OK,
I took the challenge. I got 7 out of 10. The three I missed were 2
questions about multi-well crystals which would be better (no problem)
and the capillary (no problem either, because you can mount it)...
I wouldn't be that snipe and braging (pun intended) if I would not
agree with Klaus....
Jens
On Tue, 2011-04-19 at 03:02 -0600, Marcus Winter wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> Dear Klaus,
>
>
>
>
>
> Thanks for your note. Yes: we do understand the point that you make
>
> and, sincerely, we are sensitive to this possible criticism. However,
> we trust
>
> that you would agree that this was not a blatant advertisement. Also,
> my
>
> original posting was in direct response to a not unrelated one.
>
>
>
> Thank you for recognising the contributions made by the manufacturers.
>
> No doubt, we're – all of us, dependent upon public funding to some
> extent - directly
>
> or indirectly, and, similarly, we're taxpayers too...
>
>
>
>
>
> Anyway: why not entertain yourself by taking two minutes out for the
>
> PX Scanner Crystal Challenge:
>
>
>
>
>
> signature_crystalchall
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Many Thanks and Very Best Regards,
>
>
>
> Marcus (Agilent Technologies)
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Klaus Fütterer [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: 19 April 2011 09:40
> To: WINTER,MARCUS (A-UnitedKingdom,ex1)
> Cc: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [ccp4bb] viewing and scoring diffraction using the PX
> Scanner
>
>
>
> Dear Marcus,
>
>
>
> I always feel a bit uneasy about the advertisement-like posts that
>
> Agilent (and others) place on this BB. Of course, there are
>
> interactions between users and suppliers on many fronts, not least
> the
>
> support you guys provide in the form of sponsorship to meetings and
>
> conferences.
>
>
>
> Still, the original purpose of this bulletin board is the exchange
> of
>
> expertise and advice on a particular software package. No doubt,
>
> company-based crystallographers make valuable contributions to
>
> discussions on the BB. This is, however, different to placing an
> open
>
> sales pitch. I can remember that some in the community were miffed
>
> when discussions on non-CCP4 software packages became prominent.
>
>
>
> I think it is only fair to ask suppliers to minimise marketing of
>
> their products here. After all, the infrastructure for the BB is
> paid
>
> for by public money.
>
>
>
> With the obligatory '2 cents worth',
>
>
>
> Klaus
>
>
>
>
>
> =======================================================================
>
>
>
> Klaus Fütterer, Ph.D.
>
> Reader in Structural Biology
>
> Undergraduate Admissions
>
>
>
> School of Biosciences P: +44-(0)-121-414 5895
>
> University of Birmingham F: +44-(0)-121-414 5925
>
> Edgbaston E: [log in to unmask]
>
> Birmingham, B15 2TT, UK W: http://tinyurl.com/futterer-lab
>
> =======================================================================
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On 19 Apr 2011, at 08:22, Marcus Winter wrote:
>
>
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Dear Artem,
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Thanks for your reply. You raise a number of points.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Immediately, I should comment that the price of the PX Scanner is
> very
>
> >
>
> > considerably less than the $400k that you mention.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Whilst - with the proteins and crystallisation conditions that you
>
> > may be working
>
> >
>
> > with, visual inspection may be sufficient to differentiate salt
> from
>
> > protein
>
> >
>
> > crystals (as you suggest), you will accept that generally this may
>
> > not be the
>
> >
>
> > case. Thus, ‘direct’ inspection, using X-rays, must surely be the
>
> > most appropriate way ?
>
> >
>
> > As you will be aware, the best looking crystals are seldom the
> best
>
> > diffracting.
>
> >
>
> > This is well demonstrated through the PX Scanner ‘Crystal
>
> > Challenge’, of course.
>
> >
>
> > Clearly, that’s another prime purpose of the PX Scanner: to
> identify
>
> > the ‘best’ crystals
>
> >
>
> > from amongst a multitude of candidates in a single droplet or
> across
>
> > a plate, etc.
>
> >
>
> > Also, using the PX Scanner, we can check the effect of added cryo-
>
> > protect. prior to
>
> >
>
> > freezing.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Therefore, with this range of uses, the PX Scanner is clearly not
>
> > intended for full
>
> >
>
> > ‘data-collection’ – but rather to most effectively support
>
> > crystallisation optimisation and
>
> >
>
> > as a complement to in-house and central facility data-collection
>
> > work. From the feedback
>
> >
>
> > that we receive, the PX Scanner is much valued by the number of
>
> > groups which are
>
> >
>
> > now using these systems worldwide.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > However, even the proof of Grandma’s apple pie is not until the
>
> > eating. Accordingly,
>
> >
>
> > we most cordially invite you to visit one of our application labs
> –
>
> > or perhaps one of our
>
> >
>
> > customer sites (by arrangement), with you, hopefully, being able
> to
>
> > bring one or more
>
> >
>
> > of your crystallisation plates for inspection using the PX Scanner
>
> > system. Since you
>
> >
>
> > are based in North America, I believe, one of my responsible
>
> > colleagues will take up
>
> >
>
> > this invitation with you, off-BB.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > We look forward to our continuing discussions – with yourself, and
>
> > all others who
>
> >
>
> > may be interested.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Many Thanks and Best Regards,
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Marcus Winter (Agilent Technologies)
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > <image002.gif>
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > From: Artem Evdokimov [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
>
> > Sent: 19 April 2011 02:50
>
> > To: WINTER,MARCUS (A-UnitedKingdom,ex1)
>
> > Cc: [log in to unmask]
>
> > Subject: Re: [ccp4bb] viewing and scoring diffraction using the PX
>
> > Scanner
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Hi,
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > So what's your secret - how did you pack an entire synchrotron
> into
>
> > a little box?
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > OK, so I am being facetious a little. However, I cannot help
> asking
>
> > myself why would I want to spend so much money on a system that is
>
> > basically a (vertical) X-ray diffractometer in a box, with fixed
>
> > distance, and sans the ability to collect data? I can only guess
>
> > that the system costs in the range of $400K (am I right?) and for
>
> > that money one could get a pretty nice actual X-ray diffraction
> set-
>
> > up...
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Now, if this thing cost say ... $80K I may be interested, although
>
> > most of our crystals are so small that this set-up will uniformly
>
> > score them as 'no idea' because they don't even diffract at home
> on
>
> > a 'real' X-ray source with a CCD.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Artem
>
> >
>
> > P.S. the day I start routinely confusing protein and salt crystals
>
> > is the day I stop working in the lab :)
>
> >
>
> > On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 3:00 AM, Marcus Winter
> <[log in to unmask]
>
> > > wrote:
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Dear Chris,
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > I’m prompted by your posting just to mention the Agilent
> Technologies
>
> >
>
> > PX Scanner ‘Crystal Challenge’ at:
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > www.agilent.com/chem/crystalchallenge
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Thus, the only really useful assessment, or ‘score’, of objects
>
> > (putative
>
> >
>
> > crystals) – or crystallisation conditions, is by the actual
> observed
>
> > diffraction
>
> >
>
> > characteristics... and these preferably directly in situ, in the
>
> > horizontal
>
> >
>
> > crystallisation plate, as achieved in the PX Scanner.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Many Thanks and Best Regards,
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Marcus Winter (Agilent Technologies)
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > From: CCP4 bulletin board [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf
>
> > Of Chris Ulens
>
> > Sent: 18 April 2011 08:24
>
> > To: [log in to unmask]
>
> > Subject: [ccp4bb] viewing and scoring crystallization drops on the
>
> > iPad
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Our laboratory has been developing an application to view and
> score
>
> > crystallization drops on the iPad. We would like to know if
>
> > crystallographers see potential benefits from the functionality of
>
> > the iPad to swipe and pinch through drops. We are looking for
>
> > specific comments from Formulatrix users, but other users are also
>
> > welcome to comment.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LezurNhm0pA
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Specific ideas for future development are:
>
> >
>
> > - composition of crystallization buffers on a back-flip of the
> image
>
> > drop
>
> >
>
> > - back-sync of crystallization scores on the iPad with the image
>
> > database
>
> >
>
> > - emailing a drop image to colleague
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Thanks.
>
> >
>
> > -Chris
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > ---------------------------------------------------
>
> >
>
> > Chris Ulens, Ph.D.
>
> >
>
> > Lab of Structural Neurobiology
>
> >
>
> > Department of Molecular Cell Biology
>
> >
>
> > Campus Gasthuisberg, ON1
>
> >
>
> > Herestraat 49, PB 601
>
> >
>
> > B-3000 Leuven
>
> >
>
> > Belgium
>
> >
>
> > http://www.xtal.be
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
>
>
>
|