Talk:Glutamic acid

message: If high levels of glutamic acid are unhealthy, what would be considered a high level?
"Glutamic acid" and "glutamate" are often used interchangeably but, technically, glutamate is the anionic form of glutamic acid. This article doesn't recognize that. RJII 17:01, 9 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Untitled 

message: In the "Pharmacology" section, the following statement is very confusing: "For being so important in the brain functions it is therefore of no surprise that free Glu cannot cross BBB in appreciable quantities; instead it is converted into Glu."
Glu is converted into Glu?  I assume that something else was intended.. could somebody clarify? -- Foogod
Glutamine can changed by the enzyme glutamase in glutamatic acid and vice verse. It can also metabolize in y-butter.acid. All this are impotant neurotransmitters in the brain.--Fackel 21:02, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Conversion in the Brain 

message: Who the hell put up that 3d stereo stick diagram of glutamate? It's completely off. It looks like there's freaking 2 carbons between C1 and C-alpha!!!
:I put it there.  It's correct.  What structure do you think it has?  --Ben 13:05, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There are 2 carbons between C5 and C-alpha, as it should be.  --Ed (Edgar181) 13:37, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I'm not a chemist but the displayed 3D structure also looks very wrong to me. On the left side you see a hydrogen atom attached to the oxygen, on the right side it is missing. Furthermore there seem to be 3 hydrogen atoms attached to the nitrogen atom. I don't see this in the structure formula. I also don't think that this makes sense from a chemical point of view. GreSebMic (talk) 10:00, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: The 2D structure is a canonical representation of an amino acid.  All the functional groups are represented as neutral.  But since amino acids have both an acid and a base in the same molecule, in actuality the acid will be deprotonated (a negatively charged anion) to some extent and the amino group will be protonated (a positively charged cation) to some extent.  This situation is called a zwitterion. The degree to which the functional groups are ionized can depend on many factors such as pH, temperature, etc.  And in the case of glutamic acid, the situation is further complicated having two acidic functional groups.  This is why, for clarity, amino acids are generally depicted with neutral functional groups like the 2D structure currently used in the article.   The 3D structure, however, is one of the possible zwitterionic forms.  -- Ed (Edgar181) 11:57, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I see. Thank you for the clarification. GreSebMic (talk) 20:55, 7 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Issue with Glutamate Structure 

message: What would happen if the the codon were to be deleted all together?
What effect would this have on a persons blood cells? could they still carry oxygen? What shape would the cells be? 
I need answers, thanks in advance,
Adam'''
They'd be dead. TimVickers 22:34, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  CTC or CAC DELETION 

message: This article could use at least one reference stating that glutamate does not cross the blood-brain barrier-- if that is in fact the case. That section in general could be more literate; I'd change it myself, but I'd like to know that what I'm proofreading is true first. Well-worded bad info is less likely to attract editorial attention, after all... Kajerm
It is an error, if you beleave that you get a good drive by g. Also the concentration can get enhanced very small. It is the industry for pharmacy, who will tell us such stories. --Fackel 21:02, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Needs Reference 

message: the article notes: "In particular Glutamate Restriction Diets are now claiming success anecdotally, by limiting or eliminating intake of wheat, peanut, soy and bean. No similar diets for Schizophrenia are known."  
I'm going to lower-case schizophrenia, but my question is, if this sentence is to remain, should there be reference to Abram Hoffer and Humphrey Osmund's research in niacinamide (B3) therapies??  Their chemistry is sound but many people have attacked their double-blind studies. My first thought is not to mention these dudes as this article has very little to do with schizophrenia and perhaps the last sentence should be taken out entirely (it's certainly not true, if the B3 diet does in fact help some kinds of schizophrenics).  Before I do anything, I'd like to see thoughts, comments. Gaviidae 11:03, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pharmacology 

message: I made a number of changes to this section, added a reference for caged analog. I reduced the section about the nanosensor. This is a neat idea, but the sensor doesn't work for the purpose it was quoted. It is probably too slow for anything with a synapse. It didn't make sense for this to be such a big section. I tried to cut out repetition and move the section closer to the consensus views, and away from guesses. I'm not sure about the epilepsy section, it is plausible but is not referenced properly. This is more of a technique for getting an animal model of epilepsy in my view, which is much more complicated than simple lots of glu. That's more like a stroke. It could be interesting to add some brief history about how glutamate came to be accepted as a neurotransmitter after a 30 year struggle - that is, the development of antagonists. Aplested 02:14, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Neurotransmitter

message: Is it not the case that NDMA receptors require activation of the post-synaptic neuron (that is, the neuron to which they are affixed on the dendrite) in order to expel a magnesium ion and allow functionality of glutamate as an NDMA receptor agonist?  If so, that should be noted and sourced in this article.  RadicalHarmony (talk) 07:31, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: NMDA receptors and magnesium

message: This is an important question that nobody seems to be answering, or able to answer.  Many people think it's the same thing, including companies of protein powders that think the names "L-Glutamine" and "Glutamic Acid" are interchangeable.  We need this correctly addressed once and for all.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.18.81.22 (talk) 20:10, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Completely different substances, compare the glutamic acid (= glutamate as a salt) structure to glutamine. One has a carboxy group  COOH where the other has an amide group CONH2. Cacycle (talk) 22:14, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: What's the difference between l-glutamate and glutamine?

