I agree with Tassos, and btw think that this crystallographer, should be
able to go back into the lab and optimize the present crystal conditions
to get better crystals. In particularly, when he or she realize that the
scientific question they set out to investigate cannot be answered, by
analyzing the final structure, with the available data quality.
Preben
On 1/13/13 8:52 PM, Anastassis Perrakis wrote:
I think the real challenge (and one that makes for an excellent macromolecular
crystallographer) is how well one can interpret a map with poor phases.
Let me disagree ... An excellent macromolecular crystallographer, is one that
given some crystals can derive the best strategy to collect data,
process the data optimally, derive phases using all available information,
build a model and refine it in such a way that it best explains both data
and geometrical expectations, and do these as efficiently as possible.
Efficiency may suggest using one automated suite or another - or indeed may
best be achieved by manual labor - be it in the map or in data
collection strategy or refinement or another step: and here I am ignoring the
art of transforming hair-needle-crystalline-like-dingbits to a diffracting
crystal.
One that can interpret a map with poor phases can be either a genius in 3d
orientation - or a not necessarily too intelligent nor experienced but
determined student
that can drink and breathe this map for a few weeks in a row until a solution
is in place. Neither would make an excellent macromolecular crystallographer by
necessity.
Tassos
