| ²é¿´: 2876 | »Ø¸´: 3 | ||
| ±¾Ìû²úÉú 1 ¸ö BioEPI £¬µã»÷ÕâÀï½øÐв鿴 | ||
jingshan508ÖÁ×ðľ³æ (Ö°Òµ×÷¼Ò)
|
[ÇóÖú]
Á×ËáÆÏÌÑÌÇ×ªÒÆÃ¸ÏµÍ³(PTS)
|
|
| ÓÐûÓйØÓÚÁ×ËáÆÏÌÑÌÇ×ªÒÆÃ¸ÏµÍ³(PTS)[color=Red]µÄÖÐÎÄ×ÛÊö£¬ºÃÏñÕÒ²»µ½ÖÐÎĵ쬏ÕÈëÃÅʲô¶¼²»¶®¡£Ö»ÏëÉîÈëÁ˽âһϣ¬¿´Á˰ٿÆÌ«ÉÙÁË¡£ |
» ²ÂÄãϲ»¶
315Çóµ÷¼Á
ÒѾÓÐ15È˻ظ´
070300»¯Ñ§Ñ§Ë¶311·ÖÇóµ÷¼Á
ÒѾÓÐ9È˻ظ´
Ò»Ö¾Ô¸Äϲý´óѧ£¬085600£¬344·ÖÇóµ÷¼Á
ÒѾÓÐ7È˻ظ´
Ò»Ö¾Ô¸ ½ÄÏ´óѧ 085602 »¯¹¤×¨Ë¶ 338·ÖÇóµ÷¼Á
ÒѾÓÐ13È˻ظ´
»¯Ñ§0703-Ò»Ö¾Ô¸211-338·ÖÇóµ÷¼Á
ÒѾÓÐ8È˻ظ´
0703µ÷¼Á£¬Ò»Ö¾Ô¸Ìì½ò´óѧ319·Ö
ÒѾÓÐ8È˻ظ´
085602µ÷¼Á ³õÊÔ×Ü·Ö335
ÒѾÓÐ9È˻ظ´
336²ÄÁÏÓ뻯¹¤085600Çóµ÷¼Á
ÒѾÓÐ8È˻ظ´
085600²ÄÁÏÓ뻯¹¤301·ÖÇóµ÷¼ÁԺУ
ÒѾÓÐ6È˻ظ´
071000ÉúÎïѧµ÷¼Á
ÒѾÓÐ3È˻ظ´
» ±¾Ö÷ÌâÏà¹Ø¼ÛÖµÌùÍÆ¼ö£¬¶ÔÄúͬÑùÓаïÖú:
ÖвÝÒ©ÉúÎï¼¼Êõ-ÌÆ¿ËÐù
ÒѾÓÐ133È˻ظ´
ÆÏÌÑÌÇÁ×ËữÀú³Ì
ÒѾÓÐ3È˻ظ´
ÁùÁ×ËáÆÏÌÑÌÇÍÑÇâø»îÐԲⶨ
ÒѾÓÐ6È˻ظ´
¡¾ÇóÖú¡¿ÈçºÎÑ¡ÔñÊÖÐÔ·ÖÎöÖù
ÒѾÓÐ4È˻ظ´
¡¾·ÖÏí¡¿¡¼Ãû´Ê½âÊÍ¡½ÉúÎﻯѧÃû´Ê½âÊÍ
ÒѾÓÐ14È˻ظ´
¡¾ÇóÖú/½»Á÷¡¿Î¢ÉúÎïÌÇ·¢½Í²úÎï
ÒѾÓÐ10È˻ظ´
ÉúÎï²ÄÁϰæÇóÖú½»Á÷ÌûË÷Òý¡¾¸üÐÂÖÁ20090404¡¿
ÒѾÓÐ12È˻ظ´
susizheng
ľ³æ (ÖøÃûдÊÖ)
ÎÒ‚ƒÊÇÌÇ Ì𵽑n‚û
- BioEPI: 8
- Ó¦Öú: 130 (¸ßÖÐÉú)
- ¹ó±ö: 0.008
- ½ð±Ò: 4738.3
- É¢½ð: 2273
- ºì»¨: 56
- Ìû×Ó: 2308
- ÔÚÏß: 740.7Сʱ
- ³æºÅ: 642666
- ×¢²á: 2008-11-01
- ÐÔ±ð: GG
- רҵ: ÓлúºÏ³É
¡¾´ð°¸¡¿Ó¦Öú»ØÌû
¡ï ¡ï ¡ï
¸Ðл²ÎÓ룬ӦÖúÖ¸Êý +1
¿´Ìì: ½ð±Ò+3, BioEPI+1, ¹ÄÀø ³£À´ 2012-12-06 16:42:59
¸Ðл²ÎÓ룬ӦÖúÖ¸Êý +1
¿´Ìì: ½ð±Ò+3, BioEPI+1, ¹ÄÀø ³£À´ 2012-12-06 16:42:59
|
Õâ¸ö¹úÄÚÓ¦¸ÃÊÇÑо¿±È½ÏÉÙÁË£¬¹úÍâÑо¿±È½ÏÔ磬×ÛÊö·½ÃæÓ¦¸Ã»¹Ã»ÓУ¬²»¹ý¿ÉÒÔÌṩһЩÑо¿·½ÃæµÄÄÚÈÝ£¬ ±È½ÏÔçµÄÊÇdupont¹«Ë¾µÄ1,3-±û¶þ´¼ÏîÄ¿ÓÐÉæ¼°µ½PTS²¿·ÖµÄ¸ÄÔ죻ÒÔÏÂÎÄÏ×¶¼ÓÐÉæ¼°µ½£¬Èç¹ûÏêϸÁ˽â¿ÉÒԲο¼ÆäÒýÎÄ [1]Nakamura C E ,Whited GM. Metabolic engineering for the microbial production of 1, 3 propanediol[J]. Current Opinion in Biotechnology, 2003, 14: 454 -459. [2]Robert Westervelt. DuPont, Tate & Lyle Form joint venture for propanediol production[J]. Chemical Week, 2004, 166(18): 101 È»ºó¾ÍÊÇMyriant¹«Ë¾µÄÉúÎï¶¡¶þËáÏîÄ¿ÖÐÒ²Éæ¼°µ½PTS²¿·ÖµÄÑо¿£¬Ïà¹ØÎÄÏ׿ÉרÀûÄãÒ²¿ÉÒÔÁ˽âÏ£¬ÒªÏëÁ˽âPTSÏêϸÄÚÈÝ£¬Ò²Ö»ÄÜÊÇÄãÈ¥¿´ÒÔÏÂÂÛÎĵÄÏà¹ØÒýÎÄÁË£¬ÎÒÖ»ÊÇÅ×שÒýÓñ¡£ 2009-Reengineering Escherichia coli for