenger RNA; mRNP, messenger ribonucleoprotein; F-actin, filamentous actin.
2.5.4.3 Small-molecule modulation of biomolecular condensates: Mechanisms and therapeutic potential
The internal microenvironment of biomolecular condensates is formed through dynamic interactions among proteins, RNA, and solutes. These interactions govern key condensate properties—such as biochemical reactivity, molecular sorting, and material exchange—and enable the selective recruitment of specific small molecules, which in turn influence condensate stability and assembly. Mechanistically, small molecules can alter the physical state of condensates by modulating their internal environment. Hydrophilic compounds, for example, raise polarity and lower viscosity, while “proteophilic” molecules like ATP exclude water, thereby increasing hydrophobicity and viscosity. Such effects suggest that cells can fine-tune the material state of membraneless organelles through changes in the concentration of endogenous regulators (Pan et al., 2025). However, under pathological conditions, small molecules may act as drivers that promote the conversion of liquid-like condensates into gel-like or solid states (Pan et al., 2025). Studies using purified α-synuclein have further revealed how small molecules can selectively modulate phase separation. Polyphenols such as quercetin and EGCG promote the formation of liquid condensates while potently inhibiting their conversion into solid amyloid fibrils. These molecules bind α-synuclein via hydrophobic interactions, enhancing its effective multivalency to drive phase separation, while simultaneously stabilizing conformations that hinder β-sheet assembly required for fibrillation. In contrast, dyes like thioflavin T act as potent inducers that rapidly initiate phase separation and accelerate aggregation (Sarkar et al., 2025). These findings illustrate that small molecules can precisely control the dynamics and phase states of biomolecular condensates, providing a rationale for interfering with pathological protein aggregation. This insight underpins the emerging therapeutic strategy termed Condensate-Modifying Therapeutics (C-mods). Rather than targeting classic protein active sites, C-mods are rationally designed small molecules that directly regulate the assembly, material state, and function of biomolecular condensates—often by tuning properties such as hydrophilicity/hydrophobicity, charge distribution, and three-dimensional conformation (Usman et al., 2025; Wang X. et al., 2024). C-mod activity is highly context-dependent. For instance, polar aliphatic molecules like 1,6-hexanediol can dissolve condensates (e.g., Cajal bodies, stress granules) by disrupting weak hydrophobic interactions, yet under certain conditions they can also promote condensate formation or chromatin compaction through competitive interference with multivalent interactions (Hamad et al., 2021; Trnka et al., 2021). Polar aromatic C-mods frequently operate by weakening inter-chain hydrogen bonds within condensates or via competitive binding, thereby preventing protein oligomerization or abnormal conformational transitions—offering new intervention routes for neurodegenerative diseases, cancer, and viral infections (Usman et al., 2025). Beyond synthetic compounds, ions and endogenous metabolites also exhibit dual regulatory capacities. In viral infection, Zn2+ promotes phase separation of the viral nucleocapsid protein (N), supporting replication and RNA packaging. Host antiviral responses can counteract this by upregulating Cu2+, which competitively inhibits Zn2+, disrupting viral morphology and reducing pathogenicity (Monette and Mouland, 2020). Similarly, ATP acts as a key endogenous modulator: at low concentrations it generally enhances phase separation, whereas high concentrations inhibit it. The adenine ring engages in π-π stacking or hydrophobic interactions with protein regions, while the triphosphate chain influences solvent environment; age-related declines in ATP levels compromise the reversibility of phase separation (Meyer and Voigt, 2017; Rice and Rosen, 2017). In summary, C-mods regulate liquid–liquid phase separation through multiple, reversible, and context-sensitive mechanisms. This approach moves beyond the classical “lock-and-key” drug-design model, opening new avenues for treating condensate-related pathologies.
2.5.4.4 Future perspectives
The study of biomolecular condensates is evolving from descriptive observation to quantitative prediction, yet significant challenges persist. Current techniques lack sufficient resolution to dynamically probe condensate organization in living systems, necessitating advanced methods that can precisely manipulate key physicochemical parameters. Fundamental questions remain about cellular control over phase transitions, requiring integrated theoretical frameworks combining Flory-Huggins and active matter principles. Therapeutically, while “molecular glues” and “wedges” offer promising approaches for modulating pathological condensates, achieving specificity presents substantial hurdles. Ultimately, tackling these challenges will demand intensified cross-disciplinary efforts to translate mechanistic insights into clinical applications.
Author contributions
YC: Investigation, Writing – review and editing, Data curation, Methodology, Conceptualization, Resources, Validation, Visualization, Project administration, Supervision, Funding acquisition, Formal Analysis. QL: Resources, Writing – review and editing, Writing – original draft, Formal Analysis, Project administration, Visualization, Methodology, Validation, Conceptualization, Software, Investigation, Data curation. YJ: Data curation, Writing – original draft, Project administration, Methodology, Investigation, Visualization, Writing – review and editing.
Funding
The author(s) declared that financial support was received for this work and/or its publication. This study was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation joint fund project (U23A20498) and the Guizhou Provincial Program on Commercialization of Scientific and Technological Achievements (QKHCG (2024)ZD012).
Acknowledgements
We gratefully acknowledge Associate Research Fellow Huang Pei for her advice and guidance during this work; we also acknowledge the use of the following tools for figure preparation: Figures 1, 2, and 4 were drawn using Figdraw (www.figdraw.com), and Figure 3 was created using Adobe Illustrator.
Conflict of interest
The author(s) declared that this work was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Generative AI statement
The author(s) declared that no generative AI was used in the creation of this manuscript. DeepSeek was employed solely for text polishing and not for any other purpose; all content and commentary were entirely produced by the authors.
