Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35913403›Full record

ArticleFaraday discussions2022

Customising the plunge-freezing workflow for challenging conditions.

Ian Hands-Portman, Saskia E Bakker

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Faraday discussions, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 19% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Ian Hands-PortmanAdvanced Bioimaging Research Technology Platform, University of Warwick, Gibbet Hill Road, Coventry, CV4 7AL, UK. s.bakker@warwick.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0002-8895-2342
Saskia E BakkerAdvanced Bioimaging Research Technology Platform, University of Warwick, Gibbet Hill Road, Coventry, CV4 7AL, UK. s.bakker@warwick.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0003-3958-4421
University of Warwick · GB

Funding

Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council BB/M01228X/1Medical Research Council MC_PC_17136
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Grid freezing is a critical step for successful cryo-transmission electron microscopy, and optimising freezing conditions is a considerable bottleneck in many projects. To improve reproducibility in grid preparation, temperature- and humidity-controlled chambers were built into the second generation of plunge-freezers, including the ThermoFisherScientific Vitrobot and Leica GP. Since then, for most published structures, the proteins were plunge-frozen from a cold, humid environment. This provides two benefits: many proteins are more stable at 4 °C than room temperature, and both the low temperature and the humidity help control evaporation of the tiny drop of liquid. However, for optimal stability, certain samples may have different requirements. Here, we describe various (reversible) adaptations made to a Leica GP2 system to accommodate several samples with special handling requirements: a protein that is sensitive to both light and oxygen, a sample that needs to be kept at 37 °C throughout the plunge-freezing process, and a method to freeze a polymer that gels at 37 °C in its gelled state. While some of these methods are specific to these specimens, we hope sharing the ideas behind them will help people who are dealing with tricky protein samples.

Indexed as

FreezingCryoelectron MicroscopyHumansReproducibility of ResultsWorkflow

Identifiers

PMID35913403
PMCPMC9641998
OpenAlexW4289323627

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.