[3dem] LaB6 to cryo - upgrade suggestions

[Ludtke, Steven J.]

Hi Andrei,
Our core has a 2100 with LAB6 for screening with a DE-12 and a Gatan cryoholder. It is a very nice screening instrument. Potentially good for perhaps 6-10 Å on cryo specimens if everything is optimal, but we generally move to a better instrument as soon as we confirm we have good grids.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Steven Ludtke, Ph.D. <sludtke at bcm.edu<mailto:sludtke at bcm.edu>>                      Baylor College of Medicine
Charles C. Bell Jr., Professor of Structural Biology
Dept. of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology                      (www.bcm.edu/biochem<http://www.bcm.edu/biochem>)
Academic Director, CryoEM Core                                        (cryoem.bcm.edu<http://cryoem.bcm.edu>)
Co-Director CIBR Center                                    (www.bcm.edu/research/cibr<http://www.bcm.edu/research/cibr>)



On Jun 7, 2019, at 7:25 PM, Andrei Moiseenko <postmoiseenko at gmail.com<mailto:postmoiseenko at gmail.com>> wrote:

***CAUTION:*** This email is not from a BCM Source. Only click links or open attachments you know are safe.
________________________________
Dear all,
I consider upgrading my microscope to a cryo-em. My purpose is to use it as a screening device and also for low-resolution single particle data acquisition. But I am not sure if our configuration can possibly fit this purpose, so I’m seeking for an advise.
What we already have:
1.       JEOL JEM-2100: 200kV, Cs 1.4, Сс 1.8, LaB6 gun
2.       Anticontaminator: JEOL cryo-fin (not a twin-blade style).
3.       Pretty fine Thon rings up to 5A at -1mkm defocus
4.       Three condenser lenses, nice parallel illumination
5.       Stable 1.0-1.1 eV electron energy spread, measured from EELS ZLP
6.       Already set up single particle acquisition with serialEM for negative stained samples.
What we consider to get:
1.       Direct Electron DE-20 instead of a 2k CCD
2.       Gatan cryo-transfer holder.
I would appreciate any opinion on this upgrade. Does it seem reasonable or not?
I will also be very grateful for any suggestions about highest possible resolution on such a system and about any important limitations that we should be aware of.

Best regards,
Andrey Moiseenko
Electron Microscopy Lab @ Biology Department
Moscow State University
postmoiseenko at gmail.com<mailto:postmoiseenko at gmail.com>
skype: callmoiseenko
_______________________________________________
3dem mailing list
3dem at ncmir.ucsd.edu<mailto:3dem at ncmir.ucsd.edu>
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__mail.ncmir.ucsd.edu_mailman_listinfo_3dem&d=DwICAg&c=ZQs-KZ8oxEw0p81sqgiaRA&r=Dk5VoQQ-wINYVssLMZihyC5Dj_sWYKxCyKz9E4Lp3gc&m=mzx6EhH70PZaxjoyGeT2zyilXcN5jhM2HOLn5vkFYy8&s=0ZAOI9mEeC6Vv6pl5oLVAbDEsaG9YBCQzfqBWFBuMcs&e=

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.ncmir.ucsd.edu/pipermail/3dem/attachments/20190607/d3010a12/attachment-0001.html>