message: please add this to the picture. Thanks!! 76.174.42.22 (talk) 04:17, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  please add carbon alpha beta gamma so i can see which carbon is gamma 

message: This article talk page was automatically added with  banner as it falls under :Category:Food or one of its subcategories. If you find this addition an error, Kindly undo the changes and update the inappropriate categories if needed. The bot was instructed to tagg these articles upon consenus from WikiProject Food and drink. You can find the related request for tagging here . Maximum and carefull attention was done to avoid any wrongly tagging any categories , but mistakes may happen... If you have concerns , please inform on the project talk page -- TinucherianBot (talk) 17:31, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: [[WP:FOOD|WikiProject Food and drink]] Tagging

message: Can someone please check the external link from the sentence "Some protein-rich plant foods also serve as sources."? I'm not sure, but I don't see anything on the reference site talking about plant foods, and instead seems to be indirectly selling "nutrition supplements". 
--Hellsop (talk) 14:35, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nutrients 

message: Under "History" the article says "This compound was discovered in 1908 by the professor Kikunae Ikeda" but:
peptideguide.com says "Glutamic acid is a non-essential amino acid, was first isolated from wheat gluten in 1866 by the German chemist Karl Ritthausen. The chemical structure of the amino acid was identified in 1890." at http://www.peptideguide.com/amino-acids/glutamic-acid.html
medterms.com states it was isolated from wheat gluten in 1866: http://www.medterms.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=22824
As does this article published in 1948: http://blog.modernmechanix.com/2007/09/08/pills-that-increase-your-intelligence/
While the current "History" section is interesting, it would seem that it's a particular chapter in the history of glutamic acid regarding taste, seaweed and oriental food. But it currently reads as if glutamic's history starts at 1908.
ChuckEsterbrook (talk) 06:40, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Good job finding this error.  I think you should feel free to correct it.  delldot ∇. 23:21, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Yeah, it's a wiki, after all... Be bold!. Cacycle (talk) 00:07, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  History 

message: The term "Free Glutamic Acid" is used only once in the entire article and it is used "in passing".  The average reader could not infer the meaning of the qualifier "Free" in this context.  Could someone with knowledge on the subject (not me) explain the meaning of "Free Glutamic Acid" vs "Glutamic Acid"?  Thanks.  Travis28 (talk) 21:58, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I am a biochemist. I have never come across the term "Free Glutamic Acid". Glutamate is transported freely in the blood stream. I have found the word "free" in the article. I will delete the word "free" to avoid any confusion.Carstensen (talk) 13:16, 30 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  I just came to think that whoever added the word "free" maybe did so to distinguish glutamate found in a protein from the free amino acid. I don't know. Either way I have deleted the word "free" to avoid any confusion.Carstensen (talk) 13:19, 30 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I added it back before reading this section, but I think it is necessary.  Maybe "free" is the wrong word, but it is important to distinguish the unbound amino acid from the glutamatic acid that is found in every sort of protein.  I have added a sentence to try to clarify the meaning here.  Regards, Looie496 (talk) 17:34, 30 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  I think your addition is better than my deletion. It is now obvious what is meant by free glutamic acid.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Carstensen (talk • contribs) 13:56, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Free Glutamic Acid 

message: What's the molecular formula?
Eg: Phenylalanine has a chemical formula of C9H11NO2 but a molecular forumla of C6H5CH2CHCOOH
~ender 2014-10-05 3:13:AM MST — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.223.87.212 (talk • contribs) 10:15, 5 October 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: for the condensed formula see here Jytdog (talk) 13:14, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

text: OP posted this on several amino acid pages; please see discussion here: Talk:Tryptophan#Molecular_Formula Jytdog (talk) 14:19, 6 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Molecular Formula 

message: I'd like to note that today I created glutamate (neurotransmitter), initializing it by copying and pasting the contents of the "Neurotransmitter" section of this article.  I have added a "main" link; over the coming days I plan to simplify the contents of that section to avoid duplication. I think perhaps it would also be good to add some dab info at the top of this article, but I won't do that immediately. Looie496 (talk) 14:25, 3 December 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Spinning off [[glutamate (neurotransmitter)]] 

message: Substituted at 16:25, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Assessment comment

message: The reference for glutamate not readily passing the blood brain barrier was tagged as possibly being an unreliable source because supplements to The Journal of Nutrition might not be peer reviewed, but as can be seen here, they are:  I've added another reference to a supplement of The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, which is also peer reviewed:  and  --tronvillain (talk) 20:23, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Supplement Peer Review 

message: I have moved this talk topic to the Monosodium glutamate talk page, since it seems more appropriate there. --(talk) 21:56, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  L-glutamate vs D-glutamate vs MSG 

message: The article says "Glutamic acid can exist in three optical isomers, including the dextrorotatory L-form, d(−), and l(+)". 
Surely that should be two optical isomers, namely the dextrorotatory L-form or L(+) form and the levorotatory D-form or D(−) ? 
The quoted source for the claim that there are three is Webster's Third New International Dictionary of the English Language, which doesn't sound like the best source of chemistry information to me.
--HairyDan (talk) 11:00, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Optical isomers