Re: [ccp4bb] funding experiences - query
Hi Fellows, thanks to all who have responded to my query. The response were very elucidating, and at the same time (a) consistent and (b) depressing, even for my slightly cynical standards As no good deed goes unpunished, I wonder whether the respondents (and anyone else) have a reasonable idea how much resources and/or money/fte allocated to each project they spend (relatively is enough) from (a) conception to data (bioinfo, cloning variants, expression screening, scale-up, purification, crystal screening, mounting, data collection) compared to (b) data to structure (including analysis and validation). It is relatively easy to get agency funding numbers, funding success rates etc, but those break-up data are elusive, which is probably due to the fact that we re-engineer and divert a lot from other sources to get the prelims... Many thanks again to everyone for responding. Best regards, BR - Bernhard Rupp 001 (925) 209-7429 +43 (676) 571-0536 b...@ruppweb.org hofkristall...@gmail.com http://www.ruppweb.org/ - Physicist are there to find the laws of nature. Engineers are there to work around them. -
Re: [ccp4bb] funding experiences - query
One of my projects was caught in the transition- as long as we didn't have crystals diffracting to high resolution, the project was highly significant but was denied (continuation of) funding for lack of confidence we would get the structure. After we got good crystals and phased them they said sure, you can solve the structure, but what is the broader context? What questions are you trying to answer? What is your hypothesis? Once you get good crystals, you can probably solve the structure in a year by yourself. Is it justified to ask for 5 years and a Post-Doc to pay back for effort already successfully invested? or to bootstrap the next project up to the fundable stage? Maybe propose four years of cell biology, mutagenesis, and drug-binding experiments to test the hypotheses you are going to be able to make once you have the structure for clues? ed On 04/14/2015 03:06 PM, Anastassis Perrakis wrote: Dear Bernhard, I think you need to clarify the first question. “Denied funding’ means to me that a committee officially denied the proposal for these reasons, which is rare, as typically they are very careful, or at least that is my experience. However, its rather common that one of the referees uses any of these as a negative point during a review. Most importantly though, I think that these days almost any grant that is purely based on determining structures will be denied by definition. Thus I doubt if the question as it is posed now warrants investigation … I think the time for ‘crystallographic studies’ has passed and almost all grants that include structural work are in the context of a wider scientific framework... best Tassos Were you denied funding for a structure study because you did not have yet (a) large scale protein expression (b) first crystals (c) diffraction crystals (d) data (e) maps Did you have to 'reverse engineer' an application, i.e. you had the structure already (almost) and then write the grant? Any other peculiarities/comments you received, and what you feel would need improvement/should be addressed. Again, any comments will be confidential and will contribute to raise awareness for the special requirements of, and funding for, the significant up-front work necessary for crystallographic studies. Get it off your soul and make the world a better place. Thanks and best regards, BR - Bernhard Rupp 001 (925) 209-7429 +43 (676) 571-0536 b...@ruppweb.org hofkristall...@gmail.com http://www.ruppweb.org/ --- The road to scientific serfdom is paved with Nature papers ---
Re: [ccp4bb] funding experiences - query
Dear Bernhard, I think you need to clarify the first question. “Denied funding’ means to me that a committee officially denied the proposal for these reasons, which is rare, as typically they are very careful, or at least that is my experience. However, its rather common that one of the referees uses any of these as a negative point during a review. Most importantly though, I think that these days almost any grant that is purely based on determining structures will be denied by definition. Thus I doubt if the question as it is posed now warrants investigation … I think the time for ‘crystallographic studies’ has passed and almost all grants that include structural work are in the context of a wider scientific framework... best Tassos > Were you denied funding for a structure study because you did not have yet > (a) large scale protein expression > (b) first crystals > (c) diffraction crystals > (d) data > (e) maps > > Did you have to 'reverse engineer' an application, i.e. you had the > structure already (almost) and > then write the grant? > > Any other peculiarities/comments you received, and what you feel would need > improvement/should be addressed. > > Again, any comments will be confidential and will contribute to raise > awareness for the special > requirements of, and funding for, the significant up-front work necessary > for crystallographic studies. > Get it off your soul and make the world a better place. > > Thanks and best regards, BR > - > Bernhard Rupp > 001 (925) 209-7429 > +43 (676) 571-0536 > b...@ruppweb.org > hofkristall...@gmail.com > http://www.ruppweb.org/ > --- > The road to scientific serfdom is paved with Nature papers > ---
[ccp4bb] funding experiences - query
Hi Fellows, hopefully everyone has recovered from the Easter Egg coma & April jokes by now. Now something serious: for a commissioned opinion piece in a vanity journal, I seek to get a better understanding regarding improvement of review and funding decisions for crystallographic studies. Under assurance of full confidentiality, I would hope to hear from some of you off board comments/experiences on subjects/questions like those: Were you denied funding for a structure study because you did not have yet (a) large scale protein expression (b) first crystals (c) diffraction crystals (d) data (e) maps Did you have to 'reverse engineer' an application, i.e. you had the structure already (almost) and then write the grant? Any other peculiarities/comments you received, and what you feel would need improvement/should be addressed. Again, any comments will be confidential and will contribute to raise awareness for the special requirements of, and funding for, the significant up-front work necessary for crystallographic studies. Get it off your soul and make the world a better place. Thanks and best regards, BR - Bernhard Rupp 001 (925) 209-7429 +43 (676) 571-0536 b...@ruppweb.org hofkristall...@gmail.com http://www.ruppweb.org/ --- The road to scientific serfdom is paved with Nature papers ---
