Skip to main content
Chemistry

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

3
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ There is a difference between how we discovered that proteins are largely amino acid polymers and how we can now observe that this is what they are. You describe the process of discovery but we can now observe many complete protein structures from high resolution X-ray analysis of their crystal structures. $\endgroup$
    – matt_black
    Commented May 1 at 10:50
  • $\begingroup$ To all: I know there is a difference between how this fact was discovered versus how it can be verified now. I don’t care how it was discovered, and I only went down this path because I don’t know X-ray or any other analysis. But if you have X-ray or NMR or other data that shows this I will be glad to look! $\endgroup$
    – powerful_bob
    Commented May 1 at 13:15
  • $\begingroup$ It wasn't always accepted that proteins are linear polymers of amino acids. A competing theory, the (now discredited) cyclol hypothesis due mainly to Dorothy Wrinch held (some) sway until the 1950s, Dorothy Hodgkin being a major debunker. $\endgroup$
    – tomd
    Commented May 17 at 8:18