Talk:Enzyme/Archive 5

Link to BRENDA changed
Perhaps someone could change the link to BRENDA. The official link is: http://www.brenda-enzymes.org Unfortunately I can´t change the link on my own.

Best regards,

Andreas


 * Thank you, fixed. Tim Vickers (talk) 21:45, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

substrate versus enzyme
IS THERE A MISTAKE IN HERE?

Typically, the suffix -ase is added to the name of the substrate (e.g., lactase is the enzyme that cleaves lactose) or the type of reaction (e.g., DNA polymerase forms DNA polymers).

SHOULD IT READ AS FOLLOWS? Typically, the suffix -ase is added to the name of the enzyme (e.g., lactase is the enzyme that cleaves lactose) or the type of reaction (e.g., DNA polymerase forms DNA polymers).

Bcymbala (talk) 01:38, 22 January 2009 (UTC)


 * I've reworded this to read "Typically, to generate the name of an enzyme, the suffix -ase is added to the name of its substrate (e.g., lactase is the enzyme that cleaves lactose)" Tim Vickers (talk) 01:47, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

induced fit diagram rubbish (shows and explains v little in its current (Feb 2009) form)
I'm a chemist.

I would expect this diagram to have come out of a bad (US ?) High School publication...

Is this the quality of text-book of the next generation of scientists, the generation who have so much to solve...?

You can tell me what you like: this diagram is rubbish.

Koala Paw (talk) 16:59, 22 February 2009 (UTC)


 * What precisely do you not like about it (what is incorrect, not clearly drawn, not explained clearly what is happening, etc)?
 * I see a fairly standard generic representation of an enzyme binding site and a substrate. I see that the receptor is not perfectly shaped for this substrate but that it changes shape to fit perfectly when binding occurs. Then I see normal enzymatic activity (a reaction of the bound substrate) followed by release of the product and the enzyme returning to its original shape. That's about as straightforward a generic/simplistic "induced fit" example as I can think of. As an aside, the article here contains more detail especially for the layman than our Induced fit model (enzyme) article, not even mentioning (that I see) the "lock & key" model, which isn't really and fully correct but is still the main (and usually only) one taught in schools (often including intro college courses)! Might be nice to have a diagram of that (since the public is used to hearing about and seeing it) for comparison so that the induced-fit part looks clearly "different" and this idea isn't mixed with the general catalysis stage. DMacks (talk) 20:16, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Now the model is more of a "hand in glove" model because both the substrate and enzyme adopt conformational changes when they bind. --Bmdubs (talk) 05:14, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

removed entire passage from "Uses of Inactivators"...
Inhibitors are often used as drugs, but they can also act as poisons. However, the difference between a drug and a poison is usually only a matter of amount, since most drugs are toxic at some level, as Paracelsus wrote, "In all things there is a poison, and there is nothing without a poison." Equally, antibiotics and other anti-infective drugs are just specific poisons that kill a pathogen but not its host.

I did not feel this passage had any relevance to enzymes because it was more about antibiotics, poison, and philosophy. Bluerasberry (talk) 15:51, 7 May 2009 (UTC)


 * I've rewritten it a bit. Tim Vickers (talk) 16:40, 7 May 2009 (UTC)