I couldn’t agree more with Patrick which is often the case.

To echo some of his comments, in the High-Throughput Crystallization Screening 
Center we see many examples where the visual images of initial crystallization 
hits are very poor and experienced (or inexperienced) crystallographers would 
typically ignore them. SONICC and UV two photon fluorescence images can 
indicate something far more promising. Optimization of the visually ‘crappy’ 
crystals (or even things that really don’t look like crystals to the eye) that 
have strong SONICC or UV two photon fluorescence very often produces beautiful 
results. We published a short paper on this  “The detection and subsequent 
volume optimization of biological nanocrystals, Luft JR, et al.. Struct Dyn. 
2015 May 15;2(4):041710 and have seen many examples since. The crystallization 
research page of the High-Throughput Screening Center (http://getacrystal.org) 
has a link to this paper under the Crystallization Research section and there 
is a more extensive literature related to this research are on the website in 
my signature.

Excuse the shameless plug, but if you don’t have SONICC and UV-two photon 
detection, this is a standard part of the crystallization screening center 
available to all and run by Dr. Sarah Bowman 
(https://hwi.buffalo.edu/scientist-directory/sbowman/) – Details at 
http://getacrystal.org. There is also some news on automated outcome 
classification just to put a teaser of things to come out there.

Best,

Eddie

Edward Snell Ph.D.

Biological Small Angle Scattering Theory and Practice, Eaton E. Lattman, Thomas 
D. Grant, and Edward H. Snell.
Available through all good bookshops, or direct from Oxford University Press

Director of the NSF BioXFEL Science and Technology Center
President and CEO Hauptman-Woodward Medical Research Institute
BioInnovations Chaired Professorship, University at Buffalo, SUNY
700 Ellicott Street, Buffalo, NY 14203-1102
hwi.buffalo.edu
Phone:       (716) 898 8631         Fax: (716) 898 8660
Skype:        eddie.snell                 Email: [email protected]
Webpage: https://hwi.buffalo.edu/scientist-directory/snell/

[cid:[email protected]]
Heisenberg was probably here!

From: CCP4 bulletin board [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Patrick 
Shaw Stewart
Sent: Friday, July 6, 2018 7:08 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [ccp4bb] Please share your experience about "ugly" crystals 
showing good diffraction


Hi All

I have a comment, based on my old supervisor's explanation, which seemed to 
make sense.

Crystals usually grow layer by layer.  Once a new layer is formed it quickly 
expands to cover the whole surface.  That's why crystals normally have flat 
surfaces and sharp edges - the layers/steps expand rapidly until they get to 
the edges.

However it doesn't have to be like that.  Sometimes new layers can form roughly 
as quickly as the previous layers can spread.  The result is crystals with 
curved surfaces - or even just blobs.

Just because the new layers form at a rate that is comparable to the spreading 
doesn't mean that the crystals won't be ordered, and won't diffract well.

Once I understood that I understood what I was seeing better when I checked my 
drops.

Best wishes Patrick


On 5 July 2018 at 22:06, Sanishvili, Ruslan 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:

Hi Anirban,

It would be great if you could share the compilation of relevant responses to 
your request. I think many others in the community could use these examples for 
educational purposes.

Best,

Nukri


Ruslan Sanishvili (Nukri), Ph.D.
Macromolecular Crystallographer
GM/CA@APS
X-ray Science Division, ANL
9700 S. Cass Ave.
Lemont, IL 60439

Tel: (630)252-0665
Fax: (630)252-0667
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>

________________________________
From: CCP4 bulletin board <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> 
on behalf of Anirban Banerjee <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2018 7:07 PM
To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
Subject: [ccp4bb] Please share your experience about "ugly" crystals showing 
good diffraction


Dear all,

Apologies for the non-CCP4 related question.

If you have concrete experience about visually unappealing, i.e. ugly crystals 
( your own take on ugly is fine)  diffracting better than comparably similar 
sized nicer looking crystals of the same protein, will you please share here ? 
Even better if that led to a published structure. Might you also have pictures ?

We have all heard anecdotes about not using visual appearance to judge the 
quality of crystals as far as their ability to give good diffraction data is 
concerned but I am trying to gather some concrete pointers here to motivate 
trainees.

Thanks very much for any help.

Best,

Anirban

P.S. I know that there is probably a lot of thought and wisdom  on this this 
specific topic but I am really looking for actual experience.

________________________________

To unsubscribe from the CCP4BB list, click the following link:
https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?SUBED1=CCP4BB&A=1

________________________________

To unsubscribe from the CCP4BB list, click the following link:
https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?SUBED1=CCP4BB&A=1



--
 [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>    Douglas Instruments Ltd.
 Douglas House, East Garston, Hungerford, Berkshire, RG17 7HD, UK
 Directors: Peter Baldock, Patrick Shaw Stewart

 http://www.douglas.co.uk
 Tel: 44 (0) 148-864-9090    US toll-free 1-877-225-2034
 Regd. England 2177994, VAT Reg. GB 480 7371 36

________________________________

To unsubscribe from the CCP4BB list, click the following link:
https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?SUBED1=CCP4BB&A=1

########################################################################

To unsubscribe from the CCP4BB list, click the following link:
https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?SUBED1=CCP4BB&A=1

Reply via email to