[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
--
[Send comment to list secretary]
[Reply to list (subscribers only)]
Re: New items relevant to radiation damage
- To: Distribution list of the IUCr COMCIFS Core Dictionary Maintenance Group<coredmg@mailman.iucr.org>
- Subject: Re: New items relevant to radiation damage
- From: James H via coreDMG <coredmg@mailman.iucr.org>
- Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2024 13:17:38 +1100
- Authentication-Results: mailserver.iucr.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=mailman.iucr.org
- Cc: James H <jamesrhester@gmail.com>, coredmg@iucr.org, palat <palat@fzu.cz>
- DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mailserver.iucr.org 9CDF05A0FCC
- DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mailserver.iucr.org 62C6A5A0FCC
- In-Reply-To: <f8fcff46-b61d-4031-b320-826b0287f276@iucr.org>
- References: <f8fcff46-b61d-4031-b320-826b0287f276@iucr.org>
Did the discussion consider which was the most appropriate category for these definitions? I agree that total dose and total exposure time should go in diffrn, as diffrn describes a single measurement with a single specimen so these quantities are well-defined. However, I would normally consider flux density a property of the radiation, so more properly in diffrn_radiation. However, if the flux density is considered to be setup-specific, that is, different specimens would experience a different flux density (that could be determined) due to being at different positions within the beam, then I agree with putting a definition in diffrn. If both scenarios are reasonable, then a fourth definition could be added to diffrn_radiation, something like '_diffrn_radiation.peak_flux_density'
On Sat, 7 Dec 2024 at 00:45, Brian McMahon via coreDMG <coredmg@mailman.iucr.org> wrote:
I have been working with the NanED project on new CIF data names
relevant to electron diffraction, and the suggestion has arisen for a
number of items that allow some assessment of the amount of radiation
that the crystal is subjected to. It seems to me that these terms have
more general application, and so I am posting these suggested
definitions as possible general terms to add to the core dictionary.
Your comments are welcome.
Note that the units of flux density are dependent on the radiation
probe. Note also that the terminology regarding amount of radiation is
often confused and confusing. For example, the mmCIF dictionary has a
term _em_imaging.electron_dose
(https://mmcif.wwpdb.org/dictionaries/mmcif_pdbx_v50.dic/Items/_em_imaging.electron_dose.html)
defined as "The electron dose received by the specimen (electrons per
square angstrom)." where the units are those of flux density and not
dose.
The definitions given below arose from a lengthy discussion within the
electron diffraction community (and are supported by the cited
literature reference to RADDOSE, which has DOI
https://doi.org/10.1002/pro.5005).
Regards
Brian
save_diffrn.flux_density
   _definition.id        '_diffrn.flux_density'
   _definition.update      2024-12-02
   _description.text
;
   Flux density of radiation incident at the crystal.
   Reference: Dickerson, J. L., McCubbin, P. T. N., Brooks-Bartlett,
   J. C. & Garman, E. F. (2024). Doses for X-ray and electron
   diffraction: New features in RADDOSE-3D including intensity decay
   models. Protein Sci. 33, e5005.
;
   _name.category_id       diffrn
   _name.object_id        flux_density
   _type.purpose         Number
   _type.source         Recorded
   _type.container        Single
   _type.contents        Real
   _enumeration.range      0.0:
   _method.purpose        Definition
   _method.expression
;
   If   (_diffrn_radiation.probe == "neutron")
                 _units.code =
"neutrons_per_millimetre_squared"
   Else If (_diffrn_radiation.probe == "electron")
                 _units.code =
"electrons_per_angstrom_squared"
   Else            _units.code =
"photons_per_millimetre_squared"
;
save_
save_diffrn.total_dose
   _definition.id        '_diffrn.total_dose'
   _definition.update      2024-12-02
   _description.text
;
   Total radiation dose absorbed by the crystal during the diffraction
   experiment.
   Reference: Dickerson, J. L., McCubbin, P. T. N., Brooks-Bartlett,
   J. C. & Garman, E. F. (2024). Doses for X-ray and electron
   diffraction: New features in RADDOSE-3D including intensity decay
   models. Protein Sci. 33, e5005.
;
   _name.category_id       diffrn
   _name.object_id        total_dose
   _type.purpose         Number
   _type.source         Recorded
   _type.container        Single
   _type.contents        Real
   _enumeration.range      0.0:
   _units.code          megagray
save_
save_diffrn.total_exposure_time
   _definition.id        '_diffrn.total_exposure_time'
   _definition.update      2024-12-02
   _description.text
;
   Total time the crystal was exposed during the diffraction experiment.
;
   _name.category_id       diffrn
   _name.object_id        total_exposure_time
   _type.purpose         Number
   _type.source         Recorded
   _type.container        Single
   _type.contents        Real
   _enumeration.range      0.0:
   _units.code          minutes
save_
_______________________________________________
coreDMG mailing list
coreDMG@mailman.iucr.org
https://mailman.iucr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/coredmg
--
T +61 (02) 9717 9907
F +61 (02) 9717 3145
M +61 (04) 0249 4148
F +61 (02) 9717 3145
M +61 (04) 0249 4148
_______________________________________________ coreDMG mailing list coreDMG@mailman.iucr.org https://mailman.iucr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/coredmg
[Send comment to list secretary]
[Reply to list (subscribers only)]
- References:
- New items relevant to radiation damage (Brian McMahon via coreDMG)
- Prev by Date: New items relevant to radiation damage
- Next by Date: Re: New items relevant to radiation damage
- Prev by thread: New items relevant to radiation damage
- Next by thread: Re: New items relevant to radiation damage
- Index(es):