Any alternative text (alt text) provided alongside figures in this article has been generated by Frontiers with the support of artificial intelligence and reasonable efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, including review by the authors wherever possible. If you identify any issues, please contact us.
Publisher’s note
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
Footnotes
Abbreviations:Csat, Critical Saturation Concentration; DFC, Dense Fibrillar Component; FC, Fibrillar Center; GC, Granular Component; LCR, Low-Complexity Region; LCST, Lower Critical Solution Temperature; PAR, Poly(ADP-ribose); PRM, Proline-Rich Motif; PTM, Post-Translational Modification; RNP, Ribonucleoprotein; SG, Stress Granule; SIPAN, Starvation-Induced Proteasome Assembly in the Nucleus; SLiM, Short Linear Motif; UCST, Upper Critical Solution Temperature; UPS, Ubiquitin-Proteasome System.
References
Adame-Arana, O., Weber, C. A., Zaburdaev, V., Prost, J., and Julicher, F. (2020). Liquid phase separation controlled by pH. Biophys. J. 119 (8), 1590–1605. doi:10.1016/j.bpj.2020.07.044
Al-Husini, N., Tomares, D. T., Pfaffenberger, Z. J., Muthunayake, N. S., Samad, M. A., Zuo, T., et al. (2020). BR-Bodies provide selectively permeable condensates that stimulate mRNA decay and prevent release of decay intermediates. Mol. Cell 78 (4), 670–682.e678. doi:10.1016/j.molcel.2020.04.001
Alberti, S., and Dormann, D. (2019). Liquid-Liquid phase separation in disease. Annu. Rev. Genet. 53, 171–194. doi:10.1146/annurev-genet-112618-043527
Alberti, S., Gladfelter, A., and Mittag, T. (2019). Considerations and challenges in studying liquid-liquid phase separation and biomolecular condensates. Cell 176 (3), 419–434. doi:10.1016/j.cell.2018.12.035
Alghoul, E., Paloni, M., Takedachi, A., Urbach, S., Barducci, A., Gaillard, P. H., et al. (2023). Compartmentalization of the SUMO/RNF4 pathway by SLX4 drives DNA repair. Mol. Cell 83 (10), 1640–1658 e1649. doi:10.1016/j.molcel.2023.03.021
Alshareedah, I., Borcherds, W. M., Cohen, S. R., Singh, A., Posey, A. E., Farag, M., et al. (2024). Sequence-specific interactions determine viscoelasticity and aging dynamics of protein condensates. Nat. Phys. 20 (9), 1482–1491. doi:10.1038/s41567-024-02558-1
Banani, S. F., Rice, A. M., Peeples, W. B., Lin, Y., Jain, S., Parker, R., et al. (2016). Compositional control of phase-separated cellular bodies. Cell 166 (3), 651–663. doi:10.1016/j.cell.2016.06.010
Banani, S. F., Lee, H. O., Hyman, A. A., and Rosen, M. K. (2017). Biomolecular condensates: organizers of cellular biochemistry. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 18 (5), 285–298. doi:10.1038/nrm.2017.7
Banjade, S., and Rosen, M. K. (2014). Phase transitions of multivalent proteins can promote clustering of membrane receptors. eLife 3, e04123. doi:10.7554/eLife.04123
Banjade, S., Wu, Q., Mittal, A., Peeples, W. B., Pappu, R. V., and Rosen, M. K. (2015). Conserved interdomain linker promotes phase separation of the multivalent adaptor protein Nck. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 112 (47), E6426–E6435. doi:10.1073/pnas.1508778112
Boehning, M., Dugast-Darzacq, C., Rankovic, M., Hansen, A. S., Yu, T., Marie-Nelly, H., et al. (2018). RNA polymerase II clustering through carboxy-terminal domain phase separation. Nat. Struct. Mol. Biol. 25 (9), 833–840. doi:10.1038/s41594-018-0112-y
Boija, A., Klein, I. A., Sabari, B. R., Dall'Agnese, A., Coffey, E. L., Zamudio, A. V., et al. (2018). Transcription factors activate genes through the phase-separation capacity of their activation domains. Cell 175 (7), 1842–1855.e1816. doi:10.1016/j.cell.2018.10.042
Brangwynne, C. P., Eckmann, C. R., Courson, D. S., Rybarska, A., Hoege, C., Gharakhani, J., et al. (2009). Germline P granules are liquid droplets that localize by controlled dissolution/condensation. Science 324 (5935), 1729–1732. doi:10.1126/science.1172046
Cai, D., Feliciano, D., Dong, P., Flores, E., Gruebele, M., Porat-Shliom, N., et al. (2019). Phase separation of YAP reorganizes genome topology for long-term YAP target gene expression. Nat. Cell Biol. 21 (12), 1578–1589. doi:10.1038/s41556-019-0433-z
Cao, Q., Boyer, D. R., Sawaya, M. R., Ge, P., and Eisenberg, D. S. (2019). Cryo-EM structures of four polymorphic TDP-43 amyloid cores. Nat. Struct. Mol. Biol. 26 (7), 619–627. doi:10.1038/s41594-019-0248-4
Chen, X., Jia, B., Zhu, S., and Zhang, M. (2023). Phase separation-mediated actin bundling by the postsynaptic density condensates. eLife 12, e84446. doi:10.7554/eLife.84446
