Hi All One of the joys of this meeting to me is that it is *not* about the science results and instead explicitly about how you get to those results. I worry that any meeting focussed on complimentary methods would inevitably coalesce around the common themes - science results - and become yet another structural biology conference.
I appreciate the needs for structural biology conferences, but I would feel that they are already well met. The diffraction methods conference is unique in allowing methods people to get together - if we expand this to all biophysical / biochemical methods then we completely lose that. Even if we did succeed in pulling in methods people from all techniques, the meeting would then become too big. I am well aware that the majority of people in the community are interested in the results not the methods, and are hence interested in applying as many techniques as necessary to get the insights. I’d just like to make sure that there is a little corner left where the people who develop those techniques - which are usually pretty specialist - can get together. I am certain that folks in non-diffraction methods development feel the same. All the best Graeme On 30 Jan 2023, at 01:59, Bostjan Kobe <b.k...@uq.edu.au<mailto:b.k...@uq.edu.au>> wrote: Hi guys I would be a bit more optimistic about this idea… If people attend the meeting with the objective of building some bridges they will try. I have been to meetings on a biological topic where I may have been the only structural biologist but it was clear why I was there and I did not feel isolated, despite not being able to participate in every technical discussion on methods I am not familiar with. Bostjan -- Bostjan Kobe FAA Australian Laureate Fellow Professor of Structural Biology School of Chemistry and Molecular Biosciences and Institute for Molecular Bioscience (Division of Chemistry and Structural Biology) and Australian Infectious Diseases Research Centre Cooper Road University of Queensland Brisbane, Queensland 4072 Australia Phone: +61 7 3365 2132 Fax: +61 7 3365 4699 E-mail: b.k...@uq.edu.au<applewebdata://A220FB9B-AAC1-4876-9D6D-5C9F47D3C087/b.k...@uq.edu.au> URL: http://www.scmb.uq.edu.au/staff/bostjan-kobe Office: Building 76 Room 329 Notice: If you receive this e-mail by mistake, please notify me, and do not make any use of its contents. I do not waive any privilege, confidentiality or copyright associated with it. Unless stated otherwise, this e-mail represents only the views of the Sender and not the views of The University of Queensland. From: CCP4 bulletin board <CCP4BB@JISCMAIL.AC.UK<mailto:CCP4BB@JISCMAIL.AC.UK>> on behalf of Nukri Sanishvili <sannu...@gmail.com<mailto:sannu...@gmail.com>> Reply to: Nukri Sanishvili <sannu...@gmail.com<mailto:sannu...@gmail.com>> Date: Monday, 30 January 2023 at 11:40 am To: "CCP4BB@JISCMAIL.AC.UK<mailto:CCP4BB@JISCMAIL.AC.UK>" <CCP4BB@JISCMAIL.AC.UK<mailto:CCP4BB@JISCMAIL.AC.UK>> Subject: Re: [ccp4bb] Future Diffraction Methods Hi Pavel, Your description of the current status is exactly correct. And that's exactly what I am proposing to change or, more accurately, try to change. By seeking out and bringing together people who do complementary and collaborative work, so they can set an example for others. This, of course, isn't meant in place of more narrowly defined topical meetings and conferences but to be in addition to those. James asked the community if we had new ideas and this is a new-ish approach I was suggesting. Don't get me wrong - I myself will happily continue my efforts in more narrowly defined meetings. Best wishes, Nukri On Sun, Jan 29, 2023 at 6:44 PM Pavel Afonine <pafon...@gmail.com<mailto:pafon...@gmail.com>> wrote: Nukri, IMO, the idea of cross-discipline meetings is great conceptually, at least for reasons you pointed out, but utopical in practice. When we attend our field-specific meetings we meet colleagues we know, we talk to collaborators from the past or find new ones, we have things in common that we can talk about to forge something new, we meet authors of papers we were excited to read, and so on, and so on. I once attended a meeting of some chemistry society, well, which is not too far from what we are doing, really, as interpreting atomic models is essentially putting your chemistry knowledge into production. And, at that meeting I felt like I'm alone in a dark forest. Now, I imagine, if you bring two (or more) groups of people to your meeting from two different domains, well, I guess you will end up having two bubbles of people clustered by their field of interest. Same disclaimer goes here as yours -- no offence to any one, just thinking out loud... All the best! Pavel On Sun, Jan 29, 2023 at 6:09 AM Nukri Sanishvili <sannu...@gmail.com<mailto:sannu...@gmail.com>> wrote: Hi James, This meeting has indeed been one of the best ones by its format, content, and atmosphere. Many thanks to all the organizers and attendees of the past. Nevertheless, it is not surprising that it was cancelled, given the trends in structural biology research. Straightforward evolutionary pressure to adapt or else... Throughout my career I was always amazed (dare I say, annoyed?) how scientists from different fields, or even the same field but different methods, speak different languages. How little they understand each other, become entrenched in their own methods and how much of the collaboration/cooperation opportunities are wasted. IMO, having a conference on "Complementary Methods in Structural Biology" with the emphasis on complementarity and not on individual methods, would be a great benefit in the long run. Hopefully it would give good examples to young researchers to help them develop a collaborative mindset. If I offended anyone, it was not intentional, I promise, and apologize in advance. Best wishes to all and best of luck to all who continue the effort for the benefit of the whole community. Nukri On Fri, Dec 16, 2022 at 4:11 PM James Holton <jmhol...