{
  "abstract": "Total synthesis has long been regarded as the intellectual backbone of organic chemistry, driving reaction discovery, stereoselective methodology, and molecular design. Yet its place within the contemporary discipline is actively debated, largely on the basis of editorial opinion rather than evidence. In this Perspective we bring quantitative data to that debate. We examined the annual share of articles carrying the phrase “total synthesis” in their titles across four leading journals—Angewandte Chemie International Edition, Journal of Organic Chemistry, Organic Letters, and Tetrahedron Letters—from 1959 to 2025. The share rose through the late twentieth century to a peak of about 4.79% in 2009, then fell to 1.85% by 2025, a relative decline of roughly 61%. Structural-break analysis places a consistent inflection near 2020, and an AIC-selected ARIMA(0,1,0) model with drift projects continued decline to about 1.40% by 2030. Crucially, the fall is relative rather than absolute: the annual number of total syntheses has held broadly steady while overall journal output has expanded dramatically. We argue that total synthesis is not disappearing but being diluted and redefined, and we outline how researchers, editors, and funding agencies might sustain it as a driver of innovation.",
  "abstract_shown": true,
  "affiliations": [
    "Department of Mathematics & Statistics",
    "Department of Chemistry School of Science, GITAM (Deemed to be University"
  ],
  "article_type": null,
  "arxiv": null,
  "author_total": 4,
  "authors": [
    {
      "affs": [
        0
      ],
      "name": "B. Meghana"
    },
    {
      "affs": [
        0
      ],
      "name": "Sofiya Sultana"
    },
    {
      "affs": [
        1
      ],
      "name": "S. Chandrasekhar"
    },
    {
      "name": "Motahar Reza",
      "orcid": "0000-0002-1790-5813"
    }
  ],
  "bibtex": "https://research.draconitic.com/paper/9k0kq0x0m47wg.bib",
  "cited_by": 0,
  "doi": "10.26434/chemrxiv.15007939/v2",
  "fulltext_url": null,
  "id": "9k0kq0x0m47wg",
  "issns": [],
  "landing_url": "https://chemrxiv.org/doi/full/10.26434/chemrxiv.15007939/v2",
  "language": null,
  "licence": "CC-BY",
  "licence_label": "CC BY",
  "licence_source": "journal",
  "licence_url": "https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/",
  "metadata_licence": null,
  "native_subjects": [
    [
      "openalex",
      "1804|scientometrics and bibliometrics research"
    ]
  ],
  "openalex": "W7213460296",
  "pdf_url": "https://chemrxiv.org/doi/pdf/10.26434/chemrxiv.15007939/v2",
  "pmcid": null,
  "pmid": null,
  "published": "2026-09-16",
  "publisher": "American Chemical Society (ACS)",
  "ris": "https://research.draconitic.com/paper/9k0kq0x0m47wg.ris",
  "sources": [
    {
      "first_seen": "2026-10-30T12:17:19Z",
      "native_id": "10.26434/chemrxiv.15007939",
      "source": "chemrxiv",
      "url": "https://chemrxiv.org/doi/full/10.26434/chemrxiv.15007939/v2"
    }
  ],
  "subjects": [
    {
      "field": "chemistry",
      "origin": "source:chemrxiv",
      "subfield": "general"
    }
  ],
  "title": "Total Synthesis: Backbone of Organic Chemistry, a Discipline in Decline?",
  "title_text": "Total Synthesis: Backbone of Organic Chemistry, a Discipline in Decline?",
  "type": "preprint",
  "updated_at": "2026-10-30T12:17:19Z",
  "url": "https://research.draconitic.com/paper/9k0kq0x0m47wg",
  "venue": "ChemRxiv",
  "versions": []
}