Slashdot Mirror


Longest Chemical Name: 64,060 letters

mycro writes "A new article on Wikipedia shows the longest chemical name, reaching 64,060 letters. Methionylalanylthreonyl...leucine is a chemical name for enaptin, a nuclear envelope protein found in human myocytes and synapses, which is made up of 8,797 amino acids. It is involved in the maintenance of nuclear organization and structural integrity, tethering the cell nucleus to the cytoskeleton by interacting with the nuclear envelope and with F-actin in the cytoplasm."

28 of 133 comments (clear)

  1. Easy Paradox by poopdeville · · Score: 2, Funny

    People are just going to call it "The chemical compound that cannot be named in less than 60,000 characters." Whoops.

    --
    After all, I am strangely colored.
    1. Re:Easy Paradox by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Or those who RTFA would call it enaptin.

  2. With an article like that... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    ...no wonder nobody has anything to say yet. We're all still trying to get our brains past the first sentence.

  3. Spelling bee by regcrusher · · Score: 5, Funny

    I dare the contestants of the Scrips-Howard spelling bee to get that one. "May I hear that word in a sentence?" "Uh...... (nervous) no."

  4. I blame IUPAC nomenclature by Dancin_Santa · · Score: 4, Informative

    The problem with this kind of naming scheme is that no valuable information can be quickly gleaned from the name itself. Neither the function nor form of the amino acid can be determined or inferred easily without resorting to computer-aided decryption of the name itself.

    Something easier to remember (not an acronym of this long-ass acronym) that clearly explained the form and function of the amino acid would be much more useful.

    In programmer terms, this IUPAC nomenclature is like Hungarian notation, putting too much information about the data into the name without sufficiently ascribing useful information to it.

    1. Re:I blame IUPAC nomenclature by Dr.+GeneMachine · · Score: 5, Informative
      This is no IUPAC problem - this long name is simply the sequence. If you have a functional protein, you have other nomenclatures at hand, for example the IEC classification for enzymes. Biochemists have developed several systems of nomenclature, which are actually useful (Overview here. IUPAC has its place for small molecules organic chemists are concerned with.

      By the way, if you want a longer and equally useless chemical name, you can always spell out the nucleotid sequence of a whole chromosome in full nomenclature.

      --
      This comment does not exist.
    2. Re:I blame IUPAC nomenclature by Dr.+GeneMachine · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Unfortunately the name - which is simply the sequence - does not give you information bout different conformers, at least not in a straightforward way. If you wrote out the sequence of the prion protein in that way, it would not reveal its "prionness". You'd have to do statistical analyses for that, and even they aren't that accurate.

      --
      This comment does not exist.
    3. Re:I blame IUPAC nomenclature by jd · · Score: 2, Funny
      This reminds me of the attempt to "standardize" element names by converting each digit of the atomic number into Latin. Needless to say, it never became popular, and most serious scientists quietly disposed of it.


      Besides, the name can't even be used in Scrabble.

      --
      It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
    4. Re:I blame IUPAC nomenclature by BillyBlaze · · Score: 2, Informative

      I don't think anybody suggested that would be done for all elements, or permanently for any. It's just so there's a way to talk about the newly-discovered ones until people stop fighting over whom it should be named after.

  5. oh please by moosesocks · · Score: 2, Funny

    it's like the linguistic equivilant to an irrational number. brilliant!

    --
    -- If you try to fail and succeed, which have you done? - Uli's moose
  6. Spelling? by Phleg · · Score: 2, Funny

    If someone spelt it wrong, how would we know?

    --
    No comment.
    1. Re:Spelling? by thegrassyknowl · · Score: 4, Funny

      I say - I think I might change my Ph.D topic to study that chemmical. Write it in your thesis a few times and there is a two-volume manuscript that is full mostly of a few instances of one chemical name. I bet that's why the name is so long... whoever discovered it decided that he needed a space filler for his thesis...

      --
      I drink to make other people interesting!
  7. Hmm... by schmink182 · · Score: 3, Informative

    Occurences:
    a - 5940
    b - 0
    c - 1946
    d - 238
    e - 3210
    f - 0
    g - 2738
    h - 1192
    i - 2666
    j - 0
    k - 0
    l - 14645
    m - 1938
    n - 3195
    o - 1457
    p - 1398
    q - 0
    r - 2771
    s - 3069
    t - 3575
    u - 3273
    v - 430
    w - 0
    x - 0
    y - 10379
    z - 0

    Nope...it's probably not random.