Choi, J. M., Holehouse, A. S., and Pappu, R. V. (2020). Physical principles underlying the complex biology of intracellular phase transitions. Annu. Rev. Biophys. 49, 107–133. doi:10.1146/annurev-biophys-121219-081629
Clifford, P. B., Péter, T., and Rohit, V. P. (2015). Polymer physics of intracellular phase transitions. Nat. Phys. 11, 899–904. doi:10.1038/nphys3532
Dao, T. P., Kolaitis, R. M., Kim, H. J., O'Donovan, K., Martyniak, B., Colicino, E., et al. (2018). Ubiquitin modulates liquid-liquid phase separation of UBQLN2 via disruption of multivalent interactions. Mol. Cell 69 (6), 965–978.e966. doi:10.1016/j.molcel.2018.02.004
Das, S., Lin, Y.-H., Vernon, R. M., Forman-Kay, J. D., and Chan, H. S. (2020). Comparative roles of charge,π, and hydrophobic interactions in sequence-dependent phase separation of intrinsically disordered proteins. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 117 (46), 28795–28805. doi:10.1073/pnas.2008122117
De La Cruz, N., Pradhan, P., Veettil, R. T., Conti, B. A., Oppikofer, M., and Sabari, B. R. (2024). Disorder-mediated interactions target proteins to specific condensates. Mol. Cell 84 (18), 3497–3512.e3499. doi:10.1016/j.molcel.2024.08.017
Dignon, G. L., Zheng, W., Kim, Y. C., and Mittal, J. (2019). Temperature-controlled liquid-liquid phase separation of disordered proteins. ACS Cent. Sci. 5 (5), 821–830. doi:10.1021/acscentsci.9b00102
Doshi, N., Venema, P., van der Linden, E., and de Vries, R. (2025). The generality of pH-induced liquid-liquid phase separation in plant proteins extends to commercial legume flours. Food Hydrocoll. 162, 110927. doi:10.1016/j.foodhyd.2024.110927
Du, M., Ea, C. K., Fang, Y., and Chen, Z. J. (2022). Liquid phase separation of NEMO induced by polyubiquitin chains activates NF-κB. Mol. Cell 82 (13), 2415–2426.e2415. doi:10.1016/j.molcel.2022.03.037
Duan, C., and Wang, R. (2024). A unified description of salt effects on the liquid-liquid phase separation of proteins. ACS Cent. Sci. 10 (2), 460–468. doi:10.1021/acscentsci.3c01372
Dzuricky, M., Rogers, B. A., Shahid, A., Cremer, P. S., and Chilkoti, A. (2020). De novo engineering of intracellular condensates using artificial disordered proteins. Nat. Chem. 12 (9), 814–825. doi:10.1038/s41557-020-0511-7
Feric, M., Vaidya, N., Harmon, T. S., Mitrea, D. M., Zhu, L., Richardson, T. M., et al. (2016). Coexisting liquid phases underlie nucleolar subcompartments. Cell 165 (7), 1686–1697. doi:10.1016/j.cell.2016.04.047
Ferrolino, M. C., Mitrea, D. M., Michael, J. R., and Kriwacki, R. W. (2018). Compositional adaptability in NPM1-SURF6 scaffolding networks enabled by dynamic switching of phase separation mechanisms. Nat. Commun. 9 (1), 5064. doi:10.1038/s41467-018-07530-1
Fitzpatrick, A. W. P., Falcon, B., He, S., Murzin, A. G., Murshudov, G., Garringer, H. J., et al. (2017). Cryo-EM structures of tau filaments from Alzheimer's disease. Nature 547 (7662), 185–190. doi:10.1038/nature23002
Flory, P. J. (1942). Thermodynamics of high polymer solutions. J. Chemical Physics 10 (1), 51–61. doi:10.1063/1.1723621
Frattini, C., Promonet, A., Alghoul, E., Vidal-Eychenie, S., Lamarque, M., Blanchard, M. P., et al. (2021). TopBP1 assembles nuclear condensates to switch on ATR signaling. Mol. Cell 81 (6), 1231–1245.e1238. doi:10.1016/j.molcel.2020.12.049
Galkin, O., Chen, K., Nagel, R. L., Hirsch, R. E., and Vekilov, P. G. (2002). Liquid–liquid separation in solutions of normal and sickle cell hemoglobin. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci., 99 (13), 8479–8483. doi:10.1073/pnas.122055299
Ganassi, M., Mateju, D., Bigi, I., Mediani, L., Poser, I., Lee, H. O., et al. (2016). A surveillance function of the HSPB8-BAG3-HSP70 chaperone complex ensures stress granule integrity and dynamism. Mol. Cell 63 (5), 796–810. doi:10.1016/j.molcel.2016.07.021
Gibson, B. A., Doolittle, L. K., Schneider, M. W. G., Jensen, L. E., Gamarra, N., Henry, L., et al. (2019). Organization of chromatin by intrinsic and regulated phase separation. Cell 179 (2), 470–484.e421. doi:10.1016/j.cell.2019.08.037
Goetz, S. K., and Mahamid, J. (2020). Visualizing molecular architectures of cellular condensates: hints of complex coacervation scenarios. Dev. Cell 55 (1), 97–107. doi:10.1016/j.devcel.2020.09.003
Hamad, N., Yoneda, R., So, M., Kurokawa, R., Nagata, T., and Katahira, M. (2021). Non-coding RNA suppresses FUS aggregation caused by mechanistic shear stress on pipetting in a sequence-dependent manner. Sci. Rep. 11 (1), 9523. doi:10.1038/s41598-021-89075-w
Harmon, T. S., Holehouse, A. S., Rosen, M. K., and Pappu, R. V. (2017). Intrinsically disordered linkers determine the interplay between phase separation and gelation in multivalent proteins. eLife 6, e30294. doi:10.7554/eLife.30294
