I'm not familiar with Margaret Oakley Dayhoff, but I am aware that Rosalind Franklin [1] was extremely important for our understanding of DNA, comparable to Watson/Crick, with whom she co-discovered the structure of DNA. So it seems "Rosalind" is at least very appropriate as a name for a genomics tool such as this.

Not to say the other names mentioned aren't also deserving of similar honors

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosalind_Franklin

▲

philipallstar 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Rosalind Franklin was the team lead of the research team that photographed DNA.

The actual team member that took the key photo[0] was Raymond Gosling.

That team didn't interpret the double helix structure of DNA that the photograph had captured - that was Watson and Crick working it out from the photograph.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photo_51

	▲	groby_b 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		It's not quite that clear-cut. Franklin was pretty clear on the helical structure in both research notes and papers, but she didn't quite nail the overall structure (2 strands with opposing winding, complementing bases). Fundamentally, she suffered the curse of the experimental scientist - waiting for actual data before being willing to build a model. Watson & Crick postulated ahead based on partial data.

▲

flobosg 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

> I'm not familiar with Margaret Oakley Dayhoff

Then you’re one of today’s lucky 10,000. Any time!