Is RuBisCO going to be added as an enzyme/organelle

After a brief understanding of gluconeogenesis, I don’t agree to give up on RuBisCO. The problem of gluconeogenesis lies in the raw materials. It is not a carbon fixation pathway for CO2. Its role is to convert other non sugar organic substances. From the perspective of realism, it is necessary to store glycolytic metabolites (such as lactic acid, which may be better abstracted as nonsugar-precursors) as raw materials for gluconeogenesis. The conditions of action as a possible glycogen should also be good.

edit: Gluconeogenesis is the carbon utilization of non sugar organic matter by organisms, and we still need the carbon fixation way to obtain carbon dioxide.

For the carbon sequestration process, I still prefer to use RuBisCO. As for its use in the game, I insist on splitting photosynthesis. Whether it is cyanobacteria or chloroplasts, thylakoid is just a place for light reaction, and carbon fixation is completed in the carboxysomes in cyanobacteria or chloroplast matrix, which is essentially the role of RuBisCO. At present, the direct synthesis of glucose by this thylakoid is easy to misunderstand that thylakoid can independently complete photosynthesis. Perhaps the evolution of RuBisCO predates photoreaction and was born when cells first used hydrogen as a hydrogen source for carbon sequestration. Not only photosynthesis, but also various chemoautotrophic processes rely on RuBisCO for carbon sequestration, and this commonality should be reflected.

The original


Summarized two ideas

edit:
Consider nitrogen fixation and organic hydrogen supply.

Add Hydrogenosome. (Nitrogenase can catalyze hydrogen synthesis.)


Note: NADH indicates the degree of glycolysis and can be regarded as NADH and the corresponding amount of pyruvate. NADH allows incomplete utilization and all excess NADH disappears. It can be considered that the disappeared NADH and pyruvate enter the fermentation pathway.

3 Likes