Henninger, J. E., Oksuz, O., Shrinivas, K., Sagi, I., LeRoy, G., Zheng, M. M., et al. (2021). RNA-mediated feedback control of transcriptional condensates. Cell 184 (1), 207–225 e224. doi:10.1016/j.cell.2020.11.030
Huggins, M. L. (1942). Some properties of solutions of long-chain compounds. J. Phys. Chem. 46 (1), 151–158. doi:10.1021/j150415a018
Hyman, A. A., and Simons, K. (2012). Cell biology. Beyond oil and water--phase transitions in cells. Science 337 (6098), 1047–1049. doi:10.1126/science.1223728
Hyman, A. A., Weber, C. A., and Jülicher, F. (2014). Liquid-liquid phase separation in biology. Annu. Rev. Cell Dev. Biol. 30, 39–58. doi:10.1146/annurev-cellbio-100913-013325
Ilik, A., Malszycki, M., Lübke, A. K., Schade, C., Meierhofer, D., and Aktaş, T. (2020). SON and SRRM2 are essential for nuclear speckle formation. eLife 9, e60579. doi:10.7554/eLife.60579
Jack, A., Kim, Y., Strom, A. R., Lee, D. S. W., Williams, B., Schaub, J. M., et al. (2022). Compartmentalization of telomeres through DNA-scaffolded phase separation. Dev. Cell 57 (2), 277–290.e279. doi:10.1016/j.devcel.2021.12.017
Jain, S., Wheeler, J. R., Walters, R. W., Agrawal, A., Barsic, A., and Parker, R. (2016). ATPase-Modulated stress granules contain a diverse proteome and substructure. Cell 164 (3), 487–498. doi:10.1016/j.cell.2015.12.038
Jawerth, L., Fischer-Friedrich, E., Saha, S., Wang, J., Franzmann, T., Zhang, X., et al. (2020). Protein condensates as aging Maxwell fluids. Science 370 (6522), 1317–1323. doi:10.1126/science.aaw4951
Jeon, P., Ham, H. J., Choi, H., Park, S., Jang, J. W., Park, S. W., et al. (2024). NS1 binding protein regulates stress granule dynamics and clearance by inhibiting p62 ubiquitination. Nat. Commun. 15 (1), 10925. doi:10.1038/s41467-024-55446-w
Jeon, H. J., Lee, J. H., Park, A. J., Choi, J. M., and Kang, K. (2025). A single amino acid model for hydrophobically driven liquid-liquid phase separation. Biomacromolecules 26 (2), 1075–1085. doi:10.1021/acs.biomac.4c01410
Jeong Hyun, A., Eric, S. D., Timothy, A. D., Shuai, Z., Ivana Yoseli, Q., Hidetaka, U., et al. (2021). Phase separation drives aberrant chromatin looping and cancer development. Nature. doi:10.1038/s41586-021-03662-5
Jo, Y., Jang, J., Song, D., Park, H., and Jung, Y. (2022). Determinants for intrinsically disordered protein recruitment into phase-separated protein condensates. Chem. Sci. 13 (2), 522–530. doi:10.1039/d1sc05672g
Jonchhe, S., Pan, W., Pokhrel, P., and Mao, H. (2022). Small molecules modulate liquid-to-solid transitions in phase-separated tau condensates. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. Engl. 61 (23), e202113156. doi:10.1002/anie.202113156
Kang, W., Wu, Z., Huang, X., Qi, H., Wu, J., Wang, J., et al. (2025). Time-dependent catalytic activity in aging condensates. Nat. Commun. 16 (1), 6959. doi:10.1038/s41467-025-62074-5
Kato, M., Han, T. W., Xie, S., Shi, K., Du, X., Wu, L. C., et al. (2012). Cell-free formation of RNA granules: low complexity sequence domains form dynamic fibers within hydrogels. Cell 149 (4), 753–767. doi:10.1016/j.cell.2012.04.017
Kim, J., Qin, S., Zhou, H.-X., and Rosen, M. K. (2024). Surface charge can modulate phase separation of multidomain proteins. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 146 (5), 3383–3395. doi:10.1021/jacs.3c12789
King, M. R., and Petry, S. (2020). Phase separation of TPX2 enhances and spatially coordinates microtubule nucleation. Nat. Commun. 11 (1), 270. doi:10.1038/s41467-019-14087-0
King, M. R., Ruff, K. M., Lin, A. Z., Pant, A., Farag, M., Lalmansingh, J. M., et al. (2024). Macromolecular condensation organizes nucleolar sub-phases to set up a pH gradient. Cell 187 (8), 1889–1906.e1824. doi:10.1016/j.cell.2024.02.029
Krainer, G., Welsh, T. J., Joseph, J. A., Espinosa, J. R., Wittmann, S., de Csilléry, E., et al. (2021). Reentrant liquid condensate phase of proteins is stabilized by hydrophobic and non-ionic interactions. Nat. Commun. 12 (1), 1085. doi:10.1038/s41467-021-21181-9
Kumaraswamy, G. (2017). Thermodynamics of high-polymer solutions. Resonance 22 (4), 415–426. doi:10.1007/s12045-017-0481-2
Lafontaine, D. L. J., Riback, J. A., Bascetin, R., and Brangwynne, C. P. (2021). The nucleolus as a multiphase liquid condensate. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 22 (3), 165–182. doi:10.1038/s41580-020-0272-6
Lao, Z., Dong, X., Liu, X., Li, F., Chen, Y., Tang, Y., et al. (2022). Insights into the atomistic mechanisms of phosphorylation in disrupting liquid-liquid phase separation and aggregation of the FUS low-complexity domain. J. Chem. Inf. Model 62 (13), 3227–3238. doi:10.1021/acs.jcim.2c00414
