Tracing the path of hydrogen atoms after the ingestion of glucose.

Thread starter john16O
Start date Feb 4, 2008
Tags

Atoms Glucose Hydrogen Path tracing

AI Thread Summary

After glucose ingestion, hydrogen atoms are released during glycolysis in the cytoplasm, where glucose is broken down into pyruvate. This process generates NADH, which carries hydrogen atoms to the mitochondria. In the Krebs cycle, pyruvate is further oxidized, releasing more hydrogen atoms and producing additional NADH and FADH2. These carriers then enter the electron transport chain, where hydrogen atoms contribute to ATP production through oxidative phosphorylation. Understanding these pathways is crucial for tracing hydrogen atoms from glucose to energy production.

Feb 4, 2008

john16O

After ingestion of glucose, trace the path of the hydrogen atoms in glucose beginning within the digestive tract and ending with the oxidation of the glucose during aerobic respiration. Can anyone help me out with this problem?

Thanks to everyone in advance!

Physics news on Phys.org

Feb 6, 2008

chemisttree

Science Advisor

Homework Helper

Gold Member

You should investigate glycolysis and the Krebs cycle.

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...

View full post »

Thread 'Prove that evolution is constant (Provide at least two arguments to support your position)'

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...

View full post »