Talk:Palytoxin

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Molecular Biology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Molecular Biology 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.Molecular BiologyWikipedia:WikiProject Molecular BiologyTemplate:WikiProject Molecular BiologyMolecular Biology articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Molecular and Cell Biology task force (assessed as Mid-importance).

Chemicals Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chemicals, a daughter project of WikiProject Chemistry, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of chemicals. To participate, help improve this article or visit the project page for details on the project.ChemicalsWikipedia:WikiProject ChemicalsTemplate:WikiProject Chemicalschemicals articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Untitled

I believe the chemical structure is incorrect. John BLunt, a natural products expert, has confirmed this. The correct structure is available on ChemSPider here: http://www.chemspider.com/Chemical-Structure.9280425.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by ChemSpiderMan (talk • contribs) 14:49, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I too confirmed that the picture is uncorrect. Why didn't anybody remove it in 3 years? It took me a week to analyse why I mess up the chirality of this toxine when I suddenly realised that the problem was not with my naming skills rather than wiki's picture. There seems to be no good high-res alternatives out there. Please do not put back the wrong picture. (John Paul) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.101.134.17 (talk) 18:44, 18 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

IUPAC name and structure do not match.

I added the "dispute" sign on top of the article, because the IUPAC name does not match with the structure (R- and S- configurations). Chemspider's structure matches with the name, but current wiki's photo comes from a reputable source too. Where's the bug? P.S. By profession I am not a chemist, just somebody who is interested. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Osmoregulator (talk • contribs) 14:04, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have replaced the dispute sign with a citation needed because it looked like the whole article was disuputed. Christian75 (talk) 13:20, 15 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Palytoxin/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

It appears that palytoxin has 64 stereocenters, not 71, just using a simple google search. - buzz

Last edited at 23:21, 13 May 2007 (UTC). Substituted at 02:12, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

Potential medical use?

An ever-increasing number of "highly toxic chemicals" has been shown to have legitimate medical uses in pure form and in managed and controlled doses. Is there any such for this guy? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.166.227.224 (talk) 06:01, 7 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Question about structure

Is it supposed to be in a straight line, and was wrapped for simplicity purposes? if so this should be mentioned directly below the picture

There is an enormous number of conformations that this chemical compound could adopt. A "straight line" conformation is just one of them, as is the "wrapped" one shown in the image. Neither of these is known to be more relevant than any other. It is generally understood that 2D chemical structures are not intended to indicate any particular conformation, unless specified, and large chemical structures such as this one tend to be drawn compactly to best depict the structure without wasting space. -- Ed (Edgar181) 14:55, 28 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]