Talk:Adenosine diphosphate

From WikiProjectMed
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Suggested improvement

ADP does not activate P2X1 receptors. Only P2Y1, P2Y12 ( and P2Y13) Northwhale (talk) 14:19, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Preliminary outline for improved article
adenosine diphosphate
  • opening paragraphing giving quick high level information
Table of contents
  • A section on the structure of the molecule. Already some good information here.
  • A section on cellular respiration with subsections on glycolysis, citric acid cycle, and Oxidative phosphorylation (pictures exist on these pages that we can use.)
  • Role in ATP synthase complex (maybe a larger section here, this seems pretty important) p. 729 in principles of biochem book. (Lehninger)
  • Binding change model for ATP synthase (lehninger p. 729)
  • ADP-ribose as secondary messenger cyclic ADP-ribose
  • Sections already on the page Thrombus formation subsection endothelial-ADPase
  • Single nucleotide reactions (already on the page) and RNA world hypothesis
  • Further reading/information
Indented line
Indented line

Jengel11 (talk) 17:31, 18 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I uploaded an image of the chemical conversion of GTP to ATP in the citric acid cycle....it appeared as if it successfully uploaded, but I cannot find it embedded in this article. How did you get your images to appear within this article??PJCollettJHU (talk) 20:10, 4 April 2013 (UTC) I figured it out, sort of...it's really small, but under the glycolysis image. Did you adjust the size of the images you embedded?PJCollettJHU (talk) 20:18, 4 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It depends on where you get the image from, but if you use the images already in wikipedia there's a few different sizes available to use when you pull it off the image database. The size of the image you have there isn't too bad. Theres a nice photo of platelet aggregation I'd like to get on there but I"m not sure if it would be infringing on the copy right. here's where it is: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0163725805000835. I'm going to look into it.

Jengel11 (talk) 02:47, 5 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Azackta1

The lead section is clear and is a nice summarized introduction to the article. The lead section could have some in-line citations embedded in the paragraph to improve quality. The article as a whole is neutral and flows nicely to where a user could easily find information within the article. The article does not contain any jargon but could benefit from creating a beginning sentence for each paragraph that better defines the topic for a non specialist user without being overly specific. Some of the references are PDF files to notes or some other media. My suggestion would be to find published journal articles that support the information in the paragraphs. An example would be the subsections of "Cellular Respiration", some of these references are PDF files to notes. The article could also improve with additional cited references but all other references correlate with the information given in the article. Another suggestion I have is to link the subsections of "Cellular Respiration" to other main article pages, so that the user can quickly go to another Wikipedia article that might have more detailed information. The images within the article could improve with more in depth explanations rather than a title for the image, for example, the "glycolysis overview" image could be confusing to most users, so a short explanation could help a user understand the process. My last suggestion for the article is to better define ADP's role in blood platlet activation. This section is a little confusing but important. The article overall is informative and not to specific with details, and with added information to its subsections, has the potential to move from a stub class. Autumn Zack-Taylor (talk) 17:55, 8 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the constructive assessment! I absolutely agree with you as to the layout and need to be more clear in certain areas.PJCollettJHU (talk) 16:56, 25 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
It looks like you guys are heading in the right direction with this article. I would suggest expanding the 'Blood platelet activation' section. The article would benefit so much with more referenced articles. Maybe you could add a section about possible diseases in relation to ADP? In all, I can see where your group added information and fixed some structural suggestions. Great job! Autumn Zack-Taylor (talk) 18:48, 29 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from DougCovert

