ATP Synthase in Action

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 28 лис 2024

КОМЕНТАРІ •

  • @BitwiseMobile
    @BitwiseMobile 6 років тому +65

    ATP Synthase and cellular respiration is mind blowing. We are truly made of nano-machines.

    • @kridadounsattapong1533
      @kridadounsattapong1533 5 років тому

      Sign csddspim dtwdeg ufo

    • @littlepoodle7443
      @littlepoodle7443 Рік тому +1

      Not really. That’s over simplifying. Its all organic. Think of it like a robot made of liquid instead of a mechanical robot.

  • @sarahcherry7341
    @sarahcherry7341 6 років тому +55

    These videos are extremely helpful in understanding how the different parts work together. Reading from a textbook can only do so much - it's easier to understand each part but harder to comprehend how they function. I'm so grateful that these videos are here to help fully visualize the system and its overall process.

  • @lic.fernandodanielruiz5465
    @lic.fernandodanielruiz5465 6 років тому +9

    Soy un estudiante principiante de biotecnología. Este video es ORO para mí. Muchas gracias!

  • @paulferry7791
    @paulferry7791 5 років тому +8

    I love this but one very crucial piece is missing that I think would help bring it all together. Water molecules (and possibly free ions like sodium and chloride, for instance). Without the water molecules suffused throughout, we can't really see how these molecular assemblies truly interact within a netting of water molecules interlaced with free ions.

  • @gavinpeters9531
    @gavinpeters9531 5 років тому +4

    Thankyou so much for taking the time to explain this!

  • @bluedutch01
    @bluedutch01 6 років тому +11

    Sublimely beautiful!.... seems like many complex structures must be connected with precision for this thing to work.

    • @williamchamberlain2263
      @williamchamberlain2263 6 років тому

      Bloody inefficient though

    • @Domispitaletti
      @Domispitaletti 6 років тому +1

      @@williamchamberlain2263 If that mechanism was more efficient the life of the organisms would be dramatically shorter.

    • @DW-vl2wi
      @DW-vl2wi 6 років тому

      @@Domispitaletti Explain please.

    • @Domispitaletti
      @Domispitaletti 6 років тому +1

      @@DW-vl2wi
      My english is not that good.
      1 - If it was more efficient all organisms would produce more energy.
      2 - With more energy available the organism for sure would evolve with time to do everything faster.
      3 - Our life-time is directly related with a certain number of heart beats.
      4 - As we see in nature, creatures able to produce and consume energy faster, have acelerated heart beats.
      5 - In the case of mammals almost all have 1 billion heart beats to "spend" then die. Humans are an exception. Due to technology we have 2 billions or a little more.
      Efficiency in that process means shorter life.

    • @DW-vl2wi
      @DW-vl2wi 6 років тому +1

      @@Domispitaletti I do not believe that. Athletes, military personnel, and thrill seekers live just as long if not longer than the average couch potato. Too many factors to consider, opposed to the heart just having a certain stop rate. I understand that cardiovascular disease is the number one cause of mortality, but I do not believe it is because of this process.
      Eventually our cells just are not as functional as they are in the beginning, and I do not believe anyone worked out correlation of energy transferred and cell division.
      We are simply programmed to die. Your English is perfectly understood.

  • @kingsleyamematsror4887
    @kingsleyamematsror4887 6 років тому +3

    Greater analysis of biochemistry. Boss tnx.

  • @shashigupta4385
    @shashigupta4385 7 років тому +6

    very very thank you for the video....

  • @offplanetevent
    @offplanetevent 6 років тому +18

    The rotation all depends on what side of the equator you are on.

  • @BarnardClangdeggin
    @BarnardClangdeggin 6 років тому +2

    Love this stuff. Thanks, Omar!

  • @jatigre1
    @jatigre1 3 роки тому +1

    I'm pretty sure some corporation was bragging about the couter-clockwise movement as their trademark some 70 trillion years ago

  • @Wave1dave
    @Wave1dave 5 років тому +5

    I'm about to become an electrical engineer, so transistors is how difficult it will get for me. But this, this is really complex and really interesting!
    Anyway, I wanted to ask one thing. How do researchers come up with this? What techniques are used in order to get the structures of enzymes? Or the whole process?

    • @plumcat123
      @plumcat123 5 років тому +8

      The most common way of determining a protein (enzymes are proteins) structure is X ray crystallography where the defraction and scattering of x ray is measured at different orientations of the molecule. Many trials and computer power later a protein crystal 3d structure can be determined.