Larson, A. G., Elnatan, D., Keenen, M. M., Trnka, M. J., Johnston, J. B., Burlingame, A. L., et al. (2017). Liquid droplet formation by HP1α suggests a role for phase separation in heterochromatin. Nature 547 (7662), 236–240. doi:10.1038/nature22822
Li, P., Banjade, S., Cheng, H. C., Kim, S., Chen, B., Guo, L., et al. (2012). Phase transitions in the assembly of multivalent signalling proteins. Nature 483 (7389), 336–340. doi:10.1038/nature10879
Li, B., Ge, P., Murray, K. A., Sheth, P., Zhang, M., Nair, G., et al. (2018). Cryo-EM of full-length α-synuclein reveals fibril polymorphs with a common structural kernel. Nat. Commun. 9 (1), 3609. doi:10.1038/s41467-018-05971-2
Li, M., Liu, M., Han, W., Wang, Z., Han, D., Patalano, S., et al. (2023). LSD1 inhibition disrupts super-enhancer-driven oncogenic transcriptional programs in castration-resistant prostate cancer. Cancer Res. 83 (10), 1684–1698. doi:10.1158/0008-5472.Can-22-2433
Lin, C. W., Nocka, L. M., Stinger, B. L., DeGrandchamp, J. B., Lew, L. J. N., Alvarez, S., et al. (2022). A two-component protein condensate of the EGFR cytoplasmic tail and Grb2 regulates Ras activation by SOS at the membrane. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 119 (19), e2122531119. doi:10.1073/pnas.2122531119
Lipiński, W. P., Visser, B. S., Robu, I., Fakhree, M. A. A., Lindhoud, S., Claessens, M., et al. (2022). Biomolecular condensates can both accelerate and suppress aggregation of α-synuclein. Sci. Adv. 8 (48), eabq6495. doi:10.1126/sciadv.abq6495
Liu, Q., Li, J., Zhang, W., Xiao, C., Zhang, S., Nian, C., et al. (2021). Glycogen accumulation and phase separation drives liver tumor initiation. Cell 184 (22), 5559–5576.e5519. doi:10.1016/j.cell.2021.10.001
Liu, D., Yang, J., and Cristea, I. M. (2024). Liquid-liquid phase separation in innate immunity. Trends Immunol. 45 (6), 454–469. doi:10.1016/j.it.2024.04.009
Martin, E. W., Holehouse, A. S., Peran, I., Farag, M., Incicco, J. J., Bremer, A., et al. (2020). Valence and patterning of aromatic residues determine the phase behavior of prion-like domains. Science 367 (6478), 694–699. doi:10.1126/science.aaw8653
Mathieu, C., Pappu, R. V., and Taylor, J. P. (2020). Beyond aggregation: pathological phase transitions in neurodegenerative disease. Science 370 (6512), 56–60. doi:10.1126/science.abb8032
Meng, L., Jiang, Y., You, J., Chen, Y., Guo, S., Chen, L., et al. (2025). PRMT1-methylated MSX1 phase separates to control palate development. Nat. Commun. 16 (1), 949. doi:10.1038/s41467-025-56327-6
Mengjie, S., Mingkang, J., He, R., Biying, Y., Wangfei, C., Guangwei, X., et al. (2021). NuMA regulates mitotic spindle assembly, structural dynamics and function via phase separation. Nat. Communications 12, 7157. doi:10.1038/s41467-021-27528-6
Meyer, T., and Voigt, N. (2017). In search for novel functions of adenosine 5'-triphosphate (ATP) in the heart. Cardiovasc Res. 113 (14), e59–e60. doi:10.1093/cvr/cvx207
Milovanovic, D., Wu, Y., Bian, X., and De Camilli, P. (2018). A liquid phase of synapsin and lipid vesicles. Science 361 (6402), 604–607. doi:10.1126/science.aat5671
Mitrea, D. M., Cika, J. A., Guy, C. S., Ban, D., Banerjee, P. R., Stanley, C. B., et al. (2016). Nucleophosmin integrates within the nucleolus via multi-modal interactions with proteins displaying R-rich linear motifs and rRNA. eLife 5, e13571. doi:10.7554/eLife.13571
Mitrea, D. M., Cika, J. A., Stanley, C. B., Nourse, A., Onuchic, P. L., Banerjee, P. R., et al. (2018). Self-interaction of NPM1 modulates multiple mechanisms of liquid-liquid phase separation. Nat. Commun. 9 (1), 842. doi:10.1038/s41467-018-03255-3
Mittag, T., and Pappu, R. V. (2022). A conceptual framework for understanding phase separation and addressing open questions and challenges. Mol. Cell 82 (12), 2201–2214. doi:10.1016/j.molcel.2022.05.018
Molliex, A., Temirov, J., Lee, J., Coughlin, M., Kanagaraj, A. P., Kim, H. J., et al. (2015). Phase separation by low complexity domains promotes stress granule assembly and drives pathological fibrillization. Cell 163 (1), 123–133. doi:10.1016/j.cell.2015.09.015
Monahan, Z., Ryan, V. H., Janke, A. M., Burke, K. A., Rhoads, S. N., Zerze, G. H., et al. (2017). Phosphorylation of the FUS low-complexity domain disrupts phase separation, aggregation, and toxicity. EMBO J. 36 (20), 2951–2967. doi:10.15252/embj.201696394
Monette, A., and Mouland, A. J. (2020). Zinc and copper ions differentially regulate prion-like phase separation dynamics of pan-virus nucleocapsid biomolecular condensates. Viruses 12 (10), 1179. doi:10.3390/v12101179
