Talk:Ubiquinol: Difference between revisions
→Regarding third edit: 13:12, 13 August 2010: Q about "natural" being reduced versus oxidized form |
|||
| Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
:I've made the requested change (which you could have done yourself), but I'm afraid I don't get the import. Doesn't "The natural ubiquinol form of coenzyme Q<sub>10</sub>" equally suggest that there are other, unnatural ubiquinol forms of CoQ<sub>10</sub>? --[[User talk:Lambiam|Lambiam]] 17:44, 17 August 2010 (UTC) |
:I've made the requested change (which you could have done yourself), but I'm afraid I don't get the import. Doesn't "The natural ubiquinol form of coenzyme Q<sub>10</sub>" equally suggest that there are other, unnatural ubiquinol forms of CoQ<sub>10</sub>? --[[User talk:Lambiam|Lambiam]] 17:44, 17 August 2010 (UTC) |
||
::I would suggest a wording that reinforces that "natural" in this context refers to the fact that ubiqui''nol'' (as opposed to -''none'') is the reduced form of Coenzyme Q10. I assume that word "natural" would refer to whichever form is more stable - i.e. not going to transform into the other form. But I don't know if there is a convention on this - either in chemistry, or for wikipedia. The only other example I know of is [[glutathione]], which can exist in a reduced or oxidized form. I believe the reduced form is usually referred to as plain "glutathione (GSH)'' whereas the oxidized form is referred to by ''GSSG''. That might indicate that the reduced form is considered the "natural" form, but I forget just enough high school chemistry to know if that is true in general.. |
|||
Another note on terminology, is there a general term that encompases all the different "Co-Q[n]" compounds? I think it might have been Co-Q10 that I read the body having the ability to synthesize from two of the lower-order "Co-Q's". It was either CoQ10, or the MK-7 form of Vitamin K. |
|||
Revision as of 19:01, 27 January 2012
 | Chemicals Stub‑class Mid‑importance | |||||||||
| ||||||||||
Regarding third edit: 13:12, 13 August 2010
Lambian - please reconsider one of the changes made on the second line of the third edit (13:12, 13August2010). Previously it said: The natural Ubiquinol form of Coenzyme Q10.... It was changed by you to read: The natural form of ubiquinol.... However, this would then imply that that there are other unnatural forms of ubiquinol, and it can only be one particular molecule. If you agree, please return the beginning of that line to: The natural Ubiquinol form of Coenzyme Q10... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Committed molecules (talk • contribs) 16:50, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
- I've made the requested change (which you could have done yourself), but I'm afraid I don't get the import. Doesn't "The natural ubiquinol form of coenzyme Q10" equally suggest that there are other, unnatural ubiquinol forms of CoQ10? --Lambiam 17:44, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
- I would suggest a wording that reinforces that "natural" in this context refers to the fact that ubiquinol (as opposed to -none) is the reduced form of Coenzyme Q10. I assume that word "natural" would refer to whichever form is more stable - i.e. not going to transform into the other form. But I don't know if there is a convention on this - either in chemistry, or for wikipedia. The only other example I know of is glutathione, which can exist in a reduced or oxidized form. I believe the reduced form is usually referred to as plain "glutathione (GSH) whereas the oxidized form is referred to by GSSG. That might indicate that the reduced form is considered the "natural" form, but I forget just enough high school chemistry to know if that is true in general..
Another note on terminology, is there a general term that encompases all the different "Co-Q[n]" compounds? I think it might have been Co-Q10 that I read the body having the ability to synthesize from two of the lower-order "Co-Q's". It was either CoQ10, or the MK-7 form of Vitamin K.