Artem Evdokimov wrote:
(although Pt(IV) compounds seem to be fairly interested in -S-S- in my
experience).
I've certainly seen PIP interact (usefully for phasing) with -S-S- and
-S- (Met).
Cheers,
Charlie
--
Charlie Bond
Professorial Fellow
University of Western Australia
School of Biomedical,
Yes, very much so.
In fact it's one of the old-school reversible protection methods for the -SH
group. Many commonly used heavy atoms avidly bind -SH but only weakly bind
-S-S- (although Pt(IV) compounds seem to be fairly interested in -S-S- in my
experience).
You can break this bond with TCEP -
Hi,
In addition to the other insightful reply, I'd like to remind folks that
glycerol solutions (neat glycerol also does it but slower) can undergo
degradation resulting in various mono- and di-carboxylic acids, some of
which are decent chelators.
Artem
---
When the Weasel comes to give New Year
Ho,
interesting case.
Glycerol actually forms weak complexes with metal ions:
Journal of Inorganic Biochemistry,60 299-302 (1995) and some references
therein.
But to be true, I am surprised that glycerol at concentrations of 10-15%
(?) as used in cryo conditions can compete with a metal ion bin
I am working with a metalloprotein that binds cobalt and iron. I
was surprised that the solved structures showed the crystals
cryoprotected with glycerol are metal free while crystals
cryoprotected with ethylene glycol had the metals present. Both
cryoprotectant solutions contained metal in th
On Wednesday 13 May 2009 10:31:50 Jacob Keller wrote:
> So what is the approximate percent contribution of the
> *temperature-dependent* b-factor at 100K, for an average crystal, or how to
> determine such?
I gave a reference for how to determine this. But as I said, to the best
of my knowledg
On Wednesday 13 May 2009 10:22:54 Patrick Loll wrote:
> Greg Petsko's group did something like this about a billion years ago
> (yet, strangely, I remember the paper, even though I'd be stumped if
> you asked me what I had for breakfast...)
>
> They covered the range from room temp down to ver
A postdoctoral position is available at the Department of Pharmacology, UT
Southwestern
Medical Center at Dallas, TX. Our lab uses both NMR and X-ray crystallography
to
characterize the atomic structures of macromolecules involved in cancer-related
signaling
pathways. We are also interested
Dear Rafal,
I'm developing a graphical tool to construct RNA 3D models. You can find all
the details at this address: http://www.bioinformatics.org/assemble/
It is open-source. At now, i'm searching beta-testers before the official
1.0 release. If you're interested, I will send you an email expla
I was so looking forward to being able to report that Apple's recent 600
MB bugfix had got the jitters out of PyMOL on an external screen, but
no. It still flickers like a German disco in the 90s when I ray trace.
X11 2.4. should be coming out soon. There's always hope.
Andreas
Engin Oz
So what is the approximate percent contribution of the
*temperature-dependent* b-factor at 100K, for an average crystal, or how to
determine such? In other words, if I have a crystal with an avg B of 20,
when I go from 100K to 0K, how much lower will it drop? I recall seeing
papers exploring li
This is posted as a favor for a collaborator, please do not respond to
me but directly to Neal Alto.
---
A postdoctoral research position is available in the laboratory of Dr
Greg Petsko's group did something like this about a billion years ago
(yet, strangely, I remember the paper, even though I'd be stumped if
you asked me what I had for breakfast...)
They covered the range from room temp down to very cold, using
different cryoprotectants (importantly, they we
On Wednesday 13 May 2009 09:30:06 Jacob Keller wrote:
> > The reason is that you've missed out one important term: the atomic
> > displacement parameters (B-factors), which describe a combination of
> > thermal motion and positional disorder between unit cells.
>
> A somewhat niggling point: isn
The reason is that you've missed out one important term: the atomic
displacement parameters (B-factors), which describe a combination of
thermal motion and positional disorder between unit cells.
A somewhat niggling point: isn't it true that the thermal motion is
insignificant at 100K? Does an
My X11 is still on 2.3.1 after updating to 10.5.7 (I could never get
X11 2.3.2 to work properly)
Coot fine
Phil
On 13 May 2009, at 17:25, Engin Ozkan wrote:
The new OS X 10.5.7 update downgrades your X11 to 2.1.6. There is a
new X11 update, 2.3.3, only for 10.5.7 users.
It might be pruden
The new OS X 10.5.7 update downgrades your X11 to 2.1.6. There is a new
X11 update, 2.3.3, only for 10.5.7 users.
It might be prudent to update to 10.5.7 and then xquartz 2.3.3, before
reporting that coot or something else is suddenly broken.
As usual, very annoying...
Engin
Ian Tickle wrote:
Sorry I don't have instant access to Acta A here so can't comment in the
light of the Flack & Shmueli paper. But it seems to me that Kevin's
point is still valid,
I think that I stated that I agree with him ?
regardless of whether or not the anomalously
scattering atoms ha
Kevin Cowtan wrote:
Marc SCHILTZ wrote:
I agree with everything but would like to add the following: if we
assume an overall atomic displacement parameter, the drop-off in both
the anomalous and non-anomalous scattering is the same. Therefore, the
ratio of anomalous differences over mean in
Sorry I don't have instant access to Acta A here so can't comment in the
light of the Flack & Shmueli paper. But it seems to me that Kevin's
point is still valid, regardless of whether or not the anomalously
scattering atoms have different ADPs from the average or not. I agree
that this would hav
Marc SCHILTZ wrote:
I agree with everything but would like to add the following: if we
assume an overall atomic displacement parameter, the drop-off in both
the anomalous and non-anomalous scattering is the same. Therefore, the
ratio of anomalous differences over mean intensity (which is what c
Kevin Cowtan wrote:
This is absolutely correct - in the analysis you present, the
non-anomalous scattering drops with resolution, but the anomalous part
does not. And since counting noise varies with intensity, we should
actually be better off at high resolution, since there is less
non-anomal
This is absolutely correct - in the analysis you present, the
non-anomalous scattering drops with resolution, but the anomalous part
does not. And since counting noise varies with intensity, we should
actually be better off at high resolution, since there is less
non-anomalous scattering to con
23 matches
Mail list logo
