Re: [ccp4bb] How many twinned crystals?

2007-09-06 Thread Eleanor Dodson
Not an expert on integration at all, but is this true for mosaic 
crystals when spots overlap rather messily?

Eleanor

George M. Sheldrick wrote:
Since processing non-merohedrally twinned crystals became routine in 
small-molecule crystallography, the number of such twins has increased 
dramatically. The data are often as good as from normal crystals and 
there is the advantage of getting a higher redundancy and greater 
completeness by collecting data from two or more crystals in different 
orientations at the same time! At the moment non-meroderally twinned 
protein crystals are often thrown away (e.g. because they don't index 
with programs designed for untwinned crystals) or one tries not to 
notice that the other components are there. I predict that when
MOSFLM, XDS, HKL2000 etc. are able to index and integrate non-merodedral 
twins, they will suddenly become much more common for macromolecules 
too. At least there is no problem indexing and integrating merohedral 
twins, and some refinement programs can handle them, so most of the 
discussion in this list has been about merohedral twins so far.


George

Prof. George M. Sheldrick FRS
Dept. Structural Chemistry, 
University of Goettingen,

Tammannstr. 4,
D37077 Goettingen, Germany
Tel. +49-551-39-3021 or -3068
Fax. +49-551-39-2582


On Fri, 31 Aug 2007, Ian Tickle wrote:

  
 
In the past twinned crystals must have been much more frequent than

published twinned structures because the traditional reaction of
crystallographers to twinning has been either to find a way of
inhibiting it or chucking the crystals in the bin and finding a
non-twinned form.  But I guess that's changing now with better software
and we're becoming more adventurous - maybe that's why we're hearing
about more twinned crystals now.

-- Ian



-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jacob Keller

Sent: 31 August 2007 18:32
To: CCP4BB@JISCMAIL.AC.UK
Subject: How many twinned crystals?

Since I joined this list, I have seen many many issues with 
twinned structures, but have never seen 
any personally. Granted, problems with twinning induce people 
to write to the list, making them
seem more prominent, but does anyone have an idea what 
percent of crystals are twinned, or know of

a ref about this? I always thought it was an anomaly, but

All the best,

Jacob Keller



  

Disclaimer
This communication is confidential and may contain privileged information intended solely for the named addressee(s). It may not be used or disclosed except for the purpose for which it has been sent. If you are not the intended recipient you must not review, use, disclose, copy, distribute or take any action in reliance upon it. If you have received this communication in error, please notify Astex Therapeutics Ltd by emailing [EMAIL PROTECTED] and destroy all copies of the message and any attached documents. 
Astex Therapeutics Ltd monitors, controls and protects all its messaging traffic in compliance with its corporate email policy. The Company accepts no liability or responsibility for any onward transmission or use of emails and attachments having left the Astex Therapeutics domain.  Unless expressly stated, opinions in this message are those of the individual sender and not of Astex Therapeutics Ltd. The recipient should check this email and any attachments for the presence of computer viruses. Astex Therapeutics Ltd accepts no liability for damage caused by any virus transmitted by this email. E-mail is susceptible to data corruption, interception, unauthorized amendment, and tampering, Astex Therapeutics Ltd only send and receive e-mails on the basis that the Company is not liable for any such alteration or any consequences thereof.

Astex Therapeutics Ltd., Registered in England at 436 Cambridge Science Park, 
Cambridge CB4 0QA under number 3751674





  


Re: [ccp4bb] How many twinned crystals?

2007-09-06 Thread George M. Sheldrick
Crystals with messy spots smeared out in one direction with sometimes more 
than one maximum are probably better described as split crystals rather 
than twins, but if the splitting of the spots is clear enough the same 
procedures can be used to integrate them.

George

Prof. George M. Sheldrick FRS
Dept. Structural Chemistry, 
University of Goettingen,
Tammannstr. 4,
D37077 Goettingen, Germany
Tel. +49-551-39-3021 or -3068
Fax. +49-551-39-2582


On Thu, 6 Sep 2007, Eleanor Dodson wrote:

