1. working model is people still working on it. ( two people support it,并用牛津英语大词典论证了科学专业词语的含义。
2.删帖子;
not only delete his/her own posts from wxc or Nature web site; If that is not creative enough, see below; 只有想不到没有办不到.
xxx 发表评论于 2019-08-07 07:07:50 ( same link above)
“你为啥删掉了7月15日的帖子“转运蛋白模型一日游 (五)总结”以及后面的评论?
就因为在7月15日的帖子“转运蛋白模型一日游 (五)总结”的最初版本中,我和你讨论,你说“目前看过的文献来看, Yan_Maloney模型只出现在阎的博客里,没有出现在科学杂志里,就是说在科学界不存在”。我只好问你“‘The best characterized members of the family are UhpT and GlpT, both of E. coli, for which detailed topological models have been presented (29, 90, 91).’ 这是被引用了1281次的综述“Major facilitator superfamily(1998)”文章里的原话。其中文献90, 91分别是大阎1993和1995的文章。队友阁下,在这里"models"是啥意思?”。我再说“这就是你‘看了这么多文献,没有一篇文献用模型一词来提阎的两篇论文’。反证”,到这时你才无奈地承认你错了,有大阎的模型。
客观事实:
1. 老阎九三文章,那个示意图根本没谈机理,只是标出了三个区域而异。文章写道:"although we can identify a residual within the translocation pathway of UhPT, we cannot yet comment on how this pathway may operate”. 对于这篇文章的贡献与局限性,可以作很多评论。老阎九三文章 identified a residue C265 and 3 domains. The famous graph he used in his blog is not about pathway mechanism, but about showing 3 domains with C265 in the core domain (see his 93 paper). As for pathway mechanism, Yan and Maloney did not know at the time and only suggested either mobile carrier (residual C265 as elevator to shuttle substrate in and out) or mobile barrier (gated pore) theory. These theories (mobile carrier or mobile barrier) are not related to outward open/inward open conformations Yan Nieng talked about in her graph (it is a simple graph used by many).
2. AAM模型理论研究进展在那里(1966-2013年结果),颜宁二零一四文中图五就是按理论画的 (predicted)。为了propose a 2014 version working model, 就需要更多于2013的内容。向内开口构象已经被颜宁拍到 (2014年),无争论,向外开口构象,待定,但是小颜在2014文中讨论部分从结构方面作了很好的说明(由于TMD及ICH作用,没有底物时的最可能构象是向外开,底物结合及分离则促进二个构象转换。这种model讨论不需要其他数据)。至于AAM机理要求两个occluded 结构,则需要借助XyLE, 那也是现成的(文献28,29),也是小颜的,且已经有结晶及生化数据。因此她在2014文中说了our... biochemical data (有参考文献28,29)。
3. 既然2014拿到GluT1的结构(other worked on this for decades),此时提出a working model,顺理成章。与老阎老板无关. 66-92年,92-2013年之间AAM模型早在那,内含逐年增加, 与老阎九三年模型 (3 domains)无关。
4. AAM theory is still just theory at this time (most viable per Mueckler in 2014 review) and more work is needed. Anyone can propose new techniques (crystal structure and x-ray or biochemical or both or other) or updated model for future research and development.