Specifically, I don't like descriptions of the amino acid
residues D and E as acidic residues, and K and R as basic residues.
As Jon points out, D and E are negatively charged at physiological
pH, and so they are BASES if they are anything! Conversely K, R are
hydronated (whoops going into mega-pedant mode there, let's say
protonated), and therefore ACIDS...!!
What's wrong with calling D and E, anionic residues, and K and R
cationic residues? Maybe I'm being a pedant...? But a lot of people
seem to be unaware of what the words mean (as opposed to just
using the terms as jargon, but actually understanding what's what)
judging by the number of times people to correct me when I call D an
aspartate residue (which it is!) as opposed to and an aspartic acid
residue (which it [almost always] isn't ;-)). Or am I missing something
fundamental? Is anyone serious happy with effectively saying:
"Aspartic acid is so-called because it acts as a base?"
Byeeeeee,
-- Simon
_________________________________________________________________________
|
| ,_ o Simon M. Brocklehurst,
| / //\, Oxford Centre for Molecular Sciences, Department of Biochemistry,
| \>> | University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
| \\, E-mail: smb@bioch.ox.ac.uk | WWW: http://nmra.ocms.ox.ac.uk/~smb/
|________________________________________________________________________