Leadership Letters
The Leadership Letters is a business and social-science Journal dedicated to advancing multi-, inter-, and transdisciplinary understanding of leadership.
Editor
Robert M. Yawson
Robert M. Yawson
DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.2793819
The crystallisation of miraculin - a glycoprotein was studied. The protein was extracted and purified to homogeneity from the pulp of the fruits of Richadella dulcifica using a three-step chromatographic process involving Hydrophobic Interaction Chromatography, Ion Exchange Chromatography, and Gel Filtration Chromatography respectively at ordinary temperatures. The activity of the protein was ascertained using psychometric analysis: 100g/ml of the lyophilised protein provoked sweetness with 0.02M citric acid. Sodium Dodecyl Sulphate-Polyacrylamide Gel Electrophoresis was used to determine the purity of the protein.
Experimental conditions used in 80 different crystallisation trials were chosen for the initial screening experiments. Polymorphism in the resulting precipitated, micro-crystalline, or crystalline protein samples was identified and rated numerically on a rough but quantitative scale. Correlation between these estimates of crystal quality and all the 80 different crystallisation trials were identified.
Twelve out of the 80 trials were selected for further crystallisation work by changing the concentrations of salts and precipitants and the addition of detergents until favourable conditions were achieved for the crystallisation of the protein.
Orthorhombic crystal forms of the protein with sizes ranging from 0.2mm to 0.4mm were obtained using the hanging drop technique of the vapour diffusion method from 30% PEG 600, 0.1M LiCl, 0.1M CaCl2, 0.1M HEPES buffer, 0.02M 1-O-nOctyl-D-glucopyranoside (BOG) and miraculin at a concentration of 20mg/ml. The crystalline miraculin gave a band of 44kd on SDS-PAGE
Subjects
A peeriodical is a lightweight virtual journal with you as the Editor-in-chief, giving you complete freedom in setting editorial policy to select the most interesting and useful manuscripts for your readers. The manuscripts you will evaluate and select are existing publications—preprints and papers. Thus, a peeriodical replicates all the functions of a traditional journal, including discovery, selection and certification, except publication itself.
Why set up a peeriodical? The traditional journal has changed remarkably little in centuries and many people feel that scientific publishing is stuck in a rut, subject to a corporatist drift, and is not serving science optimally. The advent of preprints in many fields beyond those served by the ArXiv is liberating the dissemination of research, but most other journal functions have not been replaced effectively. Now you—all researchers—have the opportunity to select and certify research according to your own criteria. We expect peeriodical subject matters and editorial policies to be extremely varied. Some peeriodicals may wish to target narrow domains, while others will adopt a generalist approach. Some peeriodicals will be inclusive, focusing on discovery, whereas others may aim to enforce stringent quality criteria, prioritising certification. The point is that all approaches are permitted and supported—we hope you will innovate! You can create multiple peeriodicals. It will be users and readers who decide which peeriodicals they find useful and interesting. Users can sign up to receive alerts from any peeriodical they wish.
A peeriodical has one or more editors. Anybody can set-up a peeriodical and either operate it alone or invite colleagues to form an editorial board or community. The editors can select "manuscripts"—existing papers or preprints—to consider, either spontaneously or through suggestions from other researchers, including of course the authors. Note that there is no obligation that the manuscript be recent; for instance, we expect that some peeriodicals could focus on underappreciated classics. After all, predictions about scientific impact are generally more accurate for the past than the future. If the editors wish, they can solicit reviews for the manuscript via the Peeriodicals interface. Reviews will be published and the referees will have the option of posting anonymously or signing their review. Editors may decide at any time to accept, reject or comment on the manuscript, taking into account the comments received. They may of course suggest improvements to the manuscript or underlying study. If they justify their decision, their editorial decision will also be published.
How will Peeriodicals fit into the publishing landscape? We see them as a space without entry barriers in which researchers can innovate and explore new approaches to scientific dissemination, in parallel to the traditional publishing industry. There are related and complementary initiatives, notably the overlay journals promoted by Tim Gowers, exemplified by Discrete Analysis, but also Science Open Collections, PLoS Channels, the APPRAISE initiative and Peer Community in... Each of these projects has their own specificities and goals. Nobody yet knows exactly what the future will look like, but we strongly believe that we are about to experience a period of rapid evolution in the dissemination of science and we hope that Peeriodicals will inspire and help you to share your imagination and expertise with the whole research community.
For those starting a peeriodical, you will discover that the hardest part is building up an audience. Unfortunately, we can't yet guarantee you the exposure you would get from a paper in a glamour journal. Reviews with scientific content will be mirrored on PubPeer, offering an audience through the PubPeer browser and Zotero extensions. However, it will be largely up to you to run your publicity, most likely through social media. We are on Twitter (@PEERIODICALS) and will of course help out as we can.
Get started now by requesting an invitation with the link in the top right menu.