\input jmbmacro \centerline{\bf MINUTES OF A MEETING OF WORKING GROUP 1 OF CCP4} \centerline{\bf WHICH WAS HELD AT DARESBURY LABORATORY} \centerline{\bf ON 28th JANUARY 1989} \bigskip \noindent Present: \medskip $$\vcenter{ \halign{#\hfil&\qquad#\hfil\cr Tony North (Chairman)&Leeds University\cr Tom Blundell &Birkbeck College\cr Peter Brick &Imperial College\cr Guy Dodson &York University\cr Phil Evans &MRC, Cambridge\cr Neil Isaacs &Glasgow University\cr Jim Raftery &Leicester University\cr Dave Rice &Sheffield University\cr Lindsay Sawyer &Edinburgh University\cr Brian Sutton &Kings College London\cr Garry Taylor &Oxford University\cr Herman Watson &Bristol University\cr Kim Henrick (Secretary)&Daresbury Laboratory\cr }}$$ \bigskip {\rm {\it 1. Progress of the grant application for extension of SERC support to {\scbig CCP4} for the period 1988--1993} \medskip Professor North explained to the meeting that the application for renewal of SERC funding for {\scbig CCP4} (requiring funds for half the salary of the SSO position and support for a full-time RA, together with a sum of {\it\$}8,000 per year to cover travel costs and to contribute to the costs of an annual meeting) that had been submitted to the Biological Sciences Committee had not reached a satisfactory outcome and that he had yet to be formally contacted by the SERC about the status of this application. Dr Sawyer informed the meeting that he believed that the application had received a good reception by the Biological Sciences Committee and was to be recommended for a 4 or 5 year extension, and had been passed onto the Biochemistry \& Biophysics sub-committee for consideration. Professor Dodson indicated that the information he had from the sub-committee was that the application was to be considered for a one year extension and was to be passed to the Protein Engineering Initiative underpinning fund for appraisal. Professor Blundell expressed the view that the application should be considered by the Biological Sciences Committee directly and not by any subject sub-committee. He then went on to explain that even with the division of the Protein Engineering Initiative fund with the creation of an underpinning reserve that this may not be a secure source of funding for the lifetime of the request for funding of {\scbig CCP4}. Dr Sawyer indicated his concern by assuring the meeting that he would put onto the agenda of the next Biological Sciences Committee meeting the {\scbig CCP4} application and would express the unanimous view of the {\scbig CCP4} {\it working group 1} committee that continued support of {\scbig CCP4} by the SERC was essential to the U.K. protein crystallographic community, and to reiterate to the SERC that a commitment for five years was a requirement. Dr Sawyer then explained that there was a view that {\scbig CCP4} should be broadened to include N.M.R. interests and/or that there may be an overlap of interests with the proposed new CCP in molecular biology (with which there is considerable common membership between {\scbig CCP4} and representatives of groups prepared to commit themselves to a collaborative project in molecular biology), together with the areas of molecular dynamics and transputer applications that are within the software for biology and medicine being considered by the I.U.S.C. Committee. Dr Evans best expressed the views of the meeting that such a dilution of {\scbig CCP4} would be counter productive and unwelcomed as the very success of {\scbig CCP4} was in its coherence and setting of realistic objectives in that even directly applicable techniques for protein crystallography such as those used in modelling and graphics had not been included within the scope of {\scbig CCP4}'s interests. Professor North agreed and indicated that such links were best carried out at the level of the overall CCP steering panel meetings. \bigskip {\it 2. Future Management of {\scbig CCP4}} \medskip The chairman reported that the number of protein crystallographic groups within the U.K. was increasing and representatives of these new groups had not been formally invited to join {\it working group 1}. He went on to explain the different roles of the two working groups particularly for the benefit of Professor Isaacs, Dr Sutton and Dr Raftery (representing the new Manchester group). Dr Rice explained that this had been considered by a {\it working group 2} meeting and representatives of all the academic groups were invited to {\it working group 2} meetings. Some discussion was entered into over the manageable size of each working group, however it was decided that as {\it working group 1} should under normal circumstances only meet once a year then the size of the meeting should not be a problem. The decision of the meeting was to hold future {\it working group 1} meetings during the annual study weekend at Daresbury Laboratory by setting aside a suitable time during the saturday lunch interval. For {\it working group 2} Professor Blundell was of the opinion that it was more suitable for representatives of the groups involved in producing code rather than a general meeting of all the groups representatives. Both Dr Rice and Dr Evans however believed that {\it working group 2} should be inclusive rather than exclusive and that the input from a variety of users had been found to be very useful. The meeting agreed with the latter view with the stipulation that the travel expenses for only one member per group could be met from {\scbig CCP4} funds. A wider membership of {\it working group 1} was also considered by the meeting, with representatives of other protein crystallographic research groups invited to attend as "associate members", possibly being asked to contribute to the running costs of {\scbig CCP4}. These other groups, included the MRC, AFRC, the charities, (the Cancer Research Campaign and the Imperial Cancer Research Fund), together with the embryonic industrial groups that were coming into being. The meeting also agreed to seek wider cooperation with european groups through EACBM and possible funding from such a body. Again, the proposed CCP in molecular biology is also seeking funding and collaboration with EMBL and EACAMB, and industry, and there is strong competition for such sources of funding. \bigskip {\it 3. Discussion of the subject for the 1990 Study Weekend} \medskip Professor Blundell proposed that a possible topic for next years study weekend was that of "Errors". He pointed out that this would involve both the formal analysis of errors in data collection and processing and the more serious gross errors that have become apparent in recently published structure determination studies. He suggested that David Moss may be willing to act as one of the organisers of such a meeting and expressed his awareness that this would be a very contentious topic and may de difficult to set up. A discussion on standards of refereeing followed and there was a general feeling that some dubious results were getting into press. This led to the possibility that the subject of standards of publication and quoting of original sources could be included in the proposed study weekend. This raised the issue of the status of the policy on the deposition of data and results from crystallographic studies of biological macromolecules. Professor Dodson reported that a revised version of this document was still circulating amongst interested groups and he expected a final form to be issued by the International Union of Crystallography and be put into practise by the editors of journals by the end of this year. \bigskip K. Henrick \smallskip \bigskip (secretary) } \vfill\eject \bigskip \vfill\eject \bigskip \centerline{ Protein Crystallographic Groups within the U.K.} \bigskip $$\vcenter{ \halign{#\hfil&\qquad#\hfil\cr David Moss &Birkbeck College\cr Herman Watson &Bristol University\cr Olga Kennard &Cambridge Chemistry Dept.\cr Lindsey Sawyer &Edinburgh University\cr Neil Isaacs &Glasgow University\cr David Blow &Imperial College\cr Trevor Greenhough &Keele University\cr Brian Sutton &Kings College London\cr Tony North &Leeds University\cr Marjorie Harding &Liverpool University\cr Colin Reynolds &Liverpool Polytechnic\cr John Helliwell &Manchester University\cr Garry Taylor &Oxford University\cr Pam Harrison &Sheffield University\cr Guy Dodson &York University\cr \noalign { \medskip } Colin Nave &Daresbury Lab. SERC\cr Tom Blundell &ICRF\cr Steve Neidle &CRC\cr Phil Evans &MRC, Cambridge\cr R.W. Pickersgill &AFRC, Reading\cr Peter Murray-Rust &Glaxo Group Research\cr ??? &Welcome\cr ??? &ICI\cr }}$$ \bigskip \bye pu