Is NMDA produced in the body?The probability of indirect human fertilization?Why are diabetic people often overweight?What is inside IDL (intermediate density lipoproteïn)?Why does vitamin D need to be exogenous?Which of the three is true for insulin receptors?How do we find antibiotics?How are the very first telomeres added?What is the connectivity between on-center & off-center bipolar cells?Effect of UV radiation on retinoid (vitamin A) receptors in the skinWhat is the difference between neurotransmitters acting as neurotransmitters and hormones?
What's the "magic similar to the Knock spell" referenced in the Dungeon of the Mad Mage adventure?
Is every story set in the future "science fiction"?
What dice to use in a game that revolves around triangles?
Identity of a supposed anonymous referee revealed through "Description" of the report
What is a good way to allow only one non null field in an object
What can cause an unfrozen indoor copper drain pipe to crack?
How long can fsck take on a 30 TB volume?
What's the difference between "ricochet" and "bounce"?
Randomly generate a sorted set with uniform distribution
Are on’yomi words loanwords?
Why is there a cap on 401k contributions?
Add Columns to .csv from Multiple Files
Origins of the "array like" strings in BASIC
Why do the Avengers care about returning these items in Endgame?
Are double contractions formal? Eg: "couldn't've" for "could not have"
Why do 3D printers have only one limit switch?
Integral with DiracDelta. Can Mathematica be made to solve this?
Program for finding longest run of zeros from a list of 100 random integers which are either 0 or 1
"Estrontium" on poster
Gift for mentor after his thesis defense?
Has there been evidence of any other gods?
Is there an idiom that means "revealing a secret unintentionally"?
Are wands in any sort of book going to be too much like Harry Potter?
How did Captain Marvel know where to find these characters?
Is NMDA produced in the body?
The probability of indirect human fertilization?Why are diabetic people often overweight?What is inside IDL (intermediate density lipoproteïn)?Why does vitamin D need to be exogenous?Which of the three is true for insulin receptors?How do we find antibiotics?How are the very first telomeres added?What is the connectivity between on-center & off-center bipolar cells?Effect of UV radiation on retinoid (vitamin A) receptors in the skinWhat is the difference between neurotransmitters acting as neurotransmitters and hormones?
$begingroup$
On the wiki page for NMDA it says that NMDA is a synthetic substance that mimics glutamate. So why does the body not use glutamate instead of NMDA?
Also how is it possible that our body can produce something that is synthetic? I thought synthetic was man-made chemicals. Does that mean the NMDA receptors it binds to are also synthetic? How did this come to be?
human-biology biochemistry molecular-biology neurophysiology neurotransmitter
edited Apr 30 at 8:56
WYSIWYG
31.6k750133
asked Apr 29 at 22:27
user3665690user3665690
1259
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
On the wiki page for NMDA it says that NMDA is a synthetic substance that mimics glutamate. So why does the body not use glutamate instead of NMDA?
Also how is it possible that our body can produce something that is synthetic? I thought synthetic was man-made chemicals. Does that mean the NMDA receptors it binds to are also synthetic? How did this come to be?
human-biology biochemistry molecular-biology neurophysiology neurotransmitter
edited Apr 30 at 8:56
WYSIWYG
31.6k750133
asked Apr 29 at 22:27
user3665690user3665690
1259
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
On the wiki page for NMDA it says that NMDA is a synthetic substance that mimics glutamate. So why does the body not use glutamate instead of NMDA?
Also how is it possible that our body can produce something that is synthetic? I thought synthetic was man-made chemicals. Does that mean the NMDA receptors it binds to are also synthetic? How did this come to be?
human-biology biochemistry molecular-biology neurophysiology neurotransmitter
edited Apr 30 at 8:56
WYSIWYG
31.6k750133
asked Apr 29 at 22:27
user3665690user3665690
1259
$endgroup$
On the wiki page for NMDA it says that NMDA is a synthetic substance that mimics glutamate. So why does the body not use glutamate instead of NMDA?
