ReviewActa crystallographica. Section D, Structural biology2018
Predicting data quality in biological X-ray solution scattering.
Review in Acta crystallographica. Section D, Structural biology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- High-pressure small-angle X-ray scattering cell for biological solutions and soft materials.Journal of applied crystallography · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Biological small-angle X-ray solution scattering (BioSAXS) is now widely used to gain information on biomolecules in the solution state. Often, however, it is not obvious in advance whether a particular sample will scatter strongly enough to give useful data to draw conclusions under practically achievable solution conditions. Conformational changes that appear to be large may not always produce scattering curves that are distinguishable from each other at realistic concentrations and exposure times. Emerging technologies such as time-resolved SAXS (TR-SAXS) pose additional challenges owing to small beams and short sample path lengths. Beamline optics vary in brilliance and degree of background scatter, and major upgrades and improvements to sources promise to expand the reach of these methods. Computations are developed to estimate BioSAXS sample intensity at a more detailed level than previous approaches, taking into account flux, energy, sample thickness, window material, instrumental background, detector efficiency, solution conditions and other parameters. The results are validated with calibrated experiments using standard proteins on four different beamlines with various fluxes, energies and configurations. The ability of BioSAXS to statistically distinguish a variety of conformational movements under continuous-flow time-resolved conditions is then computed on a set of matched structure pairs drawn from the Database of Macromolecular Motions (http://molmovdb.org). The feasibility of experiments is ranked according to sample consumption, a quantity that varies by over two orders of magnitude for the set of structures. In addition to photon flux, the calculations suggest that window scattering and choice of wavelength are also important factors given the short sample path lengths common in such setups.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.