My first impression of the article is that each particular section could be expanded upon with more information. The lead section does follow the style guidelines, but is lacking inline citations to show validity of the information stated. The writing in the article is clear with understandable sentences. Each section flows into the next smoothly, so at the moment I don’t see any change required to sentences or paragraphs. However, in terms of gaps, a little more history on ADP and how it is made (i.e. the chemical reactions that combine the adenosine, ribose sugar and the phosphates) synthetically or biologically. Also, ADP is used for regulation in gylcolysis, citric acid cycle and oxydative phosphorylation. ADP is also found in signal transduction pathways; what particular pathways and what is the fate of ADP could be discussed. Another observation I made was that the article seemed to be “ATP” dominate in areas. The images posted are satisfactory and add decent visuals to the article sections. The blood platelet section is interesting. Are there any other topics that ADP is used like this? I don’t see any hint of plagiarism. With expansion of each section and more citations this will become a good article. Please let me know if you wish further clarification on any of my observations. DC DougCovert (talk) 16:09, 11 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the notes on our article, I appreciate the specifics! We will definitely try to make the changes necessary to bringing up the quality of this article. PJCollettJHU (talk) 17:00, 25 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Klortho

  • The comments from your fellow reviewers are very good -- please try to take as many suggestions as you can.
  • The article is too short. There should be more content than this by now.
  • Add "Main page" links under the subsection headings, whenever there is a dedicated Wikipedia article on that topic. See Wikipedia:Summary_style
  • The opening sentence of the lead is at too-high a level. Can you stretch it out, and use plain English, and then introduce each of the concepts there more gradually?
  • Link the first usage of "ATP".
  • Link AMP.
  • Perhaps, in the lead, or under "Bioenergetics", describe the relationship of AMP (one phosphate), ADP (two), and ATP (three).
  • Link "kilojoule", "mole", "kcal", "mitochondria", "photosynthetic", etc.
  • Headings should only have the first word capitalized: "Cellular Respiration" → "Cellular respiration".
  • In Bioenergetics, you have some redundancy that should be cleaned up. The sentence with "powered back to ATP through the process of releasing the chemical energy available in food" seems redundant with the last sentence, "Animals use the energy released in the breakdown of glucose and other molecules to convert ADP to ATP".
  • The structure of the "cellular respiration" section is very confusing. Maybe you don't need so many subsection headings. Please try to carefully explain the relationship between these various mechanisms, and stretch the text out, and try to be more gentle in guiding the reader. For example, is glycolysis a sub-process of catabolism? Is the citric acid cycle? Are they part of the preparatory phase or the payoff phase? It is not very clear.
  • The subsection on "Mitochondrial ATP Synthase Complex" doesn't even seem to mention this thing. What is it? Maybe just get rid of the subsection header.
  • Regarding the section "Blood platelet activation" -- plesae try to indicate why this is notable. Why is this section in this article? (I'm not saying it shouldn't be, just that it's not clear why it is.)

Klortho (talk) 16:26, 21 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, lot's of pointers, thanks! ADP is such an important molecule and there's so much information out there to compile! We will definitely work on making the necessary changes.PJCollettJHU (talk) 17:05, 25 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the critique, Klortho and classmates.

Here are a few of the additions I've gone through thus far:

  • Added an additional paragraph in the Bioenergetics area with lower level information.
  • Added main page links
  • polished the opening paragraph and the bioenergetics section
  • Linked first ATP, AMP, Kilojoule, mole, kcal, mitochondria, and photosynthetic
  • Altered heading capitalization
Added a paragraph to the lead and gave lower level information on the structure.

Jengel11 (talk) 20:13, 25 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comments(#2)from DougCovert

Hi ADP writers. The article is coming along, and thanks for adding more information to specific sections by using the “main article” link. Do you have any refs for the lead section and any more data pertaining to ADPs role in the platelet activation? Also, do you think it’s worthy to include more information regarding your last sentence about “RNA world hypothesis? DougCovert (talk) 17:59, 27 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi DougCovert, Thanks for all of the input! I agree we need to add some additional references to the lead section, they will be incorporated shortly. I'm still uncertain if the RNA world hypothesis should be involved with this article or not. It was originally on placed in the stub but I'm uncertain if it should be placed the in final Draft; more to come on that as well. If you have any opinions please share. Jengel11 (talk) 12:09, 29 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hi there,It looks as though you've added in some refs to the lead and expanded the section as best you can. Good work, and thanks for considering my suggestions.DougCovert (talk) 02:20, 10 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from BinhTruong

