Neurochemical Research (1) 229--23I (t976)

Comments

N O M E N C L A T U R E P R O P O S A L FOR P R O T E I N S OF THE N E R V O U S S Y S T E M CLAUDE F. BAXTER AND FRANK L . MARGOLIS Neurochemistry Laboratories (151B2) Veterans Administration Hospital Sepulveda, California 91343 and Roche Institute of Molecular Biology Nutley, New Jersey 07110

W e hope that this j o u r n a l can be of service to the scientific c o m m u n i t y in m a n y w a y s . O n e o f o u r aims is to accomplish this in as flexible a w a y as possible. A c o m m e n t s section m a y be one form of increasing flexibility. T h e r e m u s t be m a n y w o r t h y scientific c o m m u n i c a t i o n s that do not fit in the traditional f o r m s of full or short papers but would be suitable as c o m m e n t s . A l t h o u g h we are not looking for controversial subjects (please do not attack the editors unless you h a v e to), views e x p r e s s e d do not h a v e to agree with, or represent, the views of t h e editors.--(Ed.)

In September of 1972 a meeting on Proteins in the Nervous System was held in Cortona, Italy. During the course of this meeting, it became apparent that the number of proteins isolated from the nervous system and apparently specific to the nervous system was increasing rapidly. Several investigators made reports about proteins that they considered to be " n e w " and assigned to them new names on the basis of their own fancy. Yet evidence accumulated also that some of these " n e w " proteins might be equivalent to previously reported brain proteins with other names. The resulting confusion and uncertainty, so apparent in 1972, has not diminished in the intervening years. It indicates a real need for integrated action. An optimal system of nomenclature for proteins of the nervous system would follow the computer-compatible system prepared for enzymes (IUB). However, a prerequisite for such a code is a detailed knowledge of function. Unfortunately, this is not known for most proteins of the nervous system. Alternately, a system of nomenclature could be based 229 O t976 Plenum Publishing Corporation, 227 West 17th Street, New York, N~Y. 10011. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, microfilming, recording, or otherwise, without written permission of the publisher.

230

BAXTER AND MARGOLIS

upon biological and chemical characterization. However, such nomenclature would be subject to repeated changes. Even a homogeneous protein may contain unsuspected impurities, and the nomenclature would be in a constant state of flux as our knowledge of specific biological and chemical parameters increases. There remains the possibility of a pragmatic approach to nomenclature in which a protein is identified by an operational term based upon characteristics that are neither biological nor chemical but that are rational and consistent. With this objective in mind, we have formulated a computer-compatible triplet code of six digits to identify proteins of the nervous system: (1). The first two digits would indicate the year in which the protein was first definitively described and evidence presented for its unique or selective location in neural tissue. The date and priority would be based upon the final manuscript acceptance date. (2). Digits 3-5 would consist of three letters which could be chosen to represent the initials of the principal discoverer of the protein, the institution where the work was done, or the journal in which the first definitive report of the protein was published. (3). The last digit would designate the sequential discovery of proteins of the nervous system by the same author from the same institution or reported in the same journal, depending upon the system chosen for digits 3-5, Thus, 65 BWM 1 would represent the S-100 protein reported in 1965 by Blake W. Moore. In order to make such a system meaningful and to avoid duplication of effort, a method needs to be devised whereby the same protein reported by different laboratories can be identified as such at the earliest possible time. It would be necessary to establish a "clearing house" under the auspices of an international body such as the ASN, ISN, or ISBR, and a laboratory designated (commercial or research) which would systematically and uniformly test the uniqueness of new proteins in some of the following categories: (1). Molecular weight and subunit information. (2). Isoelectric point. (3). Information with regard to amino acid composition and end-group analysis. (4). Immunological characteristics. (5). Associated small molecules and nonprotein components. (6). Quantitative estimate of specificity in nervous system. (7). Cellular localization and regional restrictions in the nervous system.

NOMENCLATURE FOR PROTEINS OF THE NERVOUS SYSTEM

231

(8). Subcellular localization. (9). Biological activity or function. This list could be expanded as needed. Once uniqueness is established for a protein by several criteria, the name of the protein would be entered in an official register of Proteins in the Nervous System and used as such in future publications. The projected register would list all of the reported properties of all proteins found in the nervous system and would appear annually in the official organ of the ASN, ISN, ISBR, or perhaps in this journal, depending upon which organization sponsors the program. A more frequently updated listing might be made available on request through the auspices of the Brain Information Service located at UCLA.

Nomenclature proposal for proteins of the nervous system.

We hope that this journal can be of service to the scientific community in many ways. One of our aims is to accomplish, this in as flexible a way as p...
129KB Sizes 0 Downloads 0 Views