Dear Italo,
It seems to me that the ccp4bb has always been a very gentle and
empathic platform of exchange of ideas and offering a great deal of help
to non-experts, "ignorants" as your friend calls them.
I remember that in the late 90thies there were some ayatollahs, which
have become gentle civils by now, that used accusatory citations to
underpin their claims. This period is over, or at least I hope so.
If ignorance exists, it's our fault of not being able to teach properly
the young generation.
I understand your frustation and may be it deserves a letter in an Acta
Journal, but please, please, refrain of citing the "ignorants" in this bb.
Wishing you a happy retirement and nice and fruitfuil projects, other
than B-factors, for your future.
Gerlind
On 29/10/2024 16:38, Italo Carugo Oliviero wrote:
Ce mail provient de l'extérieur, restons vigilants
In a few months, I will retire, because my brain thinks it is still
young but the rest of the body disagrees and thinks the brain is
slightly senile. Of course, I will miss the protein structures very
much, so unpredictable in their insolent beauty.
I have devoted several years of my life to the B-factors of their atoms.
Initially, almost 30 years ago, some colleagues mocked me, telling me
that the B-side of proteins was nothing but dust hidden under the
carpet, nothing but background noise. Some later changed their minds,
and it is now generally agreed that the B-side of proteins deserves to
be visited and admired.
However, I am concerned about more recent developments that are
turning B-factors into real junk. TLS refinements as audacious as they
are ridiculously unprofessional are producing disasters. For example,
the 8q66 structure is very strange. It has been split into individual
TLS mini-blocks, which clearly demonstrates that the authors are
unaware of the TLS procedure and its proper application. A protein
containing two structural domains was divided into six small TLS
blocks, one of which belongs to both domains. Where are physics and
chemistry?
How can this happen? Here is the answer from a friend and colleague:
“unfortunately, the crystallographic programs became so automatic and
easy to use nowadays, that even complete ignorant people can get
something from them, and do not think if what they got makes sense or
not.”
Are computational models preferable in the end?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the CCP4BB list, click the following link:
https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/WA-JISC.exe?SUBED1=CCP4BB&A=1
<https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/WA-JISC.exe?SUBED1=CCP4BB&A=1>
--
Gerlind Sulzenbacher
Architecture et Fonction des Macromolécules Biologiques
UMR7257 CNRS, Aix-Marseille Université
Case 932
163 Avenue de Luminy
13288 Marseille cedex 9
France
Tel +33 413 94 95 27
E-mail:[email protected]
########################################################################
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/
