WYSIWYG

This is the time to make biology.se popular by answering all coronavirus associated questions :D

On the other hand, I spent more than an hour doing some derivation for this question. After scribbling on many pages, I stumbled upon the very simple fact that I first missed which makes the derivation very easy.

@theforestecologist Recently I got a lot of votes for this post. It is not even a great research. Most people would know about common wasps. I myself am not an expert in this area and it just took a few minutes to answer this question. Did not expect so many votes.

Sometimes absolute shitty questions get loads of upvotes.

Not just answers. Some very well-posed and well-researched questions don't get many votes just because nobody understands them well.

@theforestecologist Well.. that happens all the time. In some answers where I put in a lot of effort, don't get that many votes whereas something not so great and cursory gets a lot of votes.

and kmm is also participating but that just makes three of us.

@Chris I think there are a lot of items piled up in the review (especially close) queue. I see that apart from David and I there is hardly any regular user who is active.

I can "vote" to undelete your question but that would be my choice. I don't see a reason to do it.

So all I can tell you is: write a new question. It is not a big deal. Not as if you have been asked to re-write your thesis! Your original question also lacks content and you would anyway have to work on it. So work on a new fresh post!

There is a reason why people don't share their identities in sites like these. Here, we are just users who participate in a site about biology.

@user You have my sympathies for the bad phase in life you are going through but it has got nothing to do with your question. I don't see how a frivolous thing like a deleted/closed stackexchange question would affect your life so much. And even if it does in some way that I fail to understand, it is not acceptable to lower the standards for a user just because they are going through a bad phase in their life.

@user I am not a mod and cannot do anything about the deleted question. Low score closed questions are automatically deleted. However, I stand by my decision to put on hold. Please understand the reason why your question was put on hold. Provide some background, do some research on your own, make the rationale of the question clear etc. Ask a new question. It isn't really that difficult.

@user Yes..

Is this question on topic in Gardening & Landscaping?

@AliceHobbs good.. So this means that p450 detoxifies. However, if there was an enzyme that in fact potentiates the neo-nicotinoid insecticide, then it would further increase toxicity. As you now know that there are many p450 enzymes. It is possible (although I am not aware of it) that two enzymes lead to opposite consequences. Then the net effect may be a balance of the two enzymes. However, there is no such complexity here.

However, there cannot be a "+" edge between p450 and toxicity.

If you were to draw a direct edge from fungicide to toxicity you would have a +

Azole by inhibiting p450 is further increasing the toxicity (of itself or other drugs).

Now, normally p450 system is involved in detoxification (unless the specific cases of the opposite are mentioned).

Not all fungicides inhibit p450 so firstly, such a generalization is incorrect.

And possibly humans too.

These fungicides also seem to have the same inhibitory activity in insects too.

Azole fungicides are actually inhibitors of some cytochrome p450 enzymes (and hence kill the fungi).

@AliceHobbs Yes there are instances in which the P450 system can make the xenobiotic more toxic (ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5402866). However, if the diagram talks about such specific cases it should have mentioned the exact enzyme and the xenobiotic.

@AliceHobbs I don't have knowledge about this so I cannot comment on what should be the interaction. But you get the point, right?

Likewise, immune response should suppress the virus not help it.

So you see here that the effects and symbols are inconsistent.

And diagrams are supposed to help understanding the process not complicate it.

@AliceHobbs check the figure legends of the textbook. If it doesn't rationalize the diagram then basically it is a shitty diagram.

In these diagrams each interaction is independent of others.

However, the primary job of P450 system is to detoxify. So the interaction from p450 to toxicity should be "-".

@AliceHobbs I don't know what pathways are you talking in particular. There can be different kinds of representations for different processes.

Okay, so we are clear up till here?

Then a positive interactions from one node to the other means that the former promotes the production/occurrence of the latter.

If we forget that level of complexity and just think about purely regulatory networks i.e. there are no conversions; just regulatory interactions.

There are other arrows that are directed from a node to an edge. These represent the regulatory effect. For e.g. an enzyme increasing the rate of a certain reaction.

Conversion does not have a negative or positive aspect.

In biochemical network diagrams node to node arrows (edges) represent conversion.

These are typically represented by an arrow.

As you know chemical reactions cause a molecule to convert to another.

In biochemical networks nodes are biomolecules.

Usually a node represents an entity of the system and an edge represents an interaction.

However you have to be clear what each node represents.

In which graphs like that are very common.

I used to work on systems biology.

I understand. But the most common usage is that + denotes a positive effect (causal) on the on the node where the edge is directed to (conversely for -). However, I cannot be sure about this diagram because it doesn't really rationalize these interactions. For example, I would expect immune response to suppress the virus and P450 system to reduce toxicity. Both these interactions should have a - but they have a +. The premise is, hence, unclear. By published text, I mean something published in a book or a peer-reviewed article (at least a place that has figure legends).

I'm voting to close this question as off-topic because it is based on a non-standard and incorrect premise that is not even a part of a published text.