> Not an expert on integration at all, but is this true for mosaic crystals when
> spots overlap rather messily?
> Eleanor
> 
> George M. Sheldrick wrote:
> > Since processing non-merohedrally twinned crystals became routine in
> > small-molecule crystallography, the number of such twins has increased
> > dramatically. The data are often as good as from normal crystals and
> > there is the advantage of getting a higher redundancy and greater
> > completeness by collecting data from two or more crystals in different
> > orientations at the same time! At the moment non-meroderally twinned
> > protein crystals are often thrown away (e.g. because they don't index
> > with programs designed for untwinned crystals) or one tries not to notice
> > that the other components are there. I predict that when
> > MOSFLM, XDS, HKL2000 etc. are able to index and integrate non-merodedral
> > twins, they will suddenly become much more common for macromolecules too.
> > At least there is no problem indexing and integrating merohedral twins,
> > and some refinement programs can handle them, so most of the discussion
> > in this list has been about merohedral twins so far.
> > 
> > George
> > 
> > Prof. George M. Sheldrick FRS
> > Dept. Structural Chemistry, University of Goettingen,
> > Tammannstr. 4,
> > D37077 Goettingen, Germany
> > Tel. +49-551-39-3021 or -3068
> > Fax. +49-551-39-2582
> > 
> > 
> > On Fri, 31 Aug 2007, Ian Tickle wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > > 
> > > In the past twinned crystals must have been much more frequent than
> > > published twinned structures because the traditional reaction of
> > > crystallographers to twinning has been either to find a way of
> > > inhibiting it or chucking the crystals in the bin and finding a
> > > non-twinned form.  But I guess that's changing now with better
> > > software
> > > and we're becoming more adventurous - maybe that's why we're hearing
> > > about more twinned crystals now.
> > > 
> > > -- Ian
> > > 
> > > 
> > > > -Original Message-
> > > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jacob Keller
> > > > Sent: 31 August 2007 18:32
> > > > To: CCP4BB@JISCMAIL.AC.UK
> > > > Subject: How many twinned crystals?
> > > > 
> > > > Since I joined this list, I have seen many many issues with
> > > > twinned structures, but have never seen any personally. Granted,
> > > > problems with twinning induce people to write to the list, making
> > > > them
> > > > seem more prominent, but does anyone have an idea what percent of
> > > > crystals are twinned, or know of
> > > > a ref about this? I always thought it was an anomaly, but
> > > > 
> > > > All the best,
> > > > 
> > > > Jacob Keller
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > Disclaimer
> > > This communication is confidential and may contain privileged
> > > information intended solely for the named addressee(s). It may not be
> > > used or disclosed except for the purpose for which it has been sent.
> > > If you are not the intended recipient you must not review, use,
> > > disclose, copy, distribute or take any action in reliance upon it. If
> > > you have received this communication in error, please notify Astex
> > > Therapeutics Ltd by emailing [EMAIL PROTECTED] and
> > > destroy all copies of the message and any attached documents. Astex
> > > Therapeutics Ltd monitors, controls and protects all its messaging
> > > traffic in compliance with its corporate email policy. The Company
> > > accepts no liability or responsibility for any onward transmission or
> > > use of emails and attachments having left the Astex Therapeutics
> > > domain.  Unless expressly stated, opinions in this message are those
> > > of the individual sender and not of Astex Therapeutics Ltd. The
> > > recipient should check this email and any attachments for the
> > > presence of computer viruses. Astex Therapeutics Ltd accepts no
> > > liability for damage caused by any virus transmitted by this email.
> > > E-mail is susceptible to data corruption, interception, unauthorized
> > > amendment, and tampering, Astex Therapeutics Ltd only send and
> > > receive e-mails on the basis that the Company is not liable for any
> > > such alteration or any consequences thereof.
> > > Astex Therapeutics Ltd., Registered in England at 436 Cambridge
> > > Science Park, Cambridge CB4 0QA under number 3751674
> > > 
> > > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> 
> 
> 


Re: [ccp4bb] How many twinned crystals?

2007-08-31 Thread George M. Sheldrick
Since processing non-merohedrally twinned crystals became routine in 
small-molecule crystallography, the number of such twins has increased 
dramatically. The data are often as good as from normal crystals and 
there is the advantage of getting a higher redundancy and greater 
completeness by collecting data from two or more crystals in different 
orientations at the same time! At the moment non-meroderally twinned 
protein crystals are often thrown away (e.g. because they don't index 
with programs designed for untwinned crystals) or one tries not to 
notice that the other components are there. I predict that when
MOSFLM, XDS, HKL2000 etc. are able to index and integrate non-merodedral 
twins, they will suddenly become much more common for macromolecules 
too. At least there is no problem indexing and integrating merohedral 
twins, and some refinement programs can handle them, so most of the 
discussion in this list has been about merohedral twins so far.

