Re: [ccp4bb] Nature policy update regarding source code

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

CCP4bb navigation

CCP4bb <-- 2007 <-- March 2007 <-- 26 March 2007

Previous message:
Subject: Re: Highest shell standards
From: "Fred {- dot -} Vellieux" vellieux {- at -} IBS {- dot -} FR
Date: 2007-03-26

Next message:
Subject: Re: Inclusion body
From: Cynthia Kinsland clk10 {- at -} CORNELL {- dot -} EDU
Date: 2007-03-26

Subject: Re: Nature policy update regarding source code
From: artem {- at -} XTALS {- dot -} ORG artem {- at -} XTALS {- dot -} ORG
Date: 2007-03-26

Hi,

From a very narrow point of view of a crystallographer/protein
expressionist, this is an overkill. Obviously if you're dealing with
articles in materials science, physics, etc. - not everything is as simple
as getting some DNA.

Generally speaking, if someone wants to reproduce nearly any
crystallographic results all they need is the source DNA in whatever form.
An obvious exception to that would be the case where the protein is
purified from a natural source. Special cases excluded; cloning,
expression, purification and so forth should be reproducible from source
DNA onward. In fact, with the advent and proliferation of synthetic DNA
even that requirement is not really all that important - all you need is
the sequence, provided that the 'materials and methods' section of the
work is well written and no significant details are omitted. The latter is
(in my experience) the more common problem than the availability of
sarting materials. It is very hard to include absolutely everything into
the Materials and Methods. At least half of the published protocols we've
reproduced required very significant investment of effort to get right
(sometimes even changing expression systems from what's reported). The end
point is clear - the crystal structures DO reproduce quite faithfully even
if extra work has to be done to get there.

For many industrial scientists the following sentence is basically the end
of the road as far as publication is concerned:

"One preferred form of disclosure is a link from the methods section to a
copy of the relevant Material Transfer Agreement (MTA) form, which is
hosted as Supplementary Information on the journal's web site."

Pharma/biotech companies are typically very reluctant to make blanket
provisions of this kind.

Are the journals trying to exclude industrial submissions?

Artem

CCP4bb navigation

CCP4bb <-- 2007 <-- March 2007 <-- 26 March 2007

Previous message:
Subject: Re: Highest shell standards
From: "Fred {- dot -} Vellieux" vellieux {- at -} IBS {- dot -} FR
Date: 2007-03-26

Next message:
Subject: Re: Inclusion body
From: Cynthia Kinsland clk10 {- at -} CORNELL {- dot -} EDU
Date: 2007-03-26