I think scans are better than theory, and there can also be "white lines" which
are often dramatically higher than predicted. Just make sure that you do not
roast your best crystal when you do your scan!
Jacob
*******************************************
Jacob Pearson Keller
Northwestern University
Medical Scientist Training Program
Dallos Laboratory
F. Searle 1-240
2240 Campus Drive
Evanston IL 60208
lab: 847.491.2438
cel: 773.608.9185
email: j-kell...@northwestern.edu
*******************************************
----- Original Message -----
From: Jerry McCully
To: CCP4BB@JISCMAIL.AC.UK
Sent: Thursday, July 16, 2009 12:15 PM
Subject: [ccp4bb] MAD wavelength
Dear All:
Next week we are going to try some seleno-Met labeled crystals.
We checked the literature to try to find out the peak wavelength that
has been used for SAD or MAD data collection. But they are slightly different (
may be 50 ev) in different papers.
I guess this is due to the discrepancy between the fluorescence scanning
and the theoretical vaules of f' and f''.
When we collect the data, which wavelength should we use? Should we
trust the scanning results?
Thanks a lot for your comments.
All the best,
Jerry McCully
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Insert movie times and more without leaving Hotmail®. See how.