Also how is it possible that our body can produce something that is synthetic? I thought synthetic was man-made chemicals. Does that mean the NMDA receptors it binds to are also synthetic? How did this come to be?
human-biology biochemistry molecular-biology neurophysiology neurotransmitter
human-biology biochemistry molecular-biology neurophysiology neurotransmitter
edited Apr 30 at 8:56
WYSIWYG
31.6k750133
asked Apr 29 at 22:27
user3665690user3665690
1259
edited Apr 30 at 8:56
WYSIWYG
31.6k750133
asked Apr 29 at 22:27
user3665690user3665690
1259
edited Apr 30 at 8:56
WYSIWYG
31.6k750133
edited Apr 30 at 8:56
WYSIWYG
31.6k750133
edited Apr 30 at 8:56
WYSIWYG
31.6k750133
31.6k750133
asked Apr 29 at 22:27
user3665690user3665690
1259
asked Apr 29 at 22:27
user3665690user3665690
1259
asked Apr 29 at 22:27
user3665690user3665690
1259
1259
add a comment |
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
(my comment reiterating the answer seemed useful, so I've reproduced it here)
There are "NMDA receptors" in our body. There is not NMDA naturally in our body*. "NMDA receptor" is just a name people gave to one of the receptors that normally binds glutamate. They could have called it something else, like the "slow glu receptor", or "Glutamate Receptor A", but they called it the NMDA receptor because they discovered it was different from other glutamate receptors in that it was activated by a chemical called NMDA in their experiments.
(original answer)
NMDA receptors are in fact glutamate receptors natively: there is no endogenous NMDA*. They are named NMDA receptors because experimentally they were differentiated from other glutamate receptors using the compound NMDA. At first glutamate receptors were known as "NMDA" and "non-NMDA" glutamate receptors, and later the non-NMDA sort were found to be sensitive to AMPA or kainate and named thusly.
Many other receptors are named this way: the nicotinic acetylcholine receptor is the receptor that nicotine is an agonist at, but the endogenous ligand is acetylcholine; muscarine is an agonist to the muscarinic acetylcholine receptor but the endogenous ligand is acetylcholine.
Watkins, J. C., & Jane, D. E. (2006). The glutamate story. British journal of pharmacology, 147(S1), S100-S108.
*In the comments, @gilleain pointed out some research suggesting that NMDA does exist endogenously, although in fairly specific areas and not disputing that glutamate is the primary endogenous agonist for NMDA receptors. This work was long after the NMDA-sensitive glutamate receptor was discovered and named, but is some interesting trivia nonetheless.
answered Apr 29 at 22:39
Bryan Krause♦Bryan Krause
20.2k33358
$endgroup$
8
$begingroup$
@user3665690 There are "NMDA receptors" in our body. There is not NMDA naturally in our body. "NMDA receptor" is just a name people gave to one of the receptors that normally binds glutamate. They could have called it something else, like the "slow glu receptor", or "Glutamate Receptor A", but they called it the NMDA receptor because they discovered it was different from other glutamate receptors in that it was activated by a chemical called NMDA in their experiments.
$endgroup$
– Bryan Krause♦
Apr 30 at 1:02
1
$begingroup$
I see! ok that makes a lot of sense now, so basically NMDA is a synthetic chemical that mimics glutamate induce NMDA receptor activity. Is that the right interpretation?
$endgroup$
– user3665690
Apr 30 at 1:07
1
$begingroup$
@user3665690 Yes that's correct
$endgroup$
– Bryan Krause♦
Apr 30 at 1:31
1
$begingroup$
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11014243 : " we show that N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) is present at nanomolar levels in rat nervous system and endocrine glands as a natural compound, and it is biosynthesized in vivo and in vitro. " but anyway that's beside the point - the question includes "Also how is it possible that our body can produce something that is synthetic?"
$endgroup$
– gilleain
Apr 30 at 15:36
1
$begingroup$
@gilleain Thanks for the reference! Quite interesting, I'll have to look into related work and possibly change my worldview a bit.
$endgroup$
– Bryan Krause♦
Apr 30 at 15:41
|
show 4 more comments
$begingroup$
There is no clear-cut line between "synthetic" and "natural" substances. They are made from the same kinds of atoms using the same kinds of covalent, ionic, and other types of bonds. The fact that a substance MAY be produced by some organism by biological processes does not make it any different from the same substance made in a laboratory by a human chemist from non-living reactants. What is relevant is the precise structure of the substance and the impurities that may be present in a particular sample of it. Sometimes, because of the details of the kinetics and thermodynamics of biosynthetic and human laboratory synthetic processes, the relative isotopic composition of one or more of the elements may be different, but that can also be true of different "natural" processes and different "synthetic" processes.
answered Apr 30 at 18:02
JDMorganArkansasJDMorganArkansas
211
$endgroup$
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "375"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fbiology.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f84069%2fis-nmda-produced-in-the-body%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
(my comment reiterating the answer seemed useful, so I've reproduced it here)
There are "NMDA receptors" in our body. There is not NMDA naturally in our body*. "NMDA receptor" is just a name people gave to one of the receptors that normally binds glutamate. They could have called it something else, like the "slow glu receptor", or "Glutamate Receptor A", but they called it the NMDA receptor because they discovered it was different from other glutamate receptors in that it was activated by a chemical called NMDA in their experiments.
(original answer)
NMDA receptors are in fact glutamate receptors natively: there is no endogenous NMDA*. They are named NMDA receptors because experimentally they were differentiated from other glutamate receptors using the compound NMDA. At first glutamate receptors were known as "NMDA" and "non-NMDA" glutamate receptors, and later the non-NMDA sort were found to be sensitive to AMPA or kainate and named thusly.
Many other receptors are named this way: the nicotinic acetylcholine receptor is the receptor that nicotine is an agonist at, but the endogenous ligand is acetylcholine; muscarine is an agonist to the muscarinic acetylcholine receptor but the endogenous ligand is acetylcholine.
Watkins, J. C., & Jane, D. E. (2006). The glutamate story. British journal of pharmacology, 147(S1), S100-S108.
*In the comments, @gilleain pointed out some research suggesting that NMDA does exist endogenously, although in fairly specific areas and not disputing that glutamate is the primary endogenous agonist for NMDA receptors. This work was long after the NMDA-sensitive glutamate receptor was discovered and named, but is some interesting trivia nonetheless.
answered Apr 29 at 22:39
Bryan Krause♦Bryan Krause
20.2k33358
$endgroup$
8
$begingroup$
@user3665690 There are "NMDA receptors" in our body. There is not NMDA naturally in our body. "NMDA receptor" is just a name people gave to one of the receptors that normally binds glutamate. They could have called it something else, like the "slow glu receptor", or "Glutamate Receptor A", but they called it the NMDA receptor because they discovered it was different from other glutamate receptors in that it was activated by a chemical called NMDA in their experiments.
$endgroup$
– Bryan Krause♦
Apr 30 at 1:02
1
$begingroup$
I see! ok that makes a lot of sense now, so basically NMDA is a synthetic chemical that mimics glutamate induce NMDA receptor activity. Is that the right interpretation?
$endgroup$
– user3665690
Apr 30 at 1:07
1
$begingroup$
@user3665690 Yes that's correct
$endgroup$
– Bryan Krause♦
Apr 30 at 1:31
1
$begingroup$
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11014243 : " we show that N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) is present at nanomolar levels in rat nervous system and endocrine glands as a natural compound, and it is biosynthesized in vivo and in vitro. " but anyway that's beside the point - the question includes "Also how is it possible that our body can produce something that is synthetic?"
$endgroup$
– gilleain
Apr 30 at 15:36
1
$begingroup$
@gilleain Thanks for the reference! Quite interesting, I'll have to look into related work and possibly change my worldview a bit.
$endgroup$
– Bryan Krause♦
Apr 30 at 15:41
|
show 4 more comments
$begingroup$
(my comment reiterating the answer seemed useful, so I've reproduced it here)
There are "NMDA receptors" in our body. There is not NMDA naturally in our body*. "NMDA receptor" is just a name people gave to one of the receptors that normally binds glutamate. They could have called it something else, like the "slow glu receptor", or "Glutamate Receptor A", but they called it the NMDA receptor because they discovered it was different from other glutamate receptors in that it was activated by a chemical called NMDA in their experiments.
(original answer)
NMDA receptors are in fact glutamate receptors natively: there is no endogenous NMDA*. They are named NMDA receptors because experimentally they were differentiated from other glutamate receptors using the compound NMDA. At first glutamate receptors were known as "NMDA" and "non-NMDA" glutamate receptors, and later the non-NMDA sort were found to be sensitive to AMPA or kainate and named thusly.
Many other receptors are named this way: the nicotinic acetylcholine receptor is the receptor that nicotine is an agonist at, but the endogenous ligand is acetylcholine; muscarine is an agonist to the muscarinic acetylcholine receptor but the endogenous ligand is acetylcholine.
Watkins, J. C., & Jane, D. E. (2006). The glutamate story. British journal of pharmacology, 147(S1), S100-S108.
*In the comments, @gilleain pointed out some research suggesting that NMDA does exist endogenously, although in fairly specific areas and not disputing that glutamate is the primary endogenous agonist for NMDA receptors. This work was long after the NMDA-sensitive glutamate receptor was discovered and named, but is some interesting trivia nonetheless.
answered Apr 29 at 22:39
Bryan Krause♦Bryan Krause
20.2k33358
$endgroup$
8
$begingroup$
@user3665690 There are "NMDA receptors" in our body. There is not NMDA naturally in our body. "NMDA receptor" is just a name people gave to one of the receptors that normally binds glutamate. They could have called it something else, like the "slow glu receptor", or "Glutamate Receptor A", but they called it the NMDA receptor because they discovered it was different from other glutamate receptors in that it was activated by a chemical called NMDA in their experiments.
$endgroup$
– Bryan Krause♦
Apr 30 at 1:02
1
$begingroup$
I see! ok that makes a lot of sense now, so basically NMDA is a synthetic chemical that mimics glutamate induce NMDA receptor activity. Is that the right interpretation?
$endgroup$
– user3665690
Apr 30 at 1:07
1
$begingroup$
@user3665690 Yes that's correct
$endgroup$
– Bryan Krause♦
Apr 30 at 1:31
1
$begingroup$
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11014243 : " we show that N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) is present at nanomolar levels in rat nervous system and endocrine glands as a natural compound, and it is biosynthesized in vivo and in vitro. " but anyway that's beside the point - the question includes "Also how is it possible that our body can produce something that is synthetic?"
$endgroup$
– gilleain
Apr 30 at 15:36
1
$begingroup$
@gilleain Thanks for the reference! Quite interesting, I'll have to look into related work and possibly change my worldview a bit.
$endgroup$
– Bryan Krause♦
Apr 30 at 15:41
|
show 4 more comments
$begingroup$
(my comment reiterating the answer seemed useful, so I've reproduced it here)
There are "NMDA receptors" in our body. There is not NMDA naturally in our body*. "NMDA receptor" is just a name people gave to one of the receptors that normally binds glutamate. They could have called it something else, like the "slow glu receptor", or "Glutamate Receptor A", but they called it the NMDA receptor because they discovered it was different from other glutamate receptors in that it was activated by a chemical called NMDA in their experiments.
(original answer)
NMDA receptors are in fact glutamate receptors natively: there is no endogenous NMDA*. They are named NMDA receptors because experimentally they were differentiated from other glutamate receptors using the compound NMDA. At first glutamate receptors were known as "NMDA" and "non-NMDA" glutamate receptors, and later the non-NMDA sort were found to be sensitive to AMPA or kainate and named thusly.