Montgomery, Jr (1898). Comparative cytological studies, with especial regard to the morphology of the nucleolus. J. Morphology 15 (2), 265–582. doi:10.1002/jmor.1050150204
Mukherjee, S., Manisha, P., Dave, K., Pradeep, K., and Samir, K. M. (2024). Protein misfolding and amyloid nucleation through liquid–liquid phase separation. Chem. Soc. Rev. 53, 4976–5013. doi:10.1039/d3cs01065a
Murray, D. T., Kato, M., Lin, Y., Thurber, K. R., Hung, I., McKnight, S. L., et al. (2017). Structure of FUS protein fibrils and its relevance to self-assembly and phase separation of low-complexity domains. Cell 171 (3), 615–627 e616. doi:10.1016/j.cell.2017.08.048
Murthy, A. C., Tang, W. S., Jovic, N., Janke, A. M., Seo, D. H., Perdikari, T. M., et al. (2021). Molecular interactions contributing to FUS SYGQ LC-RGG phase separation and co-partitioning with RNA polymerase II heptads. Nat. Struct. Mol. Biol. 28 (11), 923–935. doi:10.1038/s41594-021-00677-4
Nostramo, R., Xing, S., Zhang, B., and Herman, P. K. (2019). Insights into the role of P-Bodies and stress granules in protein quality control. Genetics 213 (1), 251–265. doi:10.1534/genetics.119.302376
Nott, T. J., Petsalaki, E., Farber, P., Jervis, D., Fussner, E., Plochowietz, A., et al. (2015). Phase transition of a disordered nuage protein generates environmentally responsive membraneless organelles. Mol. Cell 57 (5), 936–947. doi:10.1016/j.molcel.2015.01.013
Onomoto, K., Yoneyama, M., Fung, G., Kato, H., and Fujita, T. (2014). Antiviral innate immunity and stress granule responses. Trends Immunol. 35 (9), 420–428. doi:10.1016/j.it.2014.07.006
Pan, Y., Lei, J., Mou, S., Wu, Z., Zhu, L., Zeng, L., et al. (2025). Small molecules influence the physical microenvironment of biomolecular condensates. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 147 (26), 22686–22696. doi:10.1021/jacs.5c04180
Patel, A., Lee, H. O., Jawerth, L., Maharana, S., Jahnel, M., Hein, M. Y., et al. (2015). A liquid-to-solid phase transition of the ALS protein FUS accelerated by disease mutation. Cell 162 (5), 1066–1077. doi:10.1016/j.cell.2015.07.047
Petronilho, E. C., Pedrote, M. M., Marques, M. A., Passos, Y. M., Mota, M. F., Jakobus, B., et al. (2021). Phase separation of p53 precedes aggregation and is affected by oncogenic mutations and ligands. Chem. Sci. 12 (21), 7334–7349. doi:10.1039/d1sc01739j
Plys, A. J., Davis, C. P., Kim, J., Rizki, G., Keenen, M. M., Marr, S. K., et al. (2019). Phase separation of Polycomb-repressive complex 1 is governed by a charged disordered region of CBX2. Genes Dev. 33 (13-14), 799–813. doi:10.1101/gad.326488.119
Powell, W. C., Nahum, M., Pankratz, K., Herlory, M., Greenwood, J., Poliyenko, D., et al. (2024). Post-translational modifications control phase transitions of tau. ACS Cent. Sci. 10 (11), 2145–2161. doi:10.1021/acscentsci.4c01319
Prashant, B., Amy, C., Benjamin, E., Olivia, E., Sofia, A. Q., Mackenzie, S., et al. (2024). Genome organization around nuclear speckles drives mRNA splicing efficiency. Nature 629, 1165–1173. doi:10.1038/s41586-024-07429-6
Protter, D. S. W., and Parker, R. (2016). Principles and properties of stress granules. Trends Cell Biol. 26 (9), 668–679. doi:10.1016/j.tcb.2016.05.004
Pullara, P., Alshareedah, I., and Banerjee, P. R. (2022). Temperature-dependent reentrant phase transition of RNA-polycation mixtures. Soft Matter 18 (7), 1342–1349. doi:10.1039/d1sm01557e
Qamar, S., Wang, G., Randle, S. J., Ruggeri, F. S., Varela, J. A., Lin, J. Q., et al. (2018). FUS phase separation is modulated by a molecular chaperone and methylation of arginine Cation-π interactions. Cell 173 (3), 720–734.e715. doi:10.1016/j.cell.2018.03.056
Qin, Z., Fang, X., Sun, W., Ma, Z., Dai, T., Wang, S., et al. (2022). Deactylation by SIRT1 enables liquid-liquid phase separation of IRF3/IRF7 in innate antiviral immunity. Nat. Immunol. 23 (8), 1193–1207. doi:10.1038/s41590-022-01269-0
Ravindran, R., Bacellar, I. O. L., Castellanos-Girouard, X., Wahba, H. M., Zhang, Z., Omichinski, J. G., et al. (2023). Peroxisome biogenesis initiated by protein phase separation. Nature 617 (7961), 608–615. doi:10.1038/s41586-023-06044-1
Ray, S., Singh, N., Kumar, R., Patel, K., Pandey, S., Datta, D., et al. (2020). α-Synuclein aggregation nucleates through liquid-liquid phase separation. Nat. Chem. 12 (8), 705–716. doi:10.1038/s41557-020-0465-9
Ren, Q., Li, L., Liu, L., Li, J., Shi, C., Sun, Y., et al. (2025). The molecular mechanism of temperature-dependent phase separation of heat shock factor 1. Nat. Chem. Biol. 21 (6), 831–842. doi:10.1038/s41589-024-01806-y