Succinate Production in Mineral Salts Medium PNAS-2009-Metabolic evolution of energy-conserving pathways for succinate production in Escherichia coli ¹úÄÚÑо¿PTSÏà¹ØµÄºÜÉÙ£¬Ä¿Ç°ÎÒÁ˽âµÄÖ»ÓÐÌì½ò¹¤ÉúËùµÄÕÅѧÀñÑо¿Ô±£¬ÆäÓÐMyriant¹«Ë¾±³¾°£¬ËûµÄÉúÎï¶¡¶þËáÏîĿҲÓÐÉæ¼°µ½PTSϵͳ¸ÄÔìµÄÄÚÈÝ£¬2012Äê¸Õ·¢ÁËһƪÎÄÕ£¬Äã¿ÉÒÔ×Ô¼ºÈ¥²é²é¿´¡£ÎҾͲ»°ïæÁË¡£ |

3Â¥2012-12-06 09:13:45
JWGTI
гæ (³õÈëÎÄ̳)
- Ó¦Öú: 5 (Ó×¶ùÔ°)
- ½ð±Ò: 37.2
- Ìû×Ó: 14
- ÔÚÏß: 3.6Сʱ
- ³æºÅ: 2163071
- ×¢²á: 2012-12-03
- רҵ: ÒÅ´«Ñ§Ñо¿Ð¼¼ÊõÓë·½·¨
¡ï ¡ï
wizardfan: ½ð±Ò+2, ¹âÌùÎÄ×Ö°ïÖúÓÐÏÞ£¬Äܸø³öÎÄÏ׳ö´¦¸üºÃ 2012-12-06 07:35:01
wizardfan: ½ð±Ò+2, ¹âÌùÎÄ×Ö°ïÖúÓÐÏÞ£¬Äܸø³öÎÄÏ׳ö´¦¸üºÃ 2012-12-06 07:35:01
|
Ó¢ÎĵIJ»ÖªµÀ¶ÔÄãÓÐûÓаïÖú PEP group translocation, also known as the phosphotransferase system or PTS, is a distinct method used by bacteria for sugar uptake where the source of energy is from phosphoenolpyruvate (PEP). It is known as multicomponent system that always involves enzymes of the plasma membrane and those in the cytoplasm. An example of this transport is found in E. coli cells. The system was discovered by Saul Roseman in 1964.[1] The phosphotransferase system is involved in transporting many sugars into bacteria, including glucose, mannose, fructose and cellobiose. PTS sugars can differ between bacterial groups, mirroring the most suitable carbon sources available in the environment every group evolved. The phosphoryl group on PEP is eventually transferred to the imported sugar via several proteins. The phosphoryl group is transferred to the Enzyme E I (EI), Histidine Protein (HPr, Heat-stable Protein) and Enzyme E II (EII) to a conserved histidine residue, whereas in the Enzyme E II B (EIIB) the phosphoryl group is usually transferred to a cysteine residue and rarely to a histidine.[2] In the process of glucose PTS transport specific of enteric bacteria, PEP transfers its phosphoryl to a histidine residue on EI. EI in turn transfers the phosphate to HPr. From HPr the phosphoryl is transferred to EIIA. EIIA is specific for glucose and it further transfers the phosphoryl group to a juxtamembrane EIIB. Finally, EIIB phosphorylates glucose as it crosses the plasma membrane through the transmembrane Enzyme II C (EIIC), forming glucose-6-phosphate.