 |
 |
As one of the people involved (I'm author #74 out of 88 on PMID 21293373), I can tell you that about half of the three million snapshots were blank, but we wanted to be honest about the number that were collected, as well as the "minimum" number that were needed to get a useful data set. The blank images were on purpose, since the nanocrystals were diluted so that there would be relatively few double-hits. As many of you know, multiple lattices crash autoindexing algorithms! Whether or not a blank image or a failed autoindexing run qualifies as "conforming to our existing model" or not I suppose is a matter of semantics. But yes, I suppose some details do get lost between the actual work and the press release! In case anyone wants to look at the data, it has been deposited in the PDB under 3PCQ, and the detailed processing methods published under PMID: 20389587. -James Holton MAD Scientist On 2/9/2011 10:38 AM, Thomas Juettemann wrote: > http://www.nanowerk.com/news/newsid=20045.php > > http://home.slac.stanford.edu/pressreleases/2011/20110202.htm > > I think it is pretty exciting, although they only take the few > datasets that conform to their > existing model: > > "The team combined 10,000 of the three million snapshots they took to > come up with a good match for the known molecular structure of > Photosystem I."