Many other receptors are named this way: the nicotinic acetylcholine receptor is the receptor that nicotine is an agonist at, but the endogenous ligand is acetylcholine; muscarine is an agonist to the muscarinic acetylcholine receptor but the endogenous ligand is acetylcholine.
Watkins, J. C., & Jane, D. E. (2006). The glutamate story. British journal of pharmacology, 147(S1), S100-S108.
*In the comments, @gilleain pointed out some research suggesting that NMDA does exist endogenously, although in fairly specific areas and not disputing that glutamate is the primary endogenous agonist for NMDA receptors. This work was long after the NMDA-sensitive glutamate receptor was discovered and named, but is some interesting trivia nonetheless.
answered Apr 29 at 22:39
Bryan Krause♦Bryan Krause
20.2k33358
$endgroup$
(my comment reiterating the answer seemed useful, so I've reproduced it here)
There are "NMDA receptors" in our body. There is not NMDA naturally in our body*. "NMDA receptor" is just a name people gave to one of the receptors that normally binds glutamate. They could have called it something else, like the "slow glu receptor", or "Glutamate Receptor A", but they called it the NMDA receptor because they discovered it was different from other glutamate receptors in that it was activated by a chemical called NMDA in their experiments.
(original answer)
NMDA receptors are in fact glutamate receptors natively: there is no endogenous NMDA*. They are named NMDA receptors because experimentally they were differentiated from other glutamate receptors using the compound NMDA. At first glutamate receptors were known as "NMDA" and "non-NMDA" glutamate receptors, and later the non-NMDA sort were found to be sensitive to AMPA or kainate and named thusly.
Many other receptors are named this way: the nicotinic acetylcholine receptor is the receptor that nicotine is an agonist at, but the endogenous ligand is acetylcholine; muscarine is an agonist to the muscarinic acetylcholine receptor but the endogenous ligand is acetylcholine.
Watkins, J. C., & Jane, D. E. (2006). The glutamate story. British journal of pharmacology, 147(S1), S100-S108.
*In the comments, @gilleain pointed out some research suggesting that NMDA does exist endogenously, although in fairly specific areas and not disputing that glutamate is the primary endogenous agonist for NMDA receptors. This work was long after the NMDA-sensitive glutamate receptor was discovered and named, but is some interesting trivia nonetheless.
answered Apr 29 at 22:39
Bryan Krause♦Bryan Krause
20.2k33358
edited Apr 30 at 16:10
answered Apr 29 at 22:39
Bryan Krause♦Bryan Krause
20.2k33358
answered Apr 29 at 22:39
Bryan Krause♦Bryan Krause
20.2k33358
answered Apr 29 at 22:39
Bryan Krause♦Bryan Krause
20.2k33358
20.2k33358
8
$begingroup$
@user3665690 There are "NMDA receptors" in our body. There is not NMDA naturally in our body. "NMDA receptor" is just a name people gave to one of the receptors that normally binds glutamate. They could have called it something else, like the "slow glu receptor", or "Glutamate Receptor A", but they called it the NMDA receptor because they discovered it was different from other glutamate receptors in that it was activated by a chemical called NMDA in their experiments.
$endgroup$
– Bryan Krause♦
Apr 30 at 1:02
1
$begingroup$
I see! ok that makes a lot of sense now, so basically NMDA is a synthetic chemical that mimics glutamate induce NMDA receptor activity. Is that the right interpretation?
$endgroup$
– user3665690
Apr 30 at 1:07
1
$begingroup$
@user3665690 Yes that's correct
$endgroup$
– Bryan Krause♦
Apr 30 at 1:31
1
$begingroup$
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11014243 : " we show that N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) is present at nanomolar levels in rat nervous system and endocrine glands as a natural compound, and it is biosynthesized in vivo and in vitro. " but anyway that's beside the point - the question includes "Also how is it possible that our body can produce something that is synthetic?"