[2] The benefit of transforming glucose into glucose-6-phosphate is that it will not leak out of the cell, therefore providing a one-way concentration gradient of glucose. The HPr is common to the phosphotransferase systems of the other substrates mentioned earlier, as is the upstream EI.[3] Proteins downstream of HPr tend to vary between the different sugars. The transfer of a phosphate group to the substrate once it has been imported through the membrane transporter prevents the transporter from recognizing the substrate again, thus maintaining a concentration gradient that favours further import of the substrate through the transporter. With the glucose phosphotransferase system, the phosphorylation status of EIIA can have regulatory functions. For example, at low glucose concentrations phosphorylated EIIA accumulates and this activates membrane-bound adenylate cyclase. Intracellular cyclic AMP levels rise and this then activates CAP (catabolite activator protein), which is involved in the catabolite repression system, also known as glucose effect. When the glucose concentration is high, EIIA is mostly dephosphorylated and this allows it to inhibit adenylate cyclase, glycerol kinase, lactose permease, and maltose permease. Thus, as well as the PEP group translocation system being an efficient way to import substrates into the bacterium, it also links this transport to regulation of other relevant proteins. It is an active transport. After the translocation, the metabolites transported are modified. |
2Â¥2012-12-06 01:36:24
jingshan508
ÖÁ×ðľ³æ (Ö°Òµ×÷¼Ò)
- Ó¦Öú: 1 (Ó×¶ùÔ°)
- ½ð±Ò: 29408.4
- É¢½ð: 110
- ºì»¨: 3
- Ìû×Ó: 3747
- ÔÚÏß: 1761.7Сʱ
- ³æºÅ: 1218530
- ×¢²á: 2011-03-02
- רҵ: ¸ß·Ö×Ӻϳɻ¯Ñ§
4Â¥2012-12-06 12:01:13














»Ø¸´´ËÂ¥