Talk:Hexose

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Molecular Biology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Molecular Biology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Molecular BiologyWikipedia:WikiProject Molecular BiologyTemplate:WikiProject Molecular BiologyMolecular Biology
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Molecular and Cell Biology task force (assessed as Mid-importance).

Untitled

In Lehninger: Hexoses act also as lewis bases donating electrons. E.g. during nucleophilic attack of MgATP by glucose catalyzed by Hexokinase. I've never read anything about it being an acid i.e. electron acceptor. Really need a citation for that part of the article. Any thoughts?

---

Of these, only three occur in nature: D-glucose, D-galactose, and D-mannose.

Of these D isomers all, except altrose, are naturally occurring. No L isomers are found naturally.

I found this two sentences in the article, in the same Aldohexoses section. What does that mean, could somebody explain a bit further please?Fufu Fang 21:36, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's a simplification commonly done, as those are by far the commonest, can't be bothered to correct that, as I can't find the example of the altrose (remember it is found on some marine protophyta or such). Dreg743 04:41, 22 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why are there no ketohexoses with the carbonyl group at position 3 instead of position 2? Icek 01:24, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Merger proposal

I had read the page Aldohexose a while ago, and added the mnemonic device found there page also. Later I realized that I should have cited a source for the statement that it is due to Hermann Emil Fischer, so I searched for it online and found that the same mnemonic exists on thise page too. Then it became evident that an Aldohexose section already exists here, and contains essentially the same material as the Aldohexose page itself. Seems like the Aldohexose page should simply redirect to Hexose#Aldohexose, but I'm new around here and not sure how things work, so I proposed a merger instead. Bbi5291 (talk) 00:14, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose, keep article move information from hexose except for a summary. Plasmic Physics (talk) 12:32, 12 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Doesn't look like there is support for a merge, so I will remove the templates. --Kkmurray (talk) 18:31, 21 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ketohexoses section problems.

The fructose Fischer projection differs from the others in not having a letter "C" depicting the carbon double bonded to the oxygen. This is a distracting inconsistency that could even cause confusion.

The citation on the D-psicose Fischer projection seems (I took a few minutes to scroll down through the whole gigantic data-stuffed page) not to contain the Fischer projection shown.

It says, "Below are depiction of the eight isomers in an alternative style:", but wouldn't it be better to say instead what style of depiction (Natta projection?) they are in?

Last, but not least, it's far from straightforward to understand how these Natta (?) projections relate to the Fischer projections, and I think someone should add an explanation. It's awesome that the reader can compare the two, but it's extremely puzzling that D-psicose has its hydroxyls all on the right in the Fischer projection, whereas in the Natta projection the hydroxyls are neither all on the same side, nor all sticking up out of the page. I speculated that what they have in common in the Natta projection is all being on the anticlockwise side when the eye is facing the end of the molecule, imagined in three dimensions, that is nearest the double bonded oxygen, but I couldn't get further than that. Many readers will have the same experience, or will not even get as far as I did.

Also, shouldn't there be either an analogous (to the awesome aldohexose section) set of binary numbers, and perhaps a mnemonic for the four names, or if not, a reason for why there are no binary numbers needed? Polar Apposite (talk) 22:57, 12 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]