Talk:Arabinose

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Chemicals (Rated Stub-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chemicals, a daughter project of WikiProject Chemistry, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of chemicals. To participate, help improve this article or visit the project page for details on the project.
Stub-Class article Stub  This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

L-sugars are found in nature. E. coli has a set of genes to utilize L-arabinose, which would be unlikely if it were only found synthetically.

L-arabinose is a common biopolymer component. i am removing the 'rare' comment from the main page Xcomradex 04:09, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Arab-inose...?[edit]

I'm curious about the origin of the name of this sugar, does it really has something to do with arabic sugar? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 89.139.243.116 (talk) 17:36, 2 February 2007 (UTC).

Maybe a sugar in Gum Arabic? BrotherSulayman (talk) 10:16, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

likely misidentification of D versus L arabinose structural formulas[edit]

Someone should check the structural formulas given in the picture of the cyclic arabiofuranose on the left and the mirror-image Fischer projection formulas on the right. I believe the D and L identifications are reversed, so that the pictured furanose is L arabinofuranose, and the two Fischer formulas should be labeled L for the one on the left (which corresponds to the L arabinofuranose pictured) and D for the one on the right (which corresponds in structure to D glyceraldehyde). Cf articles on D Ribose and Glyceraldehyde. If I am correct here, both the picture files linked to this article should be relabeled with D and L interchanged. Then no editing of the article itself would be necessary.CharlesHBennett (talk) 01:11, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

All the images currently used in the article appear to be correct to me. -- Ed (Edgar181) 17:01, 18 October 2011 (UTC)