Everyday Scientist

p-r-o-d-a-a

February 7, 2007 at 11:05 pm | sam | literature, science community

I’ve written a few posts where I criticize/make fun of papers, and figures, and acronyms. And some people didn’t like it. And some people thought I was snobby. And some people thought I was wrong.

This is my apology post. And I will apologize by making fun of myself. (Easy to do…)

I am a co-author on a recent paper: “Long-Wavelength Analogue of PRODAN: Synthesis and Properties of Anthradan, a Fluorophore with a 2,6-Donor-Acceptor Anthracene Structure.” Basically, we made and characterized an anthracene version of a popular fluorophore, 6-propionyl-2-dimethylaminonaphthalene (PRODAN). The point of the paper doesn’t matter so much here, but I have to make fun of our nomenclature: “PRODAN”—or even its word form, prodan—is an acronym of the structure, with the “N” standing for the naphthalene in the structure. So why would “Anthradan” make any sense as a name? Does the “n” in Anthradan still stand for “naphthalene”? Clearly not. A decidedly silly name.

Actually, I had suggested the name “PRODAA” for our new structure, in order to fit with the previous naming scheme. But my advisor reasonably criticized my plan: How do you even pronounce PRODAA?? OK, so my idea was even worse. “Anthradan” won simply on the grounds that it was able to be pronounced.

(OK, so some may see this not as a mea culpa post, but as a veiled attempt at promoting my own research and paper. But, gimme a break: I’m trying to make fun of myself here without pointing out all the real flaws in my research. That would be unfair: I have insider information!)