Talk:Superoxide dismutase

Delivery systems

I am removing that part about delivery systems. Reeks of advertisement and unproven claims. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.198.36.244 (talk) 05:45, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

Vague statement

Removed because it's too vague:

the existence of a motor neuron disease in individuals who have point mutations in SOD and by the finding that the absence of SOD may lead to a form of anemia.

--Quarterduck 02:54, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)

SOD mutations in disease

This statement is unreferenced: "Mutations in SOD1 can cause familial ALS, by a mechanism that is presently not understood, but not due to loss of enzymatic activity or a decrease in the conformational stability of the SOD1 protein." Anyone wish to clarify to what this is referring?173.8.220.209 (talk) 23:49, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Introductory Paragraph

Can anyone clarify this statement in the first paragraph?

One of the exceedingly rare exceptions is Lactobacillus plantarum and related lactobacilli.

Is this supposed to mean that L. plantarum doesn't use SOD specifically for antioxidant defense, or doesn't use SOD at all?

--Scienthomas 18:33, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

According to the Lactobacillus plantarum entry SOD is not present in that genus.

apers0n 10:07, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

I found a glitch in the introductory section: "For the E. coli Fe-SOD: . Fe-SOD can be found in the plastids of plants."

To the best of my knowledge E. coli do not have plastids. Therefore, to make sense it should be reformulated as: "For the E. coli Fe-SOD: Fe-SOD can be found in the cytosol [1] or in the extracellular matrix [2]. In plants: Fe-SOD can be found in the plastids" For celular localization of SOD please see the entries in Brenda database [3], searching for EC 1.15.1.1 (superoxide dismutase) and selecting the organism you are interested in.

1. Beyer W, Imlay J, Fridovich I., Superoxide dismutases in Prog Nucleic Acid Res Mol Biol. 1991;40:221-53. 2. Munkres KD.,Purification of exocellular superoxide dismutases, in Methods Enzymol. 1990;186:249-60. 3.Brenda: The Comprehensive Enzyme Information System, http://www.brenda-enzymes.org/index.php4 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.87.53.164 (talk) 15:25, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

Page requires reorganising

(Using Firefox to view page) The image above the text "Structure of the active site of human superoxide dismutase 2" is covering part of the page's main text. The Image should be moved. This may be a problem specific to Firefox. Cs1kh 17:13, 23 July 2007 (UTC) amir —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.39.184.80 (talk) 10:12, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

Formatting and boxes

With all due respect, I placed Pfam boxes to section "Types" where they belong. And do we really need protein boxes here when we have separate articles about individual proteins, clearly linked from this article. That's a content fork, classic. Saying that, I am not going to revert anything. But it does include an excessive number of boxes. Something must be removed.Biophys (talk) 22:55, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

OK, I now see that you did place the Pfam boxes in the "Types" section, but when stacked vertically they do extend into other sections. Also to avoid bunching of section editing links, the infoboxes should ideally be placed next to each other separated by fix bunching templates. Even taking out the {{infobox protein}} templates, this is awkward because of the number of remaining infoboxes and graphics. A cleaner solution is to pivot the infoboxes so that they are displayed horizontally. This ensures that no mater what the window width or font size that is displayed, the infoboxes will all ways displayed next to the corresponding text. Furthermore, placing {{infobox protein}} that are an abbreviated version of the {{GNF Protein box}} is not a content fork but rather a summary of what is contained in the isozyme specific articles. Finally, considering the length of the text in the article, I do not think there is an excessive number of infoboxes. Boghog (talk) 15:34, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

Meaningful

Cindy Crawford's widely advertised "meaningful beauty" skin regimine claims' that SOD via a south of France melon extract does benefit one to remain youthful looking and that this is all proven , e.g. now with her use for 15 years remaining looking 30 vs 45 age. Can you add this info if accurate ? ref http://www.meaningfulbeauty.com/ /s flowa o scotland le jeune jr, camp le 69.121.221.97 (talk) 14:13, 28 November 2010 (UTC)