Re: [ccp4bb] Selenomethionine reduction v.s. disulfide bond

Protein crystallography Programs for crystallography X-ray detectors
Basic tutorials:
Protein Peptide

CCP4bb navigation

CCP4bb <-- 2007 <-- April 2007 <-- 16 April 2007

Previous message:
Subject: Re: Differentiating bound Mn & Ca.
From: artem {- at -} XTALS {- dot -} ORG artem {- at -} XTALS {- dot -} ORG
Date: 2007-04-16

Next message:
Subject: Re: salt or protein?
From: artem {- at -} XTALS {- dot -} ORG artem {- at -} XTALS {- dot -} ORG
Date: 2007-04-16

Subject: Re: Selenomethionine reduction v.s. disulfide bond
From: artem {- at -} XTALS {- dot -} ORG artem {- at -} XTALS {- dot -} ORG
Date: 2007-04-16

Hello Tiancen,

The pundits often suggest keeping the selenium reduced (and indeed, it's
not a bad idea) however if you're worried about disulphides - I would say
that they take precedence over the selenium. If you work reasonably fast
you should be able to have the best of both worlds - have the selenium
safe and the disulphides oxidized.

Not to mention that there always are the good old heavy atom derivatives
to fall back on if the selenium data does not pan out :)

Artem

CCP4bb navigation

CCP4bb <-- 2007 <-- April 2007 <-- 16 April 2007

Previous message:
Subject: Re: Differentiating bound Mn & Ca.
From: artem {- at -} XTALS {- dot -} ORG artem {- at -} XTALS {- dot -} ORG
Date: 2007-04-16

Next message:
Subject: Re: salt or protein?
From: artem {- at -} XTALS {- dot -} ORG artem {- at -} XTALS {- dot -} ORG
Date: 2007-04-16