$endgroup$
– gilleain
Apr 30 at 15:36
1
$begingroup$
@gilleain Thanks for the reference! Quite interesting, I'll have to look into related work and possibly change my worldview a bit.
$endgroup$
– Bryan Krause♦
Apr 30 at 15:41
|
show 4 more comments
8
$begingroup$
@user3665690 There are "NMDA receptors" in our body. There is not NMDA naturally in our body. "NMDA receptor" is just a name people gave to one of the receptors that normally binds glutamate. They could have called it something else, like the "slow glu receptor", or "Glutamate Receptor A", but they called it the NMDA receptor because they discovered it was different from other glutamate receptors in that it was activated by a chemical called NMDA in their experiments.
$endgroup$
– Bryan Krause♦
Apr 30 at 1:02
1
$begingroup$
I see! ok that makes a lot of sense now, so basically NMDA is a synthetic chemical that mimics glutamate induce NMDA receptor activity. Is that the right interpretation?
$endgroup$
– user3665690
Apr 30 at 1:07
1
$begingroup$
@user3665690 Yes that's correct
$endgroup$
– Bryan Krause♦
Apr 30 at 1:31
1
$begingroup$
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11014243 : " we show that N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) is present at nanomolar levels in rat nervous system and endocrine glands as a natural compound, and it is biosynthesized in vivo and in vitro. " but anyway that's beside the point - the question includes "Also how is it possible that our body can produce something that is synthetic?"
$endgroup$
– gilleain
Apr 30 at 15:36
1
$begingroup$
@gilleain Thanks for the reference! Quite interesting, I'll have to look into related work and possibly change my worldview a bit.
$endgroup$
– Bryan Krause♦
Apr 30 at 15:41
8
8
$begingroup$
@user3665690 There are "NMDA receptors" in our body. There is not NMDA naturally in our body. "NMDA receptor" is just a name people gave to one of the receptors that normally binds glutamate. They could have called it something else, like the "slow glu receptor", or "Glutamate Receptor A", but they called it the NMDA receptor because they discovered it was different from other glutamate receptors in that it was activated by a chemical called NMDA in their experiments.
$endgroup$
– Bryan Krause♦
Apr 30 at 1:02
$begingroup$
@user3665690 There are "NMDA receptors" in our body. There is not NMDA naturally in our body. "NMDA receptor" is just a name people gave to one of the receptors that normally binds glutamate. They could have called it something else, like the "slow glu receptor", or "Glutamate Receptor A", but they called it the NMDA receptor because they discovered it was different from other glutamate receptors in that it was activated by a chemical called NMDA in their experiments.
$endgroup$
– Bryan Krause♦
Apr 30 at 1:02
1
1
$begingroup$
I see! ok that makes a lot of sense now, so basically NMDA is a synthetic chemical that mimics glutamate induce NMDA receptor activity. Is that the right interpretation?
$endgroup$
– user3665690
Apr 30 at 1:07
$begingroup$
I see! ok that makes a lot of sense now, so basically NMDA is a synthetic chemical that mimics glutamate induce NMDA receptor activity. Is that the right interpretation?
$endgroup$
– user3665690
Apr 30 at 1:07
1
1
$begingroup$
@user3665690 Yes that's correct
$endgroup$
– Bryan Krause♦
Apr 30 at 1:31
$begingroup$
@user3665690 Yes that's correct
$endgroup$
– Bryan Krause♦
Apr 30 at 1:31
1
1
$begingroup$
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11014243 : " we show that N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) is present at nanomolar levels in rat nervous system and endocrine glands as a natural compound, and it is biosynthesized in vivo and in vitro. " but anyway that's beside the point - the question includes "Also how is it possible that our body can produce something that is synthetic?"