  • @AmruMagdy
    @AmruMagdy Рік тому

    سجلها في صحيفتك..... ليوم الموقف العظيم ..
    سبحان الله وبحمده..
    عدد خلقه.. ورضا نفسه.. وزنة عرشه ..ومداد كلماته
    أَسْتَغْفِرُ اللَّهَ العظيم...اللهم صل وسلم على نبينا محمد

  • @numberpirate
    @numberpirate 5 років тому +2

    I imagine this whole mechanism is highly highly conserved which makes me wonder how did this evolve in the first place? I realize there has to be some kind of reducible simplicity to this, I imagine a super computer will eventually be able to figure this out, and the majority of mutations that have led to this they must be either repeat insertion or duplication based. I wonder has anyone even scratched the surface on figuring out the next step backwards in this process?

    • @big0bad0brad
      @big0bad0brad 5 років тому +1

      Very interesting comment - I guess we can assume that this was the best it could evolve to given the trajectory it took, but there could be many many such iterations and it's a lot easier to determine a forward evolution direction than a backwards one. The question isn't "of all the reachable mutations, which leads to better stuff" but rather which is a little worse but still working, and close to another one yet a bit worse but also still working... it's sorta like trying to work a one way crypto function backwards because there's nothing simple to judge each move by. If you don't have enough hints to go by in the form of lesser-developed, but same evolution series examples, you can only connect a dot so far.
      Another way of looking at it, it's easy to empirically watch evolution go forward, and maybe even predict simple mutations, but judging effectiveness is much more straight forward than judging "complexity". Things that appear to be complex mutations and difficult jumps could be simple ones but more twisted and hard to conceptualize.

    • @happygimp0
      @happygimp0 5 років тому +1

      There are many such examples of something extremely complex that does not work at all when you remove just one part and does not serve any other function. Some of them are essential for life, a more striking example is DNA, RNA and Protein: You need DNA to encode Protein and RNA to make Protein and you need Protein to copy DNA. Not just one Protein, dozens of them.
      That is why i do not believe it evolved, i believe it was created.

    • @JonSherrill
      @JonSherrill 2 роки тому +1

      We can never really be sure because ancient bacteria, archaea, and ancestors don't leave much of a fossil record, but one hypothesis comes from deep sea vents, which for several reasons are considered a strong contender for the origin of life. Alkaline vents spewing into a somewhat acidic ocean produce natural proton gradients on par with what are used inside cells today. Early proto-life was likely just self replicating amino acids, but perhaps eventually some evolved in a way that could crudely make use of the proton gradient. Doing so grants a humongous advantage - all of a sudden there's an energy source with which to work against entropy. In fact, if you take the definition of life as "systems that work to maintain a non-equilibrium state", that would have by definition been the very start of life itself.

    • @JonSherrill
      @JonSherrill 2 роки тому +3

      @@happygimp0 Who can say, but the irreducible complexity argument has fallen before. The eyeball was the classic case used, but we now have a pretty complete picture from eyespot all the way to the modern eyeball.
      For DNA, we know self replicating RNA exists, so DNA isn't required. I don't think we have proven that a origin-of-life class system (including, for example, the simplest protein synthesis) can be made out of pure RNA. But there's little reason to think it can't exist.

  • @tomorourke6301
    @tomorourke6301 3 роки тому

    lovely as it is lively...professor lue tells his tale of microcosms once unimaginable...as a recovering alcoholic drug addict, his waterwheel analogy is one more proton transfer, continually reminding my comrades and i never to relapse back to our anti-life, drunkenstoned, death stumble-tumble-rumble-grumble....¤Ω

  • @VoidedTea
    @VoidedTea 2 роки тому +1

    How many of these rotors exist in the membrane of one mitochondria? Just one or many?

    • @3omarali
      @3omarali  2 роки тому +2

      A big number.
      For a better understanding watch this video of the electron transport chain to the end of the video
      ua-cam.com/video/rdF3mnyS1p0/v-deo.html

  • @zeddzorander9935
    @zeddzorander9935 4 роки тому +1

    Nanomachines, son

  • @curiouspunk3543
    @curiouspunk3543 6 років тому +4

    amazing explanation, i have no background in biology, just curious.
    how exactly do we get energy? cells need energy right for the work they do, instead of ADP > ATP synthesis is it possible there could be another method of energy derivation for the cells ?
    i am just doing research for my book.
    a dumber question can anyone explain, what exactly requires energy, how the food processed by us, comes to ADP > ATP. and how is the energy processed, ? i mean in terms of ionic bonds ? how is it transfered and store, if any one can put some links. thanks.

