letter to the editor
Let’s Preserve Proper Terminology
Editor’s note: In the phrase “low abundant proteins”, both low and abundant
he use of the terminology “low abundant proteins” rather than “low abundance proteins” is becoming increasingly popular in the proteomics literature. It is not clear where this started, but I suspect it is being perpetuated because some people think, “It doesn’t sound right to me, but if others are saying it, it must be right.” This issue probably does not warrant being the subject of a “The Writer’s Art” column in the Sun-
T
day paper, but I would maintain that it is a grammatically incorrect practice that the Journal of Proteome Research should not perpetuate. Would anyone argue that the term “low density polyethylene” should be “low dense polyethylene”, or that “low brilliance color” should be “low brilliant color”? DANIEL R. KNAPP Medical University of South Carolina
are adjectives that modify the noun proteins. Thus, the phrase describes the proteins as low on the horizon and numerous. Low does not—and, because it is an adjective, cannot—modify abundant, which is also an adjective; an adverb is needed to modify an adjective. However, low can modify the noun abundance, and in turn,
We welcome your comments on articles or news stories published in the Journal of Proteome Research or on other topics of interest to proteomics researchers. Letters may be submitted by email (
[email protected]), fax (202-872-4574), or regular mail (Journal of Proteome Research, 1155 16th St., NW, Washington, DC 20036). Please include your name, full address, signature, and daytime telephone number. Letters should be brief and may be edited for clarity or space.
© 2005 American Chemical Society
low-abundance can modify proteins, so the phrase “low-abundance proteins” would describe the proteins as few in number.
Journal of Proteome Research • Vol. 4, No. 2, 2005
211
