Is transcription a subprocess of translation in protein synthesis?

AI Thread Summary
Transcription and translation are distinct processes in protein synthesis, with transcription occurring in the nucleus and translation in the cytoplasm. Transcription involves creating messenger RNA (mRNA) from DNA, while translation uses mRNA to assemble amino acids into proteins. The nuclear envelope serves as the boundary separating these two processes in eukaryotic cells. Transcription consists of activation, initiation, elongation, and termination, while translation involves ribosomes reading mRNA to produce proteins. Understanding these processes clarifies that transcription is not a subprocess of translation but rather a separate, sequential step in protein synthesis.
soopo
Messages
222
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Is transcription a subprocess of translation in protein synthesis?

The Attempt at a Solution



I know that transcripition consists of four processes
1. activation
2. initiatian
3. elongenation
4. termination

I know that protein synthesis consists the following steps.
First, you have a gene that is three bases in the ribosome. The strand of three bases forms an amino acid. Subsequently, many single amino acids form an amino acid chain. The chain forms a protein and subsequently a protein chain.

I am not sure where the boundary between translation and transcription is if transcription is not a subprocess of translation.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Transcription is a separate process from translation. In eukaryotic cells, transcription and translation occur in completely different parts of the cell. Transcription takes DNA from the nucleus of a cell and creates a messenger RNA molecule (mRNA). The mRNA is then transported out of nucleus and into the cytoplasm. There, ribosomes bind to the mRNA and read the mRNA three nucleotides at a time to produce a protein. So, the boundary between translation and transcription in eukaryotes is a physical boundary of the cell: the nuclear envelope.

You can basically think of transcription and translation as two sequential steps in the process of making a protein. Transcription creates an mRNA then hands the mRNA off to the translational machinery in order to make a protein.
 
Ygggdrasil said:
Transcription is a separate process from translation. In eukaryotic cells, transcription and translation occur in completely different parts of the cell. Transcription takes DNA from the nucleus of a cell and creates a messenger RNA molecule (mRNA). The mRNA is then transported out of nucleus and into the cytoplasm. There, ribosomes bind to the mRNA and read the mRNA three nucleotides at a time to produce a protein. So, the boundary between translation and transcription in eukaryotes is a physical boundary of the cell: the nuclear envelope.

You can basically think of transcription and translation as two sequential steps in the process of making a protein. Transcription creates an mRNA then hands the mRNA off to the translational machinery in order to make a protein.

I would like to add to your excellent answer.
One of the chains in DNA is copied in transcription.
This copy is mRNA. It contains the counter bases to the other chain in DNA.

So the boundary between transription and translation is the nuclear envelope.
Everything which happens inside the nuclues belongs to transcription such as coping of rRNA from DNA.

Then again, processes which happen outside the nucleus belong to the
translation. For example, the building up of a protein from a mRNA and a
ribosome by Golgi's apparatus happens outside the nucleus.
 
Thread 'Confusion regarding a chemical kinetics problem'
TL;DR Summary: cannot find out error in solution proposed. [![question with rate laws][1]][1] Now the rate law for the reaction (i.e reaction rate) can be written as: $$ R= k[N_2O_5] $$ my main question is, WHAT is this reaction equal to? what I mean here is, whether $$k[N_2O_5]= -d[N_2O_5]/dt$$ or is it $$k[N_2O_5]= -1/2 \frac{d}{dt} [N_2O_5] $$ ? The latter seems to be more apt, as the reaction rate must be -1/2 (disappearance rate of N2O5), which adheres to the stoichiometry of the...
I don't get how to argue it. i can prove: evolution is the ability to adapt, whether it's progression or regression from some point of view, so if evolution is not constant then animal generations couldn`t stay alive for a big amount of time because when climate is changing this generations die. but they dont. so evolution is constant. but its not an argument, right? how to fing arguments when i only prove it.. analytically, i guess it called that (this is indirectly related to biology, im...

Similar threads

Back
Top