    • @DW-vl2wi
      @DW-vl2wi 6 років тому

      Just look up glycolysis.

    • @yeahkeen2905
      @yeahkeen2905 5 років тому

      Curious punk to answer part of your second question there are many reactions in the body that require energy that is released when ATP breaks down into ADP and a phosphate. For example, active transport requires energy.

  • @BonyMotoFilms
    @BonyMotoFilms 6 років тому +2

    Amazing ..finally i also got it😂
    The more we believe in science the more unbelievable it becomes 😂
    Thanks 🙏🏻 for uploading this it’s really helpful

    • @EvanXDev
      @EvanXDev 5 років тому +1

      God designed ATP Synthase. It's amazing.

  • @riichobamin7612
    @riichobamin7612 5 років тому +3

    Why does this protein need a mechanical movement like a water turbine ?

    • @Novak2611
      @Novak2611 5 років тому

      Why the water turbine need a mechanical movement?

  • @ErinRaciell
    @ErinRaciell 5 років тому +3

    Protons = hydrogen ions or cations

  • @embryophytelove
    @embryophytelove Рік тому

    If I were an enzyme, I would want to be ATP Synthase.

  • @disavillada6758
    @disavillada6758 3 роки тому

    Beautiful 🌼

  • @VoodooD0g
    @VoodooD0g 5 років тому +2

    so this unit we see is in the mitochondrion?

    • @rredding
      @rredding 5 років тому +1

      Yes, that's correct

  • @GlynWilliams1950
    @GlynWilliams1950 6 років тому +4

    Amazing.
    I want to understand what I saw

    • @joelisSHI
      @joelisSHI 6 років тому +2

      It easier to tackle a quantum aspect because it is info that can be simply accepted.
      Here every aspect of this cg display is based on data.
      This isn't what it looks like.
      But it's the closest we have ever been

    • @joelisSHI
      @joelisSHI 6 років тому

      Thank you

  • @michaelb1785
    @michaelb1785 4 роки тому

    Brilliant! Thanks!

  • @mauroenriquenievesmeneses9984
    @mauroenriquenievesmeneses9984 6 років тому +1

    Pero mira lo que es ese complejo papa!

  • @andvokslife9596
    @andvokslife9596 6 років тому +9

    Great thanks and glory to the Creator, for His wisdom!

    • @KenJackson_US
      @KenJackson_US 5 років тому

      Is your opinion about what Andr said objective, @@faiselbutt2944?

    • @That_One_Guy...
      @That_One_Guy... 5 років тому +2

      @@faiselbutt2944 coming from the guy with a vulgar last name

  • @SladeMacGregor
    @SladeMacGregor 6 років тому

    This is so awesome!

  • @kx4532
    @kx4532 5 років тому +1

    is there one for photo synthesis?

    • @yeahkeen2905
      @yeahkeen2905 5 років тому

      K V isn’t it the same thing for photosynthesis? Both reaction use the electron transport chain and ATP synthase molecules.

  • @KenJackson_US
    @KenJackson_US 6 років тому +4

    Excellent! Who invented this thing? How would it be possible to invent anything like it?

    • @ImGonnaShout2000
      @ImGonnaShout2000 6 років тому +1

      This is what happens inside your body.

    • @KenJackson_US
      @KenJackson_US 6 років тому +3

      Yes, ImGonna, that's the shocking thing. But intricate ingenious machines don't just spring up by themselves. Someone thought through the energy needs of the body and came up with a mechanism that would supply them. It's awe inspiring!

    • @AtlasReburdened
      @AtlasReburdened 6 років тому +3

      That's called random mutation and natural selection, it's a settled matter, the only question left is the structure of the earliest molecules which formed the first replication chain.

    • @KenJackson_US
      @KenJackson_US 6 років тому +7

      No, Atlas. You mean you *want* it to be a settled matter. You *want* evolution to work so you can rid yourself of the Lord God who created you and the judgement which awaits you when you die. But the fact is, a complex mechanism can't evolve one piece at a time. All of the pieces are needed. If any component is missing, none of it works. Molecular machinery like this are ample proof (for honest observers) that life was designed.