George

Prof. George M. Sheldrick FRS
Dept. Structural Chemistry, 
University of Goettingen,
Tammannstr. 4,
D37077 Goettingen, Germany
Tel. +49-551-39-3021 or -3068
Fax. +49-551-39-2582


On Fri, 31 Aug 2007, Ian Tickle wrote:

>  
> In the past twinned crystals must have been much more frequent than
> published twinned structures because the traditional reaction of
> crystallographers to twinning has been either to find a way of
> inhibiting it or chucking the crystals in the bin and finding a
> non-twinned form.  But I guess that's changing now with better software
> and we're becoming more adventurous - maybe that's why we're hearing
> about more twinned crystals now.
> 
> -- Ian
> 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jacob Keller
> > Sent: 31 August 2007 18:32
> > To: CCP4BB@JISCMAIL.AC.UK
> > Subject: How many twinned crystals?
> > 
> > Since I joined this list, I have seen many many issues with 
> > twinned structures, but have never seen 
> > any personally. Granted, problems with twinning induce people 
> > to write to the list, making them
> > seem more prominent, but does anyone have an idea what 
> > percent of crystals are twinned, or know of
> > a ref about this? I always thought it was an anomaly, but
> > 
> > All the best,
> > 
> > Jacob Keller
> > 
> > 
> > 
> 
> 
> Disclaimer
> This communication is confidential and may contain privileged information 
> intended solely for the named addressee(s). It may not be used or disclosed 
> except for the purpose for which it has been sent. If you are not the 
> intended recipient you must not review, use, disclose, copy, distribute or 
> take any action in reliance upon it. If you have received this communication 
> in error, please notify Astex Therapeutics Ltd by emailing [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> and destroy all copies of the message and any attached documents. 
> Astex Therapeutics Ltd monitors, controls and protects all its messaging 
> traffic in compliance with its corporate email policy. The Company accepts no 
> liability or responsibility for any onward transmission or use of emails and 
> attachments having left the Astex Therapeutics domain.  Unless expressly 
> stated, opinions in this message are those of the individual sender and not 
> of Astex Therapeutics Ltd. The recipient should check this email and any 
> attachments for the presence of computer viruses. Astex Therapeutics Ltd 
> accepts no liability for damage caused by any virus transmitted by this 
> email. E-mail is susceptible to data corruption, interception, unauthorized 
> amendment, and tampering, Astex Therapeutics Ltd only send and receive 
> e-mails on the basis that the Company is not liable for any such alteration 
> or any consequences thereof.
> Astex Therapeutics Ltd., Registered in England at 436 Cambridge Science Park, 
> Cambridge CB4 0QA under number 3751674
> 


Re: [ccp4bb] How many twinned crystals?

2007-08-31 Thread Ian Tickle
 
In the past twinned crystals must have been much more frequent than
published twinned structures because the traditional reaction of
crystallographers to twinning has been either to find a way of
inhibiting it or chucking the crystals in the bin and finding a
non-twinned form.  But I guess that's changing now with better software
and we're becoming more adventurous - maybe that's why we're hearing
about more twinned crystals now.

-- Ian

> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jacob Keller
> Sent: 31 August 2007 18:32
> To: CCP4BB@JISCMAIL.AC.UK
> Subject: How many twinned crystals?
> 
> Since I joined this list, I have seen many many issues with 
> twinned structures, but have never seen 
> any personally. Granted, problems with twinning induce people 
> to write to the list, making them
> seem more prominent, but does anyone have an idea what 
> percent of crystals are twinned, or know of
> a ref about this? I always thought it was an anomaly, but
> 
> All the best,
> 
> Jacob Keller
> 
> 
> 


Disclaimer
This communication is confidential and may contain privileged information 
intended solely for the named addressee(s). It may not be used or disclosed 
except for the purpose for which it has been sent. If you are not the intended 
recipient you must not review, use, disclose, copy, distribute or take any 
action in reliance upon it. If you have received this communication in error, 
please notify Astex Therapeutics Ltd by emailing [EMAIL PROTECTED] and destroy 
all copies of the message and any attached documents. 
Astex Therapeutics Ltd monitors, controls and protects all its messaging 
traffic in compliance with its corporate email policy. The Company accepts no 
liability or responsibility for any onward transmission or use of emails and 
attachments having left the Astex Therapeutics domain.  Unless expressly 
stated, opinions in this message are those of the individual sender and not of 
Astex Therapeutics Ltd. The recipient should check this email and any 
attachments for the presence of computer viruses. Astex Therapeutics Ltd 
accepts no liability for damage caused by any virus transmitted by this email. 
E-mail is susceptible to data corruption, interception, unauthorized amendment, 
and tampering, Astex Therapeutics Ltd only send and receive e-mails on the 
basis that the Company is not liable for any such alteration or any 
consequences thereof.
Astex Therapeutics Ltd., Registered in England at 436 Cambridge Science Park, 
Cambridge CB4 0QA under number 3751674