Talk:Dithiothreitol

message: DTT is not actually a reducing reagent. The oxidation numbers of the sulfer atoms involved in the disulfide exchange remain constant at -1. It should be more properly stated that it attacks disulfide bonds as a nucleophile.
: The vast majority of the chemistry world disagrees with you. In a disulfide, you have 4 lone electron pairs on the two sulfurs, plus the 1 pair in the bond, for a total of 10 electrons (ignoring bonding to the rest of the molecule). In the two free thiols case, you still have the 4 lone pairs, plus 2 pairs in each of the bonds to hydrogen, for a total of 12 electrons. (The hydrogens come in as H+ ions, and don't bring electrons with them.) Change in electron number absolutely implies redox chemistry. As "reduction describes the gain of an electron by a molecule, atom or ion", and since the disulfide gained electrons, it has been reduced by the action of DTT. Thus DTT is a "reducing agent", by definition. -- Tmhand 19:29, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: One should read the rules for determining oxidation numbers before posting. In a thiol attached to a carbon the oxidation number of the sulfur is always -II whereas in a disulfide it is always -I. So the reaction from two thiols to a disulfide is clearly an oxidation which absolutely justifies it being a reducing agend. Every person that has truly some understanding of chemistry will agree with this. --129.98.60.199 19:02, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Reducing agent?

message: On the image, the DTT is 2R-3R at the beginning and at the final, it is 2S-3R, please change the image!
Talk about L-DTT and D-DTT. Usually DTT is a DL-DTT racemic mixture, but it is important to do the difference.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 132.204.84.95 (talk • contribs) 
:Please correct the stereochemistry! In the structure you show the 2S-3S form, but name it 2R-3R; on the other hand the shown reaction starts from 2S-3R, which is DTE, not DTT, and arrives to 2R-3R DTT. 193.6.29.254 13:42, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I have commented out the image so that it is not visible, until it can be corrected/replaced.  Also I have changed the infobox so that the IUPAC name matches the structure.  Interestingly, at the link to the Pubchem page for this compound, the same error is there - the image and IUPAC name don't match in terms of stereochemistry.  Finally, I agree that some mention of the sterechemical issues should be made in the article.  I'll try to get to it soon, if someone else doesn't get to it first.  --Ed (Edgar181) 14:05, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Stereochemistry

message: Fig 2 is missing.
Sal7777777 14:24, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This image was removed because it was incorrect.  I have now recreated it without the errors and replaced it.  --Ed (Edgar181) 15:09, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  missing figures 

message: This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 07:52, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  WikiProject class rating

message: The entire section on "properties" and parts of other sections have identical wording to this page:
https://www.usbio.net/technicalSheet.php?item=D8070
There are also other pages with identical text, most of them from suppliers of DTT, like the URL in the last paragraph. Either they are copying Wikipedia, or they are all getting the same text from the original manufacturer and copying it to their websites.
Who copied who? I'm not sure. 
130.95.203.172 (talk) 01:01, 18 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyright violation? 

message: Substituted at 13:31, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Assessment comment