    • @samuel.hricko
      @samuel.hricko 6 років тому +5

      +Ken Jackson it seems to me that you want it not to be a settled matter. I couldn't care less about your Lord God who supposedly created me - on the other hand, you're peddling your version of how it came to be while "getting rid" of the islamic, buddhistic, old norse, ancient egyptian and many many more views incompatible with your one.
      The statement "fact is, a complex mechanism can't evolve one piece at a time" is not only blatantly false (because it has been demonstrated that it can), but is in itself unprovable, so don't even try ;)
      If you were an "honest" observer, you would admit that if you can't imagine something happening, that doesn't mean that it can't happen. Oh, and please don't you turn this on us, not being honest - anyone fully intellectually honest (including me) will admit that unless there's proof of some other mechanism, God as an explanation cannot be excluded. Except that this other mechanism is already too well elucidated for us to have any reasonable doubts.
      And if that's not enough, please substitute the word "God" in your statements with "pink invisible flying unicorn" and read them after yourself. You'll experience how absurd you sound to the outside viewer.

  • @DuyNguyen-vf5cv
    @DuyNguyen-vf5cv 6 років тому +2

    Is there any poison that disrupt ATP synthase system?

    • @samuel.hricko
      @samuel.hricko 6 років тому +5

      Sure is - look up trinitrophenol or picric acid - chemicals capable of binding the protons and bringing them back through the inner mitochondrial membrane back to matrix are known as respiratory chain decouplers. These "short-circuit" the chain by bypassing the ATP-synthase, thus not producing ATP, only heat.
      This can be used as a very effective means of burning calories and losing weight (it indeed has been used as that in the 30's in the US), but it's extremely risky and has led to some deaths, where the victim literally got cooked to death from inside. So yeah, they're poisons.

    • @DW-vl2wi
      @DW-vl2wi 6 років тому +1

      @@samuel.hricko I think it was unintentional on your behalf, but you just taught me the worst way to die.

    • @samuel.hricko
      @samuel.hricko 6 років тому

      @@DW-vl2wi was it now? :P

    • @DW-vl2wi
      @DW-vl2wi 6 років тому

      @@samuel.hricko Oh. Oh! Disturbing.

    • @metcas
      @metcas 6 років тому

      @@DW-vl2wi Almost beats cyanide.

  • @robertmiller5258
    @robertmiller5258 4 роки тому

    Can we have please a ‘just so story’ to ‘explain’ how all this evolved?

  • @derph.7888
    @derph.7888 5 років тому

    Is it wrong to visualize the interaction between the c-subunit ring and a-subunit (F-0) as a spiral staircase that flows within the guidelines of the counter clockwise F-1 complex? Maybe, there are more than just one exit point for the protons Within the membrane to aid in the retention of protons; as it seems that rotation is really the only reason as to why the protons are used in the first place. What I mean is that the efficiency of the Whole chain doesn't seem all that great within my eyes as only two processes really show "thought" to efficiency:
    1) The passing of electrons in Structure 1 (what looks like kinetic pressure pads, taking the visuals verbatim).
    2) The retention, "storage", of electrons for later use within the transport from Structure 2 to 3 (or 3 to 4 if my memory is working)..lol.
    Also, are there any "other reasonings", aside from the structuring of the a-subunit ring, in regards to the rotation direction? Such as the set-up of the F-1 complex in relation to idk...something it's passing the ATP to (intra-cellular) or possibly...some.thing?

    • @derph.7888
      @derph.7888 5 років тому

      Addition
      The separation of electron from proton is the third level of efficiency.
      3) The focus is the electron and finding a purpose for the "waste", protons, saves from having to produce of retain something else.
      *Correcting my statement about "the only reason as to why protons are used in the first place"....yeah.

  • @VladimirMorar
    @VladimirMorar 5 років тому +2

    I'm an arts college dropout. I have nothing to do with these studies but I still them fascinating

  • @spikarooni6391
    @spikarooni6391 5 років тому +1

    YEEEEEEEEEEEESSSSSSSSSS

  • @ZildjianJon
    @ZildjianJon 5 років тому

    4 people don't undergo aerobic respiration

  • @simpl6775
    @simpl6775 Рік тому

    L - T - O Conformational change.

  • @bruce3102
    @bruce3102 5 років тому +1

    Amazing what the random chance combination of individual atoms can accomplish!

    • @SDsc0rch
      @SDsc0rch 5 років тому +2

      you have a more faith than me.....
      (that's a ludicrous assertion)

  • @zzoldd
    @zzoldd Рік тому

    subhanallah

  • @solusbelmont
    @solusbelmont 5 років тому +2

    imagine if by some accident the wiring (those amino acid repelling things) is incorrect and the C ring rotate in the opposite direction... for sure there is some intelligence Creator who made this complex design of molecular mechanism...

