Issue 29, 2015

A comparative study on the quality of protein crystals obtained using the cross-diffusion microbatch and sitting-drop vapor diffusion methods

Abstract

We presented a systematic quality comparison of protein crystals grown using the cross-diffusion microbatch (CDM) and standard sitting-drop vapor diffusion methods. Eleven proteins were screened and it was found that crystals grown using CDM exhibited a better morphology. X-ray diffraction showed that the CDM method is practical and useful for obtaining high-quality protein crystals.

Graphical abstract: A comparative study on the quality of protein crystals obtained using the cross-diffusion microbatch and sitting-drop vapor diffusion methods

Supplementary files

Article information

Article type
Communication
Submitted
18 Mar 2015
Accepted
22 Jun 2015
First published
22 Jun 2015

CrystEngComm, 2015,17, 5365-5371

Author version available

A comparative study on the quality of protein crystals obtained using the cross-diffusion microbatch and sitting-drop vapor diffusion methods

H. Hou, B. Wang, S. Hu, J. Wang, P. Zhu, Y. Liu, M. Wang and D. Yin, CrystEngComm, 2015, 17, 5365 DOI: 10.1039/C5CE00551E

To request permission to reproduce material from this article, please go to the Copyright Clearance Center request page.

If you are an author contributing to an RSC publication, you do not need to request permission provided correct acknowledgement is given.

If you are the author of this article, you do not need to request permission to reproduce figures and diagrams provided correct acknowledgement is given. If you want to reproduce the whole article in a third-party publication (excluding your thesis/dissertation for which permission is not required) please go to the Copyright Clearance Center request page.

Read more about how to correctly acknowledge RSC content.

Social activity

Spotlight

Advertisements