The lead section is very clear and concise and provides a good overview of the topic at hand. In addition, the lead does not contain any unnecessary wording that would confuse the readers. It has a continuous smooth flow from a neutral standpoint. One concern I have is the lack of citation that may support this section. The body does a good job covering several key components relating to the topic, however it seems to lack much depth in what is covered. Perhaps, you guys can work on expanding the subcategories a little more with a focus on emphasizing the subsections of cellular respiration. In addition, perhaps adding a section on the discovery or synthesis of ADP. As mention by Doug, this article seems more geared towards informing the readers about ATP and not ADP. Other than that, I think this article was put together very well. Great job. Binhtruong (talk) 03:04, 3 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the feedback BinhTruong. I added sources to the lead section as per your recommendations. Since the relationship with ATP is so closely associated to ADP It's been difficult to leave out important metabolic precesses' in respiration.Jengel11 (talk) 23:15, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Cdunca12

• Removed “to” before the word located in the first paragraph of lead section. Be careful with the wording of all sentences. There are extraneous words such as “to” or “in” that do not belong. Proofread prior to submitting the changes or additions. • Second paragraph of lead is repetitive with mentioning the phosphate groups being attached to the 5’ carbon of the ribose for AMP, ADP, and ATP. • Bioenergetics section is excellent and clearly explains the importance of energy released to do work from the breaking of phosphate bonds, and how cleavage of a phosphate group turning ATP into ADP aids in changing protein conformation. Nice explanation on conversion of ADP back to ATP. • The second and last sentence under Glycolysis requires a citation. • The Oxidative phosphorylation subsection is mispelled as “oxydative”. The explanation is clear and concise. The last sentence requires a citation. • The second and last sentence under Mitochondrial ATP synthase complex requires citations. • The last portion of Blood platelet activation section (two bullet points and the sentence, “ADP in the blood…”) requires a citation. The last sentence, “Single nucleotides…” does not seem to belong in this section. Perhaps you can create a new but very short section to expand on nucleotides participating in the catalysis of organic reactions and just touch on the RNA world theory. • The images are great and relevant to the subsections discussed. The image of the ATP synthase complex can be a bit more descriptive, but this may be more fitting for more novice readers. • Overall, the information in this article is in-depth, targeted, clear, concise, and well sourced. Under Cellular respiration section, perhaps you can add a short background or explanation on the importance of cellular respiration and the general steps to provide a linearity and flow to all the proceeding subsections. • I know this is the last week, if you have time, can you add a small pathology section at the end of the types of mutations, let’s say, in enzymes or other proteins that are involved in cellular respiration and how this may disrupt all of these processes and result in various diseases or cell death, including additional journal article sources. • Hope this review helped. Cdunca12 15:54, 6 May 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cdunca12 (talk • contribs)

Thanks for the in depth review of our article Cdunca12. We've made some changes and added citations in response to your suggestions. Thanks for catching that very big misspelling "Oxydative" in the section title. Jengel11 (talk) 12:26, 10 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
No problem. Great job on the article. I know this was a lot of hard work for everyone. Have a nice summer! Cdunca12 23:47, 10 May 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cdunca12 (talk • contribs)

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Adenosine diphosphate/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

Rated "high" as high school/SAT biology content. - tameeria 03:49, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Last edited at 03:49, 19 February 2007 (UTC). Substituted at 06:42, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

Propose to move name to Adenosine pyrophosphate and rediredt Adenosine diphosphate.

I would like to propose that we move the name to Adenosine pyrophosphate and rediredt Adenosine diphosphate to this "new" page. It is the correct IUPAC name for this molecule and should be the Wikipedia name as well. — Preceding unsigned comment added by OrganicChem (talk • contribs) 02:59, 17 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Adenosine diphosphate. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:52, 26 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://mdwiki.org/wiki/Talk:Adenosine_diphosphate"