On Sunday, 09 June 2013, Theresa Hsu wrote: > Dear all > > A question for the cross-trained members of this forum - for small sized > proteins, is NMR better than crystallography in terms of data collection > (having crystals in the first place) and data processing? How about membrane > proteins?
A relevant study is the comparison by Yee et al (2005) JACS 127:16512. <http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/ja053565+> They tried to solve 263 small proteins using both NMR and crystallography. 43 only worked for NMR 43 only worked for X-ray 21 could be solved either way So you could say it was a toss-up, but consider that - As the size gets larger, NMR becomes increasingly impractical - 156 (60%) weren't solved by either NMR or crystallography. What is the relative cost of the failed attempt? Ethan
