[3dem] Overcoming orientation preference issue
Marta Carroni
marta.carroni at scilifelab.se
Thu May 18 02:55:12 PDT 2017
Dear Yang,
what helped in our case was to have a thin carbon film (lacey grids +
ultrathin carbon) AND to glow discharge positively in the presence of
pentylamine. Just put a couple of little Whatman paper pieces embedded
with 100µl of pentylamine in the glow discharge chamber. You should get
a bluish (rather than pinkish) glow.
Cheers!
Marta
On 18/05/2017 07:53, Dmitry Lyumkis wrote:
> Alas, it is too late for us, since it is post-peer review. But seems
> like BioRxiv is really the way to go. Perhaps this is a relevant
> discussion for the upcoming GRC or NRAMM workshop.
>
>
>> On May 17, 2017, at 10:23 PM, Gabriel Lander <glander at gmail.com
>> <mailto:glander at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>> Dmitry, don't make us all wait until August!
>> http://biorxiv.org/
>>
>>> On May 17, 2017, at 10:51 AM, Dmitry Lyumkis <dlyumkis at salk.edu
>>> <mailto:dlyumkis at salk.edu>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Dear Yang,
>>>
>>> This is a very common problem. Severely preferred orientation not
>>> only limits your ability to reconstruct an accurate map, but can
>>> also induce overfitting, sometimes rather dramatically.
>>>
>>> We have a manuscript coming out on this very issue detailing the
>>> problems, both with respect to overfitting, and how one might be
>>> able to generally address it by tilting the stage (as both Pawel and
>>> David had mentioned). It is currently in press, but look out for it
>>> in Nature Methods in early August. Briefly, with severely preferred
>>> orientation, I would suggest using higher tilt angles. Whenever you
>>> tilt the stage, there are several things that you have to take into
>>> account: (1) higher background contrast from inherently thicker ice;
>>> (2) increased beam induced movement from tilting; (3) limitations on
>>> estimating the CTF. The first problem is inherent to the data and
>>> cannot be solved (although it can be ameliorated by collecting using
>>> high doses). The second and third problems are essentially practical
>>> in nature and your final resolution will depend on how well you can
>>> deal with them. Definitely use gold grids and not carbon grids
>>> (unless there are better substrates now that further minimize
>>> beam-induced motion???). We have had success using MotionCor2 for
>>> movie alignment and GCTF for CTF estimation (on an “individual”
>>> particle basis), but there are certainly other ways to do things.
>>> These combinations have generally been successful for us with
>>> several particle sizes, ranging from 150 kDa to Megadalton-sized,
>>> and provided near-atomic resolution for a range of sizes, including
>>> 150 kDa. For specimens adopting mild preferred orientation, tilts up
>>> to 20-30° are probably good enough; for the pathological cases,
>>> 40-50° might be what you’re looking for. If I had to venture a guess
>>> based on what you’re saying, given the fact that you have 2
>>> preferred orientations, I would probably suggest somewhere in the
>>> 30-40° range (but maybe try 30 first, which will have less
>>> beam-induced movement, and will be easier to reach high-resolution).
>>> Some of these details are still being worked out. Please contact me
>>> directly if you would like more information.
>>>
>>> Many of the other suggestions that have been proposed may also work.
>>> For example, detergents should help, and many people have had
>>> success, but they require higher protein concentrations to induce
>>> the sample to go into holes. In my personal experience, either with
>>> DDM or NP40, one would have to add detergent to a concentration that
>>> is ~CMC (or slightly higher). When I worked with the HIV trimer,
>>> PMC3954647 <https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3954647/>,
>>> I specifically found that one can induce more random orientations at
>>> DDM concentrations of ~2x below the CMC, whereas anything lower than
>>> that would not be enough. Since then, we worked with DDM
>>> concentrations at CMC for different samples. Still, this is going to
>>> be specimen dependent, and I have not worked with Tween20.
>>>
>>> Good luck!
>>>
>>> Dmitry
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Dmitry Lyumkis
>>> Salk Helmsley Fellow
>>> The Salk Institute for Biological Studies
>>> 10010 N. Torrey Pines Rd., La Jolla, CA 92037
>>> E: dlyumkis at salk.edu <mailto:dlyumkis at salk.edu>
>>> T: (858)-453-4100 ext. 1155
>>>
>>>> On May 17, 2017, at 9:24 AM, Jiang,Qiu-Xing <qxjiang at UFL.EDU
>>>> <mailto:qxjiang at UFL.EDU>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Dear yang,
>>>> Besides other tricks suggested here, in our hands we noticed that
>>>> our chemically oxidized carbon films have different surface
>>>> property from the glow-discharged films and can change the
>>>> orientational distribution by introducing a different interaction
>>>> profile. A detailed procedure for chemical oxidation and cleaning
>>>> is available in https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24457027 . It
>>>> might provide a different alternative.
>>>> Best luck.
>>>> Qiu-Xing
>>>>
>>>> —
>>>> From: 3dem <3dem-bounces at ncmir.ucsd.edu
>>>> <mailto:3dem-bounces at ncmir.ucsd.edu>> on behalf of Yang Li
>>>> <yanglixtal at gmail.com <mailto:yanglixtal at gmail.com>>
>>>> Date: Wednesday, May 17, 2017 at 8:46 AM
>>>> To: "3dem at ncmir.ucsd.edu <mailto:3dem at ncmir.ucsd.edu>"
>>>> <3dem at ncmir.ucsd.edu <mailto:3dem at ncmir.ucsd.edu>>
>>>> Subject: [3dem] Overcoming orientation preference issue
>>>>
>>>> Dear colleagues,
>>>>
>>>> We have a protein sample that suffers from severe orientation
>>>> preference, that most of the particles cluster into two distinct
>>>> orientations. This way we have to collect large amounts of data in
>>>> order to obtain enough effective particles, which hiders us from
>>>> reaching high resolution. We have tried to make thicker ice or
>>>> adding tiny amount of detergent such as Tween20, but not working
>>>> very well so far. I wonder if there are any tricks we can try to
>>>> overcome this orientation preference issue? Thank you in advance
>>>> for suggestions!
>>>>
>>>> Best,
>>>> Yang
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> 3dem mailing list
>>>> 3dem at ncmir.ucsd.edu <mailto:3dem at ncmir.ucsd.edu>
>>>> https://mail.ncmir.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/3dem
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 3dem mailing list
>>> 3dem at ncmir.ucsd.edu <mailto:3dem at ncmir.ucsd.edu>
>>> https://mail.ncmir.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/3dem
>>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 3dem mailing list
> 3dem at ncmir.ucsd.edu
> https://mail.ncmir.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/3dem
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.ncmir.ucsd.edu/pipermail/3dem/attachments/20170518/0edbe99b/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the 3dem
mailing list