[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
sad news (fwd)
*** For details on how to be removed from this list visit the ***
*** CCP4 home page http://www.dl.ac.uk/CCP/CCP4/main.html ***
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1998 18:16:13 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Joel L. Sussman" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
To: Judith Murray-Rust <email@example.com>
Cc: "Joel L. Sussman" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Subject: sad news
I thought you would be interested to hear that I just learned
from Dr. Gerald Selzer (of the NSF) that the PDB will be transferred to
Rutgers Univ. in Oct '99.
Needless to say, I was really really shocked & surprised
to learn of this decision, especially after seeing last month what
appeared to be a very positive reaction of the site visit committee
to our presentation and future plans. It seemed to me that the committee
was particularly pleased with the:
* Results of the Layered Release Protocol - with the number of new
entries requesting 'on-hold' now down to only 20% and going down.
* The fact that the PDB is now (based on its initiative) receiving close
to 80% of the X-ray entries with structure factors.
* They also saw the extremely good interactions that the PDB has with
the journals (as seen in recent editorials in PNAS, Science and Nature
and the change in these journals policy w.r.t. to release of coords
upon publication - using the PDB Layered Release Protocol).
* They also were pleased with the as well with the way we were getting
industrially determined 3D structures to be made easily available to the
community like the HIV-DB (developed by Alex Wlodawer's group) through an
interaction with the PDB and specifically via the 3DB Browser tool
* The very user friendly way to access the PDB via the 3DB Browser which
has already become the standard for several online journals pointing
to the PDB atlas pages of structures (in fact during the site visit,
it became clear that the information presented there - is in some ways
clearer and easier to read than the methods sections in some journal
* That interactions/collaborations around the world were very beneficial
to the community, e.g. ligand/Het group submission (M. Hendlich & CCDC);
non-bonded-finder (E. Martz) etc. and the 14 mirror sites to provide
easy access to the PDB.
In any event, I felt you should know and I would greatly appreciate
hearing from you, if you have any information, as to what was the basis of
p.s. I thought you would be particularly interested in this, as I'm
sure you've been able to observe the changes in the PDB during
the past few years and would not like to see any major perturbation.
Is it possible that the US Govt officials who made this decision did
not pay any attention to these enormous improvements? Hard to believe.
In any event, please feel free to share this msg with your colleagues,
even OK to redistribute via e-mail, but if you have time, try to
contact the three individuals below, who made the final decision,
and ask them what is going on? They are:
NSF: Dr. Mary Clutter: email@example.com
DOE: Dr. Ari Patrinos: Ari.Patrinos@oer.doe.gov
NIH: Dr. Marvin Cassman: firstname.lastname@example.org
Thanks very much - joel