HELP! Protein Graphics!! Sorry, No help available on that topic

Ronald Knegtel ronald at rugcbe.chem.rug.nl
Wed Feb 1 08:25:19 EST 1995


In article <3glegb$56a at lyra.csx.cam.ac.uk>, owde100 at bioc.cam.ac.uk (Orhan Ertughrul) writes:
|> In article <1995Jan30.201542.18484 at alw.nih.gov>, johnk at spasm.niddk.nih.gov (John Kuszewski) writes:
|>  > In article <3ggmdi$5j at mace.cc.purdue.edu>, barani at mace.cc.purdue.edu (Barani) writes:
|>  > |>   IMHO crystallographers are more closer to the truths 
|>  > |>  of a biomolecule than anyone else. 
|>  > 
|>  > Except, of course, for us NMR people.  No packing distotions,
|>  > good pictures of flexibility. 

|> And a residue limit of about 250AA even for 4D. NMR is always going to be a 
|> technique of restricted use until larger biomolecules can be resolved.

But then again, any technique is of restricted use (ever tried to crystallize
and solve a G-protein coupled receptor, I guess we'll leave that to the EM
people). Let us not argue about which technique is best, each of them, 
including modelling, can give us a new perspective on the complex problems
we are facing: why are proteins folded they way they are and why do they function as they do.. I got my PhD in bio-NMR and modelling and am currently working in a bio-X-ray lab. I feel all three techniques are interesting and useful but not perfect. Let's try to learn from each other instead of putting 
each other down.

Just my $0.02,

Ronald



More information about the Proteins mailing list