  • @PSsquadron
    @PSsquadron Рік тому

    You do realize that if it looks the way it's depicted here, it couldn't be a coincidence that it works that way? These are the machines inside us, they build us and give us energy. Who designed it?

  • @waikienlim3562
    @waikienlim3562 6 років тому

    我的植牙手术会在英国一同与人体改造进行

    • @KenJackson_US
      @KenJackson_US 5 років тому

      Google translates this as, "My dental implant surgery will be carried out together with the human body in the UK." I don't get it.

  • @Auirtozz
    @Auirtozz 5 років тому +1

    cutting edge of science and understanding! 35000 views... there are people whom deciated there LIVES for this knowledge never to see it understood... and nobody cares...

  • @avinkris7
    @avinkris7 6 років тому

    can this be seen in action under a microscope?

    • @harshsinghal4342
      @harshsinghal4342 6 років тому

      No you can't directly see it happening under a microscope.

    • @curiouspunk3543
      @curiouspunk3543 6 років тому +1

      no it can't be, may be one day, but at this level, light is not reflecting with anything, r, its colorless.

    • @hajorm.a3474
      @hajorm.a3474 6 років тому

      @@curiouspunk3543 what about electron microscope

    • @MingoMash
      @MingoMash 6 років тому +1

      ​@@hajorm.a3474 Well, according to the electron microscope wikipedia page, the very best electron microscopes has a resolution of 50 pm, which is 0.5 % of the size of the ATP synthase protein, so that should be enough to see the protein. If you search the web for "ATP synthase electron microscope" you actually get quite a few "blurry" images of the ATP synthase.

    • @metcas
      @metcas 6 років тому

      @@harshsinghal4342 Not ENTIRELY possible. On the level of individual particles, photons would just alter them and bounce off in a random direction, if they aren't already absorbed (but given these are individual particles.) Whatever information you'd manage to get would be a freeze-frame of the previously-unaltered system.

  • @marccram6584
    @marccram6584 5 років тому

    Either my existence is a type of VR and the Matrix if feeding me this BS knowing that I will never understand it or that this is reality and I am in fact an self-aware water (proton) wheel. Either are equally horrifying.

  • @hdhddhdb2894
    @hdhddhdb2894 3 роки тому

    طالع كركر

  • @apburner1
    @apburner1 6 років тому +9

    Ya, sure, just a series of random chemical reactions that came together over time...

    • @faiselbutt2944
      @faiselbutt2944 5 років тому +5

      Translation: My limited brain cannot comprehend this complexity, therefore it must be intentionally constructed by an outside force.

    • @Novak2611
      @Novak2611 5 років тому +5

      @@faiselbutt2944 we actually understood a lot about this complexity. That's why we think inteligent sources must be involved. It's like when you find a working computer in the middle of a desert. What is the question you are going to ask?

    • @KenJackson_US
      @KenJackson_US 5 років тому +1

      You seem to be commenting on both sides of the issue, @@Novak2611.

    • @Xezlec
      @Xezlec 5 років тому +1

      No, not random. Evolution is a process of trial and error. It turns out trial and error works very well!

    • @Novak2611
      @Novak2611 5 років тому +3

      @@Xezlec A composition of a deterministic process and a random process gives a random process. You can check some stochastics. Evolution is still a random process. As a cherry on the cake, abiogenesis itself is random with no determinisstic component, because natural selection does not event exist before the birth of the first self replicating molecule.

  • @andyjudge8038
    @andyjudge8038 5 років тому +3

    And who here still believes in Darwin's theory of evolution? And who believes in creation? This to me without a doubt is intelligent design

    • @VectorOfKnowledge
      @VectorOfKnowledge 2 роки тому

      Yes, because you don't actually know a thing about evolution.

  • @outerrealm
    @outerrealm 3 роки тому

    Ummmmm, to whom is this video aimed? It's like a textbook with the whole first chapter ripped out. How about a little explaining? Otherwise you've wasted a lot of your and others' time for nothing

    • @theouxepl1222
      @theouxepl1222 Рік тому

      I find your comment unnecessarily reproachful. Yes, it probably is not aimed towards people without any prior knowledge but first, this channel has uploaded two other videos before which cover the structure and function of the atp-synthase in more depth and second, there are many videos/online articles/textbooks which superficially cover atp-synthesis but I haven't found any explanation or visualization before which was so detailed and clear.
      So I wouldn't say that the video wasted my time. :)