Rice, A. M., and Rosen, M. K. (2017). ATP controls the crowd. Science 356 (6339), 701–702. doi:10.1126/science.aan4223
Sabari, B. R., Dall'Agnese, A., Boija, A., Klein, I. A., Coffey, E. L., Shrinivas, K., et al. (2018). Coactivator condensation at super-enhancers links phase separation and gene control. Science 361 (6400), eaar3958. doi:10.1126/science.aar3958
Sarah, T., Omar, F., Marie-Claude, G., Román, G. P., Antoine, C., Samuel, Q., et al. (2022). Exploration of nuclear body-enhanced sumoylation reveals that PML represses 2-cell features of embryonic stem cells. Nat. Communications 13, 5726. doi:10.1038/s41467-022-33147-6
Sarkar, D., Roychowdhury, S., Jain, R., Chattopadhyay, K., and Banerji, B. (2025). Small molecule modulators of α-Synuclein phase separation. ACS Chem. Neurosci. 16 (16), 3174–3183. doi:10.1021/acschemneuro.5c00302
Sen, Y., Chunxia, L., Yuting, G., Guoqing, L., Dong, L., Xiumin, Y., et al. (2022). Self-construction of actin networks through phase separation–induced abLIM1 condensates. In Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. doi:10.1073/pnas.2122420119
Shang, Z., Zhang, S., Wang, J., Zhou, L., Zhang, X., Billadeau, D. D., et al. (2024). TRIM25 predominately associates with anti-viral stress granules. Nat. Commun. 15 (1), 4127. doi:10.1038/s41467-024-48596-4
Sołtys, K., Tarczewska, A., and Bystranowska, D. (2023). Modulation of biomolecular phase behavior by metal ions. Biochim. Biophys. Acta Mol. Cell Res. 1870 (8), 119567. doi:10.1016/j.bbamcr.2023.119567
Srivastav, A. K., Gupta, S. K., and Kumar, U. (2020). A molecular simulation approach towards the development of universal nanocarriers by studying the pH- and electrostatic-driven changes in the dynamic structure of albumin. RSC Adv. 10 (23), 13451–13459. doi:10.1039/d0ra00803f
Sun, D., Wu, R., Zheng, J., Li, P., and Yu, L. (2018). Polyubiquitin chain-induced p62 phase separation drives autophagic cargo segregation. Cell Res. 28 (4), 405–415. doi:10.1038/s41422-018-0017-7
Tompkins, M. M., and Hill, W. D. (1997). Contribution of somal Lewy bodies to neuronal death. Brain Res. 775 (1-2), 24–29. doi:10.1016/s0006-8993(97)00874-3
Trnka, F., Hoffmann, C., Wang, H., Sansevrino, R., Rankovic, B., Rost, B. R., et al. (2021). Aberrant phase separation of FUS leads to lysosome sequestering and acidification. Front. Cell Dev. Biol. 9, 716919. doi:10.3389/fcell.2021.716919
Tsang, B., Arsenault, J., Vernon, R. M., Lin, H., Sonenberg, N., Wang, L. Y., et al. (2019). Phosphoregulated FMRP phase separation models activity-dependent translation through bidirectional control of mRNA granule formation. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 116 (10), 4218–4227. doi:10.1073/pnas.1814385116
Uriarte, M., Sen Nkwe, N., Tremblay, R., Ahmed, O., Messmer, C., Mashtalir, N., et al. (2021). Starvation-induced proteasome assemblies in the nucleus link amino acid supply to apoptosis. Nat. Commun. 12 (1), 6984. doi:10.1038/s41467-021-27306-4
Usman, A., Yusuf, A., Isah, M. B., Dang, M., and Zhang, X. (2025). Small molecules as regulators of liquid-liquid phase separation: mechanisms and strategies for new drug discovery. Faseb J. 39 (13), e70773. doi:10.1096/fj.202501476R
Visser, B. S., Lipiński, W. P., and Spruijt, E. (2024). The role of biomolecular condensates in protein aggregation. Nat. Rev. Chem. 8 (9), 686–700. doi:10.1038/s41570-024-00635-w
Wang, L., and Li, P. (2024). Arginine methylation-enabled FUS phase separation with SMN contributes to neuronal granule formation. Cell Rep. 43 (8), 114537. doi:10.1016/j.celrep.2024.114537
Wang, B., Li, J., Song, Y., Qin, X., Lu, X., Huang, W., et al. (2024). CLK2 condensates reorganize nuclear speckles and induce intron retention. Adv. Sci. (Weinh) 11 (38), e2309588. doi:10.1002/advs.202309588
Wang, J. T., Smith, J., Chen, B. C., Schmidt, H., Rasoloson, D., Paix, A., et al. (2014). Regulation of RNA granule dynamics by phosphorylation of serine-rich, intrinsically disordered proteins in C. elegans. eLife 3, e04591. doi:10.7554/eLife.04591
Wang, J., Choi, J. M., Holehouse, A. S., Lee, H. O., Zhang, X., Jahnel, M., et al. (2018). A molecular grammar governing the driving forces for phase separation of prion-like RNA binding proteins. Cell 174 (3), 688–699.e616. doi:10.1016/j.cell.2018.06.006
Wang, D., Sun, T., Xia, Y., Zhao, Z., Sheng, X., Li, S., et al. (2023). Homodimer-mediated phosphorylation of C/EBPα-p42 S16 modulates acute myeloid leukaemia differentiation through liquid-liquid phase separation. Nat. Commun. 14 (1), 6907. doi:10.1038/s41467-023-42650-3