@lbl.gov<mailto:jmhol...@lbl.gov>> wrote: I want to thank everyone who attended the 2022 Gordon Research Conference and Gordon Research Seminar on Diffraction Methods in Structural Biology, as well as all those who contributed to these great gatherings in the past. It was an outstanding meeting if I do say so myself. Not just because it had been so long without in-person interaction, not just because we had zero covid cases (which I see as no small feat of Mind over Virus), but because of this amazing community. It is rare in this world to have such a strong spirit of collaboration, camaraderie and openness in undertakings as high-impact as this. Surmounting the barriers to atomic-detail imaging of biological systems has never been more exciting and more relevant. I am proud to be a part of it, and honored to have served as Chair. It is therefore with heavy heart that I report to this community that I was the last Chair of the Diffraction Methods GRC. The GRC Conference Evaluation Committee (https://www.grc.org/about/conference-evaluation-committee/) voted this year to discontinue the Diffraction Methods GRC and GRS. This ends a 46-year tradition that I feel played a vital, and vibrant role in the work of the people who answer questions on this BB. The reason given was insufficient attendance. All other metrics, such as evaluation surveys and demographics were very strong. I have tried to appeal, but I'm told the vote was unanimous and final. I understand that like so many conference organizing bodies the GRC is having to make tough financial decisions. I must say I disagree with this one, but it was not my decision to make. Many of the past and elected Chairs have been gathering and discussing how to replace the Diffraction Methods GRC/GRS going forward. Many great ideas, advice and perspectives have been provided, but that is a select group. I feel it is now time to open up this discussion to the broader community of structural methods developers and practitioners. There are some important questions to ask: * How do we define this community? Yes, many of us do cryoEM too, but is that one methods meeting? or two? * Does this community need a new diffraction methods meeting? As in one meeting or zero? * Should we merge with an existing meeting? It would make logistics easier, but a typical GRC has 22 hours of in-depth presentations over 5 days. The GRS is 7 hours over 2 days. As Chair, I found that was not nearly enough. * Where do you think structural methods are going? I think I know, but I may be biased. * Should the name change? From 1976 to 2000, it was "Diffraction Methods in Molecular Biology". The word "diffraction", BTW, comes from the Latin for "shattering of rays", and originally used to describe the iridescence of bird feathers. That's spectroscopy! How about: "Structural Methods for the Departing of Rays" I'm sure there are many more questions, and better suggestions. I look forward to enlightening discussions! GRCs have always been about discussion, and I hope to keep that tradition alive in this community. -James Holton MAD Scientist ######################################################################## To unsubscribe from the CCP4BB list, click the following link: https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/WA-JISC.exe?SUBED1=CCP4BB&A=1 This message was issued to members of www.jiscmail.ac.uk/CCP4BB<http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/CCP4BB>, a mailing list hosted by www.jiscmail.ac.uk<http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/>, terms & conditions are available at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/policyandsecurity/ ________________________________ To unsubscribe from the CCP4BB list, click the following link: https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/WA-JISC.exe?SUBED1=CCP4BB&A=1 ________________________________ To unsubscribe from the CCP4BB list, click the following link: https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/WA-JISC.exe?SUBED1=CCP4BB&A=1 ________________________________ To unsubscribe from the CCP4BB list, click the following link: https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/WA-JISC.exe?SUBED1=CCP4BB&A=1 -- This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential, copyright and or privileged material, and are for the use of the intended addressee only. If you are not the intended addressee or an authorised recipient of the addressee please notify us of receipt by returning the e-mail and do not use, copy, retain, distribute or disclose the information in or attached to the e-mail. Any opinions expressed within this e-mail are those of the individual and not necessarily of Diamond Light Source Ltd. Diamond Light Source Ltd. cannot guarantee that this e-mail or any attachments are free from viruses and we cannot accept liability for any damage which you may sustain as a result of software viruses which may be transmitted in or with the message. Diamond Light Source Limited (company no. 4375679). Registered in England and Wales with its registered office at Diamond House, Harwell Science and Innovation Campus, Didcot, Oxfordshire, OX11 0DE, United Kingdom ######################################################################## To unsubscribe from the CCP4BB list, click the following link: https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/WA-JISC.exe?SUBED1=CCP4BB&A=1 This message was issued to members of www.jiscmail.ac.uk/CCP4BB, a mailing list hosted by www.jiscmail.ac.uk, terms & conditions are available at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/policyandsecurity/
