File talk:Steroidogenesis.svg

Last edit

I put numbers to the locations on cholesterol. Perhaps cholesterol needs to be magnified a little further to make it easier to overview. Mikael Häggström (talk) 17:21, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Requested update

As proposed in Commons:Requested updates to protected images, I suggest updating this image with File:Steroidogenesis with moved pregnenolone.svg, because it currently runs over the structural formula. Mikael Häggström (talk) 09:37, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Stereochemistry

The image has been tagged as being disputed due to missing stereochemistry, but I'm not sure it needs to be fixed. The diagram would be very busy if we added all the stereocentres. Maybe we should just check which of them differ from cholesterol in their stereochemistry and mark them up? --203.147.41.98 06:18, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

You mean to leave out the hydrogens that are shown to state the stereochemistry? IMO at least the groups that are drawn, need to be correct. In the case of cortisol and corticosterone, even the newly introduced OH group does not bear any stereochemical information. --Leyo 20:12, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

It does need to be fixed. It would be a pity if this otherwise very nice overview image would suffer from being incorrect. I don't think that introducing some wedged-bonds at the stereogenic positions would do harm to the picture. --77.180.53.75 08:10, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

Perhaps you are overlooking this in the description: “Where stereochemistry is not shown, it is the same as for or for any functional groups shown for the first time.”. While that is totally clear, something to the appropriate effect should be added to the picture somehow. PJTraill (talk) 18:54, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

In some functional groups, the stereochemistry is not shown the first they appear. --Leyo 22:23, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for noticing this issue. I've added stereochemistries now, but please leave comments on any missing or incorrect ones, and inform how they should be. Mikael Häggström (talk) 04:26, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Thank you. I added a few image notes. They concern the positions 11 and 17. Please note that I tagged one specific problem in one structure only, but several structures might have the same problem. --Leyo 13:27, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Another thanks to you for the review. I added stereochemistries at the sites that you marked, as well as the locations further down the pathway that I assume are identical. Still, further comments on how the image can be improved are appreciated. Mikael Häggström (talk) 16:19, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Thank you. I do not see any more missing stereochemistry. --Leyo 16:38, 9 July 2012 (UTC)