 |
 |
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 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >