Dear all,
sorry, for the slightly off-topic theme, but I wonder if anyone has
compared the above mentioned ultracentrifugation devices, thoroughly.
Currently, we are using the Amicon Ultra, but as the Vivaspins are
considerably cheaper we are considering to change.
I used both with
On Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 11:03 AM, Adam Ralph adam.ra...@nuim.ie wrote:
Hi Brigitte,
You are correct, the columns labeled Fobs and Fcal refer to density. The
columns should be: averaged density for Obs and Cal for the main chain, then
averaged density Obs and Cal for the side chains. I have
Hi Jan
I have used Vivaspins for membrane proteins and they generally work fine. The
exact pore size might be different though between Vivaspin and Amicon with the
same specifications, say e.g. 100,000 MWCO. So you might find that your protein
is retained in one of them, while it is in the
Hi Jan,
In our lab we use both the Amicon Ultras and the Vivaspins (soluble and
membrane proteins).
What I can tell you is that me and a few other colleagues had the
experience (and still do) of specific soluble proteins precipitating on
the Cellulose membrane
of the Amicon. By switching to
The vivaspins are the best thing in
ultrafiltration since sliced bread. I learned about them while I
was at the NIH several years ago and haven't looked back. Fast and
low-binding. PES membranes are superior for minimizing protein
binding, and are also less
On Tue, 2011-10-04 at 15:25 -0700, Jun Liao wrote:
I want to calculate the surface curvature for my proteins in a
quantitative way and show the results in a graphics software such as
Pymol
Surface Racer
http://apps.phar.umich.edu/tsodikovlab/index_files/Page756.htm
will output curvature per
Adam, sorry I don't use overlapmap, for the reasons you mention (and many
others!). In fact I decided it was in such a mess that it was irrecoverable
so I wrote my own program EDSTATS to do all all these electron density
stats (and more). I talked about it at the last CSW (
On Wed, 2011-10-05 at 10:36 +0800, Jobichen Chacko wrote:
I looked into our previous posts and tried to locate the ccp4.LOCK
file, but I cannot find one in my system.
Curiously, neither can I with the ccp4i currently running. Maybe this
info is outdated, and you should try deleting
Dear CCP4'ers,
I am working on refining the structure of a protein complex consisting of two
different chains. Data were collected to 2.3A in space group C2 and phased by
molecular replacement without any problem, but the ASU contains 6 complexes (so
12 chains in total). In the ASU, the 6
Dear Herman
In some cases density modification starting with MR phases can indeed prove
very powerful.
We recently used Parrot to bootstrap a difficult case at 4.3 angs and were able
to obtain very good maps for entire missing domains.
See Supplementary Fig 1 in:Verstraete et al 2011 BLOOD
On 10/05/2011 03:42 PM, Peter Canning wrote:
When I run Parrot to do density improvement and NCS averaging, Parrot
works beautifully (final FOM is 0.87) but NCS averaging causes the
average NCS correlation coefficient to drop (from 0.94 to 0.64) and the
average mask volume to increase from 0.31
Hi All,
The protein engineering department at Zymeworks Inc. (www.zymeworks.com),
is actively searching for talented structural biologists who are interested
in doing in silco protein engineering.
If interested please visit [http://zymeworks.com/careers/postings.html]
Cheers,
Paula Lario
If I'm not mistaken it is caused by /tmp/'username' not existing or
being writable...
Jon
--
Jonathan P. Schuermann, Ph. D.
Beamline Scientist
NE-CAT, Building 436E
Advanced Photon Source (APS)
Argonne National Laboratory
9700 South Cass Avenue
Argonne, IL 60439
email: schue...@anl.gov
Tel:
Hello Jan,
I've used both with soluble and membrane proteins happily. I haven't
seen significant differences with protein behavior or performance in one or
the other, but of course, your favorite protein may differ. I've found that
buffer condition is a more important variable than membrane
http://www.apple.com/stevejobs/
May innovation continue to lead the future.
Jürgen
..
Jürgen Bosch
Johns Hopkins University
Bloomberg School of Public Health
Department of Biochemistry Molecular Biology
Johns Hopkins Malaria Research Institute
615 North Wolfe Street, W8708
On Oct 5, 2011, at 5:52 PM, Bosch, Juergen wrote:
http://www.apple.com/stevejobs/
May innovation continue to lead the future.
Jürgen
I've been quite saddened about this all evening. Even though we knew it was
coming, it is still incredibly sad, especially at his age (only 56).
Although
Bill
So eloquently put, much of what you say resonates with me. Very sad day.
Cheers
Ashley
Sent from my iPhone
On 06/10/2011, at 3:13 PM, William G. Scott wgsc...@ucsc.edu wrote:
On Oct 5, 2011, at 5:52 PM, Bosch, Juergen wrote:
http://www.apple.com/stevejobs/
May innovation continue to
17 matches
Mail list logo
