- From: Phillip Lord <phillip.lord@newcastle.ac.uk>
- Date: Thu, 26 Mar 2009 16:39:53 +0000
- To: Wacek Kusnierczyk <Waclaw.Marcin.Kusnierczyk@idi.ntnu.no>
- Cc: W3C HCLSIG hcls <public-semweb-lifesci@w3.org>
Wacek Kusnierczyk <Waclaw.Marcin.Kusnierczyk@idi.ntnu.no> writes: >>>> So insulin is not a protein, wheras a dipeptide is? >>>> >>>> >>> indeed; insulin is a protein complex, and a dipeptide, following this >>> and other similar definitions, is a protein. >>> >>> >> >> Insulin is two polypeptide changes so following this definition is not a >> protein. >> > > that's what i was saying: that it is a protein complex, specifically, > an aggregate of two polypeptide chains. My apologies, Wacek. I misread your reply. I thought you were disaggreing with my interpretation of the definition, which you were not. > it may sound revolutionary to you that insulin is not a protein, since > insulin is typically called a 'protein'. but, provided one accepts a > definition like the one above, there is nothing wrong in saying that > insulin is not a protein. I agree with all of this. As it happens, I would say that insulin is a protein (and not a complex) because it's disulphide bonded; so it's a single molecule, but has two polypeptide chains. I'd tweak the definition. But as you say, if we all agreed on the definition, then either way, the end result would be clear. Phil
Received on Thursday, 26 March 2009 16:40:37 UTC