Talk:Spike protein

Viruses Stub‑class Low‑importance

	Viruses portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Viruses, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of viruses on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.VirusesWikipedia:WikiProject VirusesTemplate:WikiProject Virusesvirus
Stub	This article has been rated as Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Template:WikiProject Molecular and Cell Biology

Quality

So is the term peplomer to be considered current terminology or not? If it is not, then that fact should be mentioned early, not after (pointlessly) describing specific usage. Also, if it is not currently used, what are the current terms? This is a technical term, for which we are reading the definition precisely because someone (on another page) used it. We then read the definition and examples of its usage, and are then told we should not use it. Unfortunately, we are unable to comply with this helpful suggestion, due to the lack of an approved term! Aboctok (talk) 20:18, 30 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I just searched a few databases and came up with several recent-year hits for the term. It's still in use. Bob the WikipediaN ^{(talk • contribs)} 15:48, 30 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well, you did not give LINKS, so your claim is useless. I have never before heard the term peplomer in classical virology. We all call the viral glykoproteins vp. But in veterinary medicine, they seem to use the word 'peplomer', which I have no idea for why especially the veterinary medicine affiliados use that word! 80.121.41.72 (talk) 23:27, 17 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I think we should systematically search for the origin of the word itself, which textbook about virology mentions it. 84.113.184.113 (talk) 09:37, 2 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Origin of the term

Can we get a history of the term? Peplo is a peculiar word, mer is more common (oligomer). And when it was used last. 84.113.184.113 (talk) 09:37, 2 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Uniqueness?

Some of the Covid-19 vaccines target the Spike protein, how specific is this to the Virus? Is it shared by other symbiotic, pathogenic and beneficial viri? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 5.80.214.173 (talk) 18:26, 29 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

SARS-CoV-2 without background.png

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 09:50, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 16 June 2021

The request to rename this article to Spike protein has been carried out.

If the page title has consensus, be sure to close this discussion using {{subst:RM top|'''page moved'''.}} and {{subst:RM bottom}} and remove the {{Requested move/dated|…}} tag, or replace it with the {{subst:Requested move/end|…}} tag.

Peplomer → Spike protein – The article points this out (without a citation), but this really isn't the most common term in current use. Even limiting searches to 2018 or before, to exclude the flood of covid-related papers, Google Scholar gives 17,400 hits for the phrase "spike protein", compared to 2470 for peplomer, mostly older papers. Of course, if this really were the current common term for the proteins in question, the past year should have produced hundreds of peplomer papers, but there's only 4. Similarly, see the use-by-year graphs in pubmed for peplomer and "spike protein". And the overwhelming majority of related media coverage on topics like SARS-CoV-2 variants, vaccines, antigens, etc, has used "spike", making it the common name outside the scientific literature as well. Opabinia regalis (talk) 06:38, 16 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support per nom and WP:COMMONNAME. Crossover1370 (talk | contribs) 21:44, 16 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]