Annual Review of Biochemistry 1961 [antikvár]

A preface may fulfill many functions. Lermontov pointed out long ago that a preface should be an apology for the book and a reply to its critics. In this vein, we must express our regrets to our authors for obiiging them, through restrictions on space, to encompass so much in so little. We do not apologize to our readers for the book itself unless it be for our temerity in planning a review of the whole of a year's contributions to biochemistry in a single volume-even a big one. The solution of this problem, fast increasing in gravity, has us baffled. Shall we recommend that the volume be fattened even more and be increased in price? Shall we omit a few "standard" topics? Shall we retain the usual twenty or so and enforce even more painfully the present distressing restrictions on space? The critics have given us too little to which to reply. They have been all too quiet for our own good. In this volume we hope that we have been sufficiently provocative to stir them into action. Impressed by the well-considered case put forth by Malcolm Dixon (Nature and Science, November, 1960) for abandonment of DPN and TPN, we have partéd company with these old friends and accepted instead their more attractive cousins NAD (nicotinamide-adenine dinucleotide) and NADP (nicotinamide-adenine dinucleotide phosphate). These, in fact, are the recommendations of the Enzyme Commission of the international Union of Biochemistry and are expected, in the course of time, to receive definitive adoption by both the I.U.B. and the International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry. It is not possible, however, to implement these specific recommendations without going somewhat further. In casting off DPN and TPN, we must simultaneously discard DPNH and TPNH. On the assumption that a terminál H2 is an acceptable symbolic additive, we have used throughout this volume NADH2 and NADPH2 to designate the reduced forms of NAD and NADP. The comrnents of the critics are now invited. There are many who have contributed to this volume. To the authors we are especially indebted. We know something of the labors that were theirs. The thanks that we wish to convey are not only our own but, we believe, those of the readers as well. We wish alsó to express our appreciation to Floyd Daft who for five years has helped us with his advice as a member of the Editorial Committee. We welcome, as his successor, Alton Meister who will serve through 1965. The subject index was prepared by James P. Scannell of Southern Illinois University. To him we are very grateful indeed. Our very warm thanks are alsó extended to our assistant editors, in particular Betty Schink who has borne much of the responsibility for seeing this volume through the press. Finally we owe much to the George Banta Company, who for many years has been our printer. ^^ ^