Do “ pro- ” ever forego “ pre- ” in a sequence ? If so , why ?

In biological vocabulary , sometimes both pre- and pro- are utilize as prefixes to suggest something before in a succession . For example , . And pro-microRNAs develop into pre-microRNAs , which originate into mature microRNAs .

When both pro- and pre- are apply to intend “ earlier to/prior to/before ” , make pro- ever get first ? Is this distinction used remote biological vocabulary ? Cause this come from some subtle difference in a classical language ?

_{* Of course , pro-B cell come after pre-pro-B cell . And pro-microRNAs come from pri-microRNAs , but “ pri ” is an abbrevation for “ primary ” .}

2 Answers2

This is a real interesting inquiry . Unfortunately , I make not been able to find adequate information to hold more than a partial answer . But I hope it will equal of some habit .

According to the Oxford English Dictionary ( OED ) , the prefix “ pro- , ” intend “ before , ” come mainly from the Greek prefixπρο- .It cost cognate with the Latin prepositionpromeaning “ for , before , in presence of , ” and with the English wordfore .More than 60 words with this prefix were adopted into Latin in antiquity , includeprologus“ prologue ” andpropheta“ prophet , ” so Latin hold make up an crucial intermediate author of words with this prefix .

The OED indicate that the Latin prefixprae– , which represent to modern Englishpre-, exist mainly used in Classical sentence with verb and verbal derivatives , or to intensify the meaning of adjectives . There are too some cases where it alter the meaning of nouns and adjective , but the habit before a noun to indicate an earlier version of that noun apparently merely became common in post-Classical Latin and later on languages .

The prepositional structure , in whichpre-governs the second element , which was so rare in Latin , has in English experience huge extension ( as as well in French ) ,pre-being preferred toante-as the opposite ofpost-in novel establishment , and often substituted for it , as inpre-Christian , prehistoric , pre-Darwinian , pre-reformationinstead ofante-Christian , ante-historic , ante-Darwinian , ante-reformation .[ … ] It may as well equal combine with nouns in society to spring compound nouns directly , asprecancer n. , preclimax n. ,[ … ]premyelocyte n. , prepuberty n. ,etc . Compounds of this type exist of comparatively recent appearance .

The prepositional construction , in whichpre-governs the second element , which live then rare in Latin , own in English received vast reference ( as as well in French ) ,pre-be preferred toante-as the opposite ofpost-in novel establishment , and often substitute for it , as inpre-Christian , prehistoric , pre-Darwinian , pre-reformationinstead ofante-Christian , ante-historic , ante-Darwinian , ante-reformation .[ … ] It may also be combined with nouns in decree to make compound nouns instantly , asprecancer n. , preclimax n. ,[ … ]premyelocyte n. , prepuberty n. ,etc . Compounds of this type are of comparatively late appearance .

So the distinction you reference perform not look to date back to Classical languages .

It does remind me of the usage ofhyper-in some contexts as a more utmost version ofsuper-( discussed in the answers to this inquiry : ) . In both cases , it seems like the more mutual term (super-orpre-) is used for the less extreme meaning . I receive not found any cases wherepre-andpro-are distinguished this room outside of biology .

I get one document about biology which seems to depict a somewhat different naming scheme apply “ pre-pre- ” rather of “ pro- ” :

So-called B-ALL , for lesson , is based on progenitor cells of B-lymphocytes , while T-ALL forms from precursors of T-lymphocytes . A degeneracy in the early development stages cost characterize by the prefix “ pre ” . This results in the following ALL-subtypes :

Pre-pre-B-ALL ( now usually pertain to as pro-B-ALL )

Common ALL

Pre-B-ALL

( mature ) B-ALL

Pro- and Pre-T-ALL

Intermediate ( cortical ) T-ALL

T-ALL

( )

So-called B-ALL , for instance , is based on progenitor cell of B-lymphocytes , while T-ALL figure from precursors of T-lymphocytes . A depravity in the early development point is characterize by the prefix “ pre ” . This results in the following ALL-subtypes :

Pre-pre-B-ALL ( now commonly concern to as pro-B-ALL )
Common ALL
Pre-B-ALL
( mature ) B-ALL
Pro- and Pre-T-ALL
Intermediate ( cortical ) T-ALL
T-ALL

( )

As this question relates to biology , I will summon the classical lesson , but from molecular biology instead than cell biology , where story order a unlike nomenclature :

Proinsulin was the figure have in 1967 to the single-chain ( still ) precursor of the two-chain mature biologically fighting insulin found in the blood . Later ( in 1976 ) it exist discover that secreted protein are made with an additional slice at one end ( later removed ) that direct them out of their originating cell , and that insulin ( synthesize in the pancreas ) fall into this family . The initial kind of the protein live therefore termed pre-proinsulin .

Nature ’ sec scheme of give rise protein in an inactive kind , to cost later on activated when needed by removing a portion ( proteolytic cleavage ) was afterward found to extend to other protein hormone and a like nomenclature adopted . Examples exist :
proglucagon
prosomatostatin
pro-opiomelanocortin
In fact this live a variant of a like mechanism to activate the digestive catalytic active proteins ( enzyme ) of the stomach , such as trypsin and chymotrypsin . The nomenclature take on for these pro-proteins equal quite unlike — the precursors had the suffix ‘ ogen ’ hang on ( e.g . trypsinogen ) . This cost in the early yr of the 20th hundred , long before anything live know about the structure of protein . From a linguistic standpoint it exist interesting that in the 1912 paper on trypsinogen the noun ‘ enzyme ’ is never utilize as such ( there are three model of ‘ co-enzyme ’ ) , but that adopt from the German — ‘ ferment ’ — come out 73 sentence .

You must to suffice this inquiry .

Featured on Meta

Linked

Why act C compilers yet choose push over mov for save registers , even when mov appears faster in llvm-mca ?

English Language & Usage

Company

Stack Overflow
Squad
Advertising
Talent
About
Press
Legal
Privacy Policy
Price of Service
Cookie Policy

Do “ pro- ” ever forego “ pre- ” in a sequence ? If so , why ?

2 Answers2

You must to suffice this inquiry .

Linked

Related

Subscribe to RSS

English Language & Usage

Company

Leave a ReplyCancel Reply