$endgroup$
– gilleain
Apr 30 at 15:36
$begingroup$
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11014243 : " we show that N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) is present at nanomolar levels in rat nervous system and endocrine glands as a natural compound, and it is biosynthesized in vivo and in vitro. " but anyway that's beside the point - the question includes "Also how is it possible that our body can produce something that is synthetic?"
$endgroup$
– gilleain
Apr 30 at 15:36
1
1
$begingroup$
@gilleain Thanks for the reference! Quite interesting, I'll have to look into related work and possibly change my worldview a bit.
$endgroup$
– Bryan Krause♦
Apr 30 at 15:41
$begingroup$
@gilleain Thanks for the reference! Quite interesting, I'll have to look into related work and possibly change my worldview a bit.
$endgroup$
– Bryan Krause♦
Apr 30 at 15:41
|
show 4 more comments
$begingroup$
There is no clear-cut line between "synthetic" and "natural" substances. They are made from the same kinds of atoms using the same kinds of covalent, ionic, and other types of bonds. The fact that a substance MAY be produced by some organism by biological processes does not make it any different from the same substance made in a laboratory by a human chemist from non-living reactants. What is relevant is the precise structure of the substance and the impurities that may be present in a particular sample of it. Sometimes, because of the details of the kinetics and thermodynamics of biosynthetic and human laboratory synthetic processes, the relative isotopic composition of one or more of the elements may be different, but that can also be true of different "natural" processes and different "synthetic" processes.
answered Apr 30 at 18:02
JDMorganArkansasJDMorganArkansas
211
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
There is no clear-cut line between "synthetic" and "natural" substances. They are made from the same kinds of atoms using the same kinds of covalent, ionic, and other types of bonds. The fact that a substance MAY be produced by some organism by biological processes does not make it any different from the same substance made in a laboratory by a human chemist from non-living reactants. What is relevant is the precise structure of the substance and the impurities that may be present in a particular sample of it. Sometimes, because of the details of the kinetics and thermodynamics of biosynthetic and human laboratory synthetic processes, the relative isotopic composition of one or more of the elements may be different, but that can also be true of different "natural" processes and different "synthetic" processes.
answered Apr 30 at 18:02
JDMorganArkansasJDMorganArkansas
211
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
There is no clear-cut line between "synthetic" and "natural" substances. They are made from the same kinds of atoms using the same kinds of covalent, ionic, and other types of bonds. The fact that a substance MAY be produced by some organism by biological processes does not make it any different from the same substance made in a laboratory by a human chemist from non-living reactants. What is relevant is the precise structure of the substance and the impurities that may be present in a particular sample of it. Sometimes, because of the details of the kinetics and thermodynamics of biosynthetic and human laboratory synthetic processes, the relative isotopic composition of one or more of the elements may be different, but that can also be true of different "natural" processes and different "synthetic" processes.
answered Apr 30 at 18:02
JDMorganArkansasJDMorganArkansas
211
$endgroup$
There is no clear-cut line between "synthetic" and "natural" substances. They are made from the same kinds of atoms using the same kinds of covalent, ionic, and other types of bonds. The fact that a substance MAY be produced by some organism by biological processes does not make it any different from the same substance made in a laboratory by a human chemist from non-living reactants. What is relevant is the precise structure of the substance and the impurities that may be present in a particular sample of it. Sometimes, because of the details of the kinetics and thermodynamics of biosynthetic and human laboratory synthetic processes, the relative isotopic composition of one or more of the elements may be different, but that can also be true of different "natural" processes and different "synthetic" processes.
answered Apr 30 at 18:02
JDMorganArkansasJDMorganArkansas
211
answered Apr 30 at 18:02
JDMorganArkansasJDMorganArkansas
211
answered Apr 30 at 18:02
JDMorganArkansasJDMorganArkansas
211
answered Apr 30 at 18:02
JDMorganArkansasJDMorganArkansas
211
211
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Biology Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fbiology.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f84069%2fis-nmda-produced-in-the-body%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