Wang, S., Dai, T., Qin, Z., Pan, T., Chu, F., Lou, L., et al. (2021). Targeting liquid-liquid phase separation of SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid protein promotes innate antiviral immunity by elevating MAVS activity. Nat. Cell Biol. 23 (7), 718–732. doi:10.1038/s41556-021-00710-0
Wang, W. J., Mu, X., Tan, C. P., Wang, Y. J., Zhang, Y., Li, G., et al. (2021). Induction and monitoring of DNA phase separation in living cells by a light-switching ruthenium complex. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 143 (30), 11370–11381. doi:10.1021/jacs.1c01424
Wang, X., Liu, J., Mao, C., and Mao, Y. (2024). Phase separation-mediated biomolecular condensates and their relationship to tumor. Cell Commun. Signal 22 (1), 143. doi:10.1186/s12964-024-01518-9
Wegmann, S., Eftekharzadeh, B., Tepper, K., Zoltowska, K. M., Bennett, R. E., Dujardin, S., et al. (2018). Tau protein liquid-liquid phase separation can initiate tau aggregation. EMBO J. 37 (7), e98049. doi:10.15252/embj.201798049
Welles, R. M., Sojitra, K. A., Garabedian, M. V., Xia, B., Wang, W., Guan, M., et al. (2024). Determinants that enable disordered protein assembly into discrete condensed phases. Nat. Chem. 16 (7), 1062–1072. doi:10.1038/s41557-023-01423-7
Wheeler, J. R., Matheny, T., Jain, S., Abrisch, R., and Parker, R. (2016). Distinct stages in stress granule assembly and disassembly. eLife 5, e18413. doi:10.7554/eLife.18413
Xu, S., Lai, S. K., Sim, D. Y., Ang, W. S. L., Li, H. Y., and Roca, X. (2022). SRRM2 organizes splicing condensates to regulate alternative splicing. Nucleic Acids Res. 50 (15), 8599–8614. doi:10.1093/nar/gkac669
Yang, P., Mathieu, C., Kolaitis, R.-M., Zhang, P., Messing, J., Yurtsever, U., et al. (2020). G3BP1 is a tunable switch that triggers phase separation to assemble stress granules. Cell 181 (2), 325–345.e328. doi:10.1016/j.cell.2020.03.046
Yasuda, S., Tsuchiya, H., Kaiho, A., Guo, Q., Ikeuchi, K., Endo, A., et al. (2020). Stress- and ubiquitylation-dependent phase separation of the proteasome. Nature 578 (7794), 296–300. doi:10.1038/s41586-020-1982-9
Yi, F., Cai, C., Ruan, B., Hao, M., Yeo, S. K., Haas, M., et al. (2023). Regulation of RB1CC1/FIP200 stability and autophagy function by CREBBP-mediated acetylation in an intrinsically disordered region. Autophagy 19 (6), 1662–1677. doi:10.1080/15548627.2022.2148432
Yu, X., Zhang, L., Shen, J., Zhai, Y., Jiang, Q., Yi, M., et al. (2021). The STING phase-separator suppresses innate immune signalling. Nat. Cell Biol. 23 (4), 330–340. doi:10.1038/s41556-021-00659-0
Zeng, X., Holehouse, A. S., Chilkoti, A., Mittag, T., and Pappu, R. V. (2020). Connecting coil-to-globule transitions to full phase diagrams for intrinsically disordered proteins. Biophys. J. 119 (2), 402–418. doi:10.1016/j.bpj.2020.06.014
Zhang, H., Elbaum-Garfinkle, S., Langdon, E. M., Taylor, N., Occhipinti, P., Bridges, A. A., et al. (2015). RNA controls PolyQ protein phase transitions. Mol. Cell 60 (2), 220–230. doi:10.1016/j.molcel.2015.09.017
Zhang, L., Geng, X., Wang, F., Tang, J., Ichida, Y., Sharma, A., et al. (2022). 53BP1 regulates heterochromatin through liquid phase separation. Nat. Commun. 13 (1), 360. doi:10.1038/s41467-022-28019-y
Zhao, T., Xiong, W., Cai, J., Zhang, Q., Sun, D., Long, K., et al. (2024). YTHDF2 phase separation promotes arsenic-induced keratinocyte transformation in a poly-m(6)A-dependent manner by inhibiting translational initiation of the key tumor suppressor PTEN. J. Hazard Mater 480, 136243. doi:10.1016/j.jhazmat.2024.136243
Zhou, H., Song, Z., Zhong, S., Zuo, L., Qi, Z., Qu, L. J., et al. (2019). Mechanism of DNA-induced phase separation for transcriptional repressor VRN1. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. Engl. 58 (15), 4858–4862. doi:10.1002/anie.201810373
Keywords: biomolecular condensates, cellular organization, liquid–liquid phase separation (LLPS), molecular determinants, pathological phase transition, physicochemical regulation, post-translational modifications
Citation: Li Q, Jiang Y and Chen Y (2026) The regulatory principles, physiological functions, and phase transition of biomolecular condensates. Front. Cell Dev. Biol. 14:1759561. doi: 10.3389/fcell.2026.1759561
Received: 03 December 2025; Accepted: 05 January 2026;
Published: 21 January 2026.
Edited by:
Takuya Noguchi, Iwate Medical University, JapanReviewed by:
Xinzhi Huang, Kennesaw State University, United StatesJinwei Zhu, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, China
Copyright © 2026 Li, Jiang and Chen. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
*Correspondence: Yan Chen, eWFuY2hlbkB6bXUuZWR1LmNu