Talk:AP5
 | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Structure[edit]
Structure of APV is incorrect...the P needs an extra double bond O. thanks81.179.65.179 03:25, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
Structure and name do not match[edit]
The structure shown does NOT match the name of 2-amino-5-phosphonovaleric acid. Which is correct?--ChemSpiderMan (talk) 02:09, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
- The name was right (see here). I created a new image. --NEUROtiker (talk) 13:44, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
The structure you've drawn is for (2R)-2-amino-5-phosphonopentanoic acid so you might want to edit the name now--ChemSpiderMan (talk) 05:48, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
- Which name do you mean? The name of the picture? --NEUROtiker (talk) 22:45, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
The article text itslef is rather confusing "APV (2-amino-5-phosphonovaleric acid; AP5, 2-amino-5-phosphonopentanoate) is a selective NMDA receptor (NMDAR) antagonist that competitively inhibits the active site of NMDAR. Its chemical name is R-2-amino-5-phosphonopentanoate." The structure is the neutral acid not the carboxylate so somewhere the name of that compound should be displayed as "(2R)-2-amino-5-phosphonopentanoic acid" . So, maybe edit it to be ""APV ((2R)-2-amino-5-phosphonovaleric acid; AP5, (2R)-2-amino-5-phosphonopentanoate) is a selective NMDA receptor (NMDAR) antagonist that competitively inhibits the active site of NMDAR. Its chemical name is (2R)-2-amino-5-phosphonopentanoate."" Thoughts?--ChemSpiderMan (talk) 23:13, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
- Ah, now I see what you meant. I changed it the way you proposed. In addition I deleted the sentence "Its chemical name is (2R)-2-amino-5-phosphonopentanoate.", I think its redundant. Do you agree? --NEUROtiker (talk) 21:31, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
- Yes, looks like we're there...--ChemSpiderMan (talk) 23:35, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
Name[edit]
Should somehow mention that the V is a roman numeral five, thus it is "Ay pee five" not "Ay pee vee" — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 22:36, 23 October 2008 (UTC)