Good suggestions here. In situ proteolysis is a new one on me...
Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone
Original message From: Artem Evdokimov
Date: 6/5/18 1:24 PM (GMT-06:00) To:
CCP4BB@JISCMAIL.AC.UK Subject: Re: [ccp4bb] suggestion of crystallization
MMS often works well for us too!
Best wishes,
Olga
> On 5 Jun 2018, at 19:24, Artem Evdokimov wrote:
>
> Janet, Patrick, and others beat me to it :)
>
> We have tremendous luck with MMS in cases like this.
>
> I would also suggest looking at 'atypical' additives - the word atypical is
>
Janet, Patrick, and others beat me to it :)
We have tremendous luck with MMS in cases like this.
I would also suggest looking at 'atypical' additives - the word atypical is
really not a good choice since the world of additives is pretty much
infinite, but folks too often tend to take the lazy
Dear Gerard,
You were referring to unmerged data ie as per the Redundancy.png figure.
But yes we agree one can learn from the Staraniso plot for merged data.
Overall the availability of raw data offers considerable flexibilities at
no cost to the user eg of Zenodo.
Best wishes,
Loes and John
On
Dear John,
Further to my reply below: Claus Flensburg pointed out to me that
there is an incorrect statement in your message:
> The anisotropy figure of Staraniso is indeed very useful and could
> complement Table 1, and clearly can only be made with unmerged data.
If you look at
Dear Deepali,
the best way to define the resolution cut-off is to check whether the
data still contribute to model quality. You can easily check that by the
procedure called "paired refinement" as described by Diederichs and
Karplus (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3457925/
Dear All,
There is an opportunity to join the Structural Biology team at Evotec based in
the U.K as a Senior Scientist (Crystallography, initial 12 month contract).
Please see the advert in the link below. Interested candidates should apply
directly through our website. Please do not send
Dear John,
Thank you for your interesting comments. As far as the deposition
of raw images is concerned, you are preaching to the converted in my
case (I would even, if I may blow my own trumpet for a second, claim
to have been one of the earliest proponents and most persistently
vociferous
Dear all,
here is an announcement for a cryo-EM beamline scientist position at the Centre
for Integrative Biology, Strasbourg, France.
With best regards,
Bruno Klaholz
Cryo-EM beamline scientist position:
The IGBMC/CBI is seeking a experienced scientist to participate in running the
Dear all,
we have 2 open positions for a PhD candidate and a post-doctoral researcher to
join the Klaholz group at the Centre for Integrative Biology, IGBMC, Illkirch,
France http://igbmc.fr/Klaholz
We are studying the structure and function of protein complexes through
integrated
> These can be visualized by reciprocal space reconstructions from the detector
> images, such as available in EVAL.
Yes, this is where the data collection intelligence should kick in. If it can
be detected, it can be
addressed already during data processing. But as long as we index away all
We are retiring our Cartesian Honeybee 8+1 crystallisation robot and need
the space, if anyone has a use for it (some of the parts are quite
difficult to get hold of now and/or are quite expensive) please get in
touch. Price is £GB 0.00 but buyer collects.
Please contact me directly using my
Dear Colleagues
Thankyou to Gerard for the prompt of last Friday on CCP4bb to read in
detail Bernhard's perspective in Structure on “Table 1”.
The anisotropy figure of Staraniso is indeed very useful and could
complement Table 1, and clearly can only be made with unmerged data.
However, the
Ojweh….we are back to the same stage of the old ‘What R-merge is acceptable to
the reviewer?’ Is really all we care for what is acceptable to the reviewer?
Maybe we should not try to apply simple one-dimensional numbers for complex
problems but try to better describe what the meaning of such
Dear all,
We invite enthusiastic individuals to apply for a Research Association position
in the group of Xiaodong Zhang (https://www.structurebiomed.org), within the
Section of Structural
Usual recommendations are to have CC-half > 0.3 or 0.5 (these are usually not
so far separated)
For the most part the refinement software is smart enough to down-weight
“noise” in the outer shell so there is very little penalty in including weak
measurements, and you should put up a fight with
I think all of those numbers would be pretty acceptable to almost all referees
;-)
Cheers, tom
From: CCP4 bulletin board [mailto:CCP4BB@JISCMAIL.AC.UK] On Behalf Of Deepali
Verma
Sent: Tuesday, 5 June 2018 7:29 PM
To: CCP4BB@JISCMAIL.AC.UK
Subject: [ccp4bb] Acceptable range of CC1/2
Dear all,
Dear all,
I am trying to process a crystal data at *2.8Å* and having CC1/2 is 0.771
(outer shell). I just want to know the acceptable range of CC1/2. These are
the statistics of the process data.
Overall InnerShell OuterShell
Low resolution limit
Rhine-Knee Regiomeeting 2018 on Structural Biology, Emmetten, Switzerland
http://regiomeeting.eu/meeting-2018
Emmetten, Switzerland
Sep. 26-28, 2018
The 32nd Rhine-Knee Regional Meeting on Structural Biology will take place in
the heart of Switzerland in Emmetten from September 26 to 28. The
19 matches
Mail list logo
