Set me straight
March 29, 2006 at 5:43 am #4219
Ok, I am really confused which one is correct?
glucose is oxidised to pyruvate regardeless if oxygen is present. If there is oxygen, it goes to the krebs cycle. If not the it is oxidised to lactate
Oxygen has to be present for pyruvate to be oxidized. If there is no oxygen present then fermentation occurs. Lactic acid is a by-product of fermentation.
March 29, 2006 at 6:19 am #44533kiekyonParticipant
i think both is correct
March 29, 2006 at 7:55 am #44538
😆 Uhm, okay, no.
March 29, 2006 at 6:18 pm #44578
Actually only the first one is correct because pyruvate can be oxidised(to lactate, ethanol etc) even if there is no oxygen present.
March 29, 2006 at 8:50 pm #44589
I think the both can be correct.
Because it say in the first one "glucose" can be oxydized… And in the second one it says "pyruvate" can be oxydized….
I may be thinking in my language. Correct me please.
Actually, I think it is more like an english grammer question rather than bio.
March 30, 2006 at 1:11 am #44605
The latter has validity as well; lactic acid, Co2, C2H6O can be derived from broken down pryuvate in anarobic respiration.
PS: Ever get that gamete issue [ingestion] sorted out? Hahaha.quote MrMistery:
March 30, 2006 at 5:12 pm #44666
Look at the first part of a second sentencequote :
What this is saying is that in the absence of O2 oxidation of pyruvate can not take place. That is false, for the already mentioned reasons(fermentation).
March 30, 2006 at 5:36 pm #44671
I’m familiar with aerobic and anrobic respiration, but the the other two sentences in ‘option b’ are true too.
You need to calm down with those exclamation marks, dude.
March 30, 2006 at 6:09 pm #44675
Agreed, the others are true. But if an afirmation has 1000 sentences out of which only 999 are true is false, unless they have the "or" sign between them, which is not the case.
March 30, 2006 at 8:44 pm #44685
"Oxygen has to be present for pyruvate to be oxidized. "
The problem is that we (at least I am) are thinking in our languages. What I understood from that sentence is: Oxygen is needed for pyruvate to carry on the reaction. I mean what you say should be the "glucose oxydation". I may be wrong. I’m not a native speaker.
March 30, 2006 at 9:33 pm #44693
Well if your tact is based on symantics re-read my post; never did I claim to side with one or the other. I placed emphasis on ‘option b’ having apt statements not claiming it to be an absolute.
Edit: Cease PMing me about my age. Im here to articulate my limited, but growing, knowledge of Biology and seek the aid of others grasp of Biology. Nothing more.
March 31, 2006 at 6:24 pm #44762
March 31, 2006 at 9:32 pm #44773
Yes I know. I didn’t mean that.
April 11, 2006 at 4:29 pm #45690
Ok, I copied and pasted this to my lab instructor , " got a question. Is glucose oxidized to pyruvate regardless of oxygen being present or not? With the presence of oxygen, does it go to the Krebs Cycle and without it…………what? It is oxidized into a lactate or is that completely wrong?
Her reply was, "Oxygen has to be present for pyruvate to be oxidized. If there is no oxygen present, fermentation occurs. Lactic acid is a by-product of fermentation. Does that help?"
I’ll take her word on it since she is the one passing out the grades.
April 12, 2006 at 4:09 am #45763kiekyonParticipant
the way i see this
glucose (with or without oxygen)–>pyruvate
pyruvate(with oxygen)–>Krebs cycle
so, both question is correct
April 20, 2006 at 7:45 pm #46882
April 20, 2006 at 8:18 pm #46893
Tamtam, what is the connection between this topic and your human patogen? No double posting please.
This will be deleted in 24h.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.