Talk:Enzyme/Archive 4

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

→

Archive 9

Figure

Thanks, Fvasconcellos and TimVickers. This new figure addresses my quibble perfectly and looks great.--Kompala (talk) 15:40, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Not to be a picky chemist but there should be a dip in the reaction profile once the enzyme is added. This dip would indicate an intermediate involving the enzyme and substrate. It would also indicate a process that involves at least two elementary steps.--OMCV (talk) 03:02, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

OMCV is correct. To take this point further, there should be a "hump" first, then a dip, demonstrating the substrate binding step. There should also be a symmetrical step demonstrating product release. All that being said, I'm not sure it is necessary since the main point of the figure is to demonstrate that enzymes stabilize transition states. The enzyme catalysis page has a great example as its first image. Pdcook (talk) 20:13, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

The activation energy bar looks confusing - it can be understood as the activation energy for the reverse reaction. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.71.135.63 (talk) 23:32, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

Consistent spelling of catalyse/catalyze etc.

Can someone please ensure that ALL spellings of catalyse/catalyze/catalysis/catalysed etc. are all either spelt with a 'z' or an 's'. Personally I favour the English spelling (with an 's') but as long as it is consistent I don't mind. It is just irritating to come across different spellings within the same article. Not very reminiscent of an encyclopedia.

Fixed the three "ise" spellings I found. Tim Vickers (talk) 17:28, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

small add-on

"unfolded and inactivated—by heating or chemical denaturants" (10M urea is the most common one) --Redeemer079 18:21, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Done. Tim Vickers (talk) 17:44, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Holoenzyme vs Apoenzyme

I have only found formal definitions of these to refer to an enzyme and its cofactor (a non-protein molecule). However, in some realms of academia, "holoenzyme" has been used to refer to complexes of proteins, and "apoenzyme" to refer to individual proteins that are normally found in an assembly (I think). A couple of examples of this are DNA Pol III and, possibly, RecBCD. James D. Watson, et al, in "Molecular Biology of the Gene, 5th Ed" use the term "holoenzyme" in this fashion. I was doing a search for this term and was redirected to this page. It might be useful to have some note on that. Thanks. RegiG (talk) 20:55, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

I wanted to edit this myself. I just straightened out my understanding a little bit, but am still confused. DNA Pol III is a holoenzyme because it requires magnesium, the coenzyme. However, my professor defined the term in class the other day in accordance with what I describe above. Thanks. RegiG (talk) 21:04, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

This is an alternative use of the term. In this usage a multisubunit enzyme is a "holoezyme" when all the subunits are present. There is no equivalent of "apoenzyme" in this usage, the individual components are just called "subunits". Tim Vickers (talk) 02:46, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Another historically important enzyme: Glucoamylase

The production of glucoamylase apparently revolutionized the production of sugars from starches. It could completely break down starch into glucose. In the 1960s 'almost all glucose production was re­organised and enzyme hydrolysis was used instead of acid hydrolysis because of the more benefits such as greater yield, higher degree of purity and easier crystallisation.'
~ender 2008-10-05 7:53:AM MST —Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.240.15.52 (talk)

Added to table. Thank you. Tim Vickers (talk) 15:26, 5 October 2008 (UTC)