We have an electron transport chain with the final e- acceptor as SO4 2-. We say this is an anaerobic process, or specifically a case of anaerobic respiration. Elsewhere, as with fermentation and glycolysis, we have anaerobic processes that do not require oxygen. Would it be more appropriate to call these processes with the final e- acceptor as anything other than oxygen to be pseudo-anaerobic? I say this as it seems misleading to call a process anaerobic that inherently is composed of aerobic processes.
$\begingroup$
$\endgroup$
2
-
$\begingroup$ Does this organism grow in the absense of molecular oxygen in the environment? $\endgroup$– user40950Commented Oct 1, 2019 at 23:19
-
$\begingroup$ Okay, thank you user1136. I was misled by the book I read. "The Krebs cycle and the electron transport chain both require oxygen to produce ATP and are collectively known as aerobic cellular respiration." Which I interpreted as the Krebs cycle and the electron transport chain always require oxygen, whether the end process is dubbed anaerobic or aerobic depending on the final e- acceptor. $\endgroup$– neurosciencecalcCommented Oct 2, 2019 at 22:09
Add a comment
|
1 Answer
$\begingroup$
$\endgroup$
Because oxygen is not the majority of the energy.
Krebs cycle relies on sugars. Other processes use oxygen but can do without it or primarily use carbon fuels. So they are called anaerobic.