    1. Re:Hmm... by Farq+Fenderson · · Score: 2, Insightful

      But it is highly redundant:

      $ du -sh chem
      68k chem
      $ gzip chem
      $ du -sh chem.gz
      12k chem.gz

    2. Re:Hmm... by Fizzl · · Score: 2, Funny

      It's encrypted!
      See freq analysis at http://www.fizzl.net/projects/crypto/

      The plaintext is simply:
      wioglcnteaeante ... utemrcetemrcetemrceteeihulni

      I think I also saw Cthulhu there somewhere...

    3. Re:Hmm... by dillon_rinker · · Score: 2, Informative

      You are correct, but "a lot" is not "most." Most of the compression comes from the redundancy. To be precise:

      There are 26 characters, as you point out. On the other hand, as the grandparent poster points out, only 18 are used.

      log2(18)=4.17 (to the largest hundredth)

      So you only need 4.17 bits to represent 26 characters.

      8 bits/4.7 bits = 1.9

      So using a more compact bit-level representation of characters, you could achieve a compression ratio of 1:1.9. This would reduce the file from 68K to 36K.

      The comment indicated final result was 12K. Reducing from 436K to 12K is a compression ratio of 1:3. The total compression ratio is 1:5.6

      Guess I don't have enough to do today...

  8. Research papers... by Oyume · · Score: 2, Funny

    Wow, this will REALLY help masters and doctorate students who have to write research papers with a minimum page count...

    Jds

  9. Comment haiku by AlpineR · · Score: 4, Funny

    Methionylal-
    anylthreonyl... oh just
    call me enaptin.

  10. What about titin? by syntax · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Why doesn't Titin have the longest official chemical name? As a 27,000 amino acid protein, I think it has a bit of an edge.

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cm d= Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=12187564&dopt=Abstrac t

    1. Re:What about titin? by brian0918 · · Score: 2

      fixed link: link

  11. In related news... by hoggoth · · Score: 4, Funny

    The artist formerly known as , formerly known as Prince, has changed his name to the 64,060 symbol long name of a protein referred to as 'Methionylalanylthreonyl...leucine'.

    His upcoming album will have a 10 page foldout with his name printed on it.

    --
    - For the complete works of Shakespeare: cat /dev/random (may take some time)
  12. God? by Deliveranc3 · · Score: 2, Funny

    As an atheist I must say this seems like a possible arguement for intelligent design I mean LOOK AT IT!

    I guess I'd need to look into it's functionality but that doesn't seem like something that just SPRINGS into existence.

    On the positive side all the sci-fi where they talk about advanced races with overly complicated DNA well they need to move forward right now...Like when we actually got to mars.

  13. Yeah, and? by SoCalEd · · Score: 2, Funny

    News for Nerds? Check.

    Stuff that Matters? Um... Well... Oh, nevermind...

    Slow news day, methinks.
    --
    Insert witty comment *here*. I'm fresh out of wit...
  14. Worst Submission Ever by Salis · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Whoever created the Wikipedia article is a moron. If they were going to expand out the IUPUC form for some protein (a molecule which has its own nomenclature btw) then they should have chosen Dystrophin.

    The Dystrophin exon (coding sequence) is over 2.4 MILLION bases or 800,000 amino acids long.

    Using the moron's system of naming proteins, Dystrophin's name would be ~3.5 MILLION characters long.

    Wow and this made it past the Slashdot editors. Good job guys! Maybe it's because the editors have no clue about most science. Maybe they need to hire someone who does.

    --
    Favorite /. tagline: "On the eighth day, God created FORTRAN." And it was good.
    1. Re:Worst Submission Ever by isorox · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I'm willing to forgive the editors on this one, when you compare it to the obvious trolls, astroturfs and non-storys that make it into other catagorys than "It's funny, laugh"

  15. Did anyone else see that? by whitetiger0990 · · Score: 2, Funny

    Yes it may have been vandalism and was corrected but this vandalized version just got me laughing.

    "I think we forgot an "e" in there someplace..."

    This little tidbit was the most interesting part of this whole thing.

    --
    You have been warned.
  16. Wow.... by Frodo+Crockett · · Score: 2, Funny

    Take that, pneumonoultramicroscopicsilicovolcanoconiosis!

    --
    "The newly born animals are then whisked off for a quick run through a giant baking oven." --heard on Food Network
  17. Methionylalanylthreonyl...leucine... by PapaBoojum · · Score: 2, Funny

    Would be a kickin' name for a rock band.

    Or not.