Which trps protein check the MSGPP or SGPP website they might have what you are looking for.
Jürgen ...................... Jürgen Bosch Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health Department of Biochemistry & Molecular Biology Johns Hopkins Malaria Research Institute 615 North Wolfe Street, W8708 Baltimore, MD 21205 Phone: +1-410-614-4742 Lab: +1-410-614-4894 Fax: +1-410-955-3655 http://web.mac.com/bosch_lab/ On Oct 28, 2011, at 8:19, Vellieux Frederic <frederic.velli...@ibs.fr> wrote: > I must "say" that there were some emails exchanged between me and Gerard > later, in which I pointed out that I wasn't against deposition of images > (data frames). In fact, if SR sources kept user's data there would be > one more structure from here in the PDB: HDD failure here, the data on a > mirror HDD but the company in charge of maintenance erased the data > frames and data processing statistics by accident. For a trypanosomal > enzyme there is no chance that I can ever get funding now to replicate > the work (protein production and purification, crystallisation, data > collection) so that "Table 1" could be produced for a manuscript. > > However, my email to the bb was provocative - I admit I was doing this > willingly - to write that in such harsh funding times someone could > start a career, get some small grant, enough to clone produce purify > crystallize and collect a first data set. And then find him or herself > without funding for X years (success rate = less than 10% these days). > If this person then gets scooped by whoever, end of a promising career. > Unfortunately, such a prospect doesn't seem to be science fiction any > more nowadays. I hope this clears things. I wanted to be provocative and > point out the difficulties we are all facing wrt funding so that we > shouldn't set up a system that may result in killing careers. Our > politicians do not need any help from us on that I think. > > Fred. > > Gerard Bricogne wrote: >> Dear Remy, >> >> You are right, and I was about to send a message confessing that I had >> been rash in my response to Fred's. Another person e-mailed me off-list to >> point out that sometimes a structure can be quickly solved, but that doing >> all the rest of the work involved in wrapping that structure into a good >> biological story for publication can take a very long time, and that it >> would be wrong for a SR source's forced disclosure policy to start imposing >> deadlines on that process. I entirely agree with both of you and admit that >> I reacted too quickly and with insufficient thought to Fred's message. >> >> However, as you point out yourself, this issue is related to a >> different question (SR sources' disclosure policy towards all data collected >> on their beamlines) from the original one that started this thread >> (deposition of raw images with the pdb entries they led to). The two topics >> became entangled through the idea of prototyping an approach to the latter >> by tweaking the storage and access features involved in the former. >> >> Many thanks to you and to the other correspondent for picking up and >> correcting my error. This however leaves the main topic of this thread >> untouched. >> >> >> With best wishes, >> >> Gerard. >> >> -- >> On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 01:38:29PM +0200, Remy Loris wrote: >> >>> Dear Gerard, >>> >>> I cannot agree. Last year my group published a paper in Cell which >>> contained a structure for which the native data were collected at a >>> synchrotron around 1997. Various reasons contributed to the long lag period >>> for solving this structure, but basically it all came down to money needed >>> to do the work. Equally I am sure there are other cases for which a first >>> good native data set is a breakthrough you wish to protect rather than hand >>> it out to anyone who might potentially scoop you after you have put lots of >>> money and effort into the project. >>> >>> Therefore: Images corresponding to structures I deposit in the PDB: No >>> problem. That is what we do with processed data as well. But images of >>> unsolved structures, I don't see why that should be enforced or done >>> automatically by synchrotrons. Nobody deposits processed data without an >>> accompanying structure either. >>> >>> I do agree that one could be given the option to deposit interesting data >>> with which he/se will not continue for whatever reason. But this should be >>> optional, and a clear consensus should emerge within the community as how >>> the original producers of the data have to be acknowledged if these data >>> are used and the results published by another team, especially if the use >>> of that particular dataset is crucial for the publication. >>> >>> Remy Loris >>> Vrije Universiteit Brussel and VIB >>>
