Bert's Scientific career

[avandonk]

A quick precis. Joined Kodak Research Labs in 1968. Went to CSIRO in 1974.

My background is in Physics but wasted seven years in thin film technology at Kodak. Interference filters IR sensitive semiconductors to name a couple. I went on to work at CSIRO in their EM (Electron Microscope)department.I then ran the Xray lab to elucidate the the structure of biologically important molecules. All this takes a lot of nous.

Our lab has produced the first specific anti viral Relenza that stops any Flu virus in less than a day! We have also solved the structure of many important molecules that will lead to the cure of many other diseases. One of these most importantly is the structure at atomic resolution of the Insulin Receptor Molecule. There is far more I have no time or inclination to cover.

Lookup the papers!

Bert

[glenc (Glen)]

Thanks Bert, interesting.
Where does avandonk come from?

[avandonk]

My full name is Albert Van Donkelaar. You can work it out for yourself!

avandonk

[gbeal]

Originally Posted by avandonk

My full name is Albert Van Donkelaar. You can work it out for yourself!

avandonk

"Bert" is easier, stay with that.

[avandonk]

You are dead right! bert Is far easier.

My real full name is Albertus Van Donkelaar! Been in Aus too long!

Bert

[leon]

Yea he is a clog wog like me. but much smarter

Leon

[taminga16 (Greg)]

Thanks Bert,
I always enjoy a short, sharp shiv.

Regards,

Greg.

Just Think about how much time we would have up our sleeves if it was that
simple.

[avandonk]

No Leon I was taught by Christian Brothers and they were the original computer programmers. They used to punch the information into us!

Bert

[jase (Jason)]

PM'd you Bert.

[Peter Ward]

Bert,

Interesting!

So you mainly worked on Bragg diffraction analysis? Did you do a Doctorate in that prior to Kodak? (a rare bird indeed)

Also did you get involved in the organic chemistry that followed the molecular analysis....or was it a case of this is the molecule, make of of it what you will to the chemists?

[avandonk]

Peter if you mean by Bragg diffraction from an array of molecules (crystals)with an atomic weight of greater than 50K yes. We also knew what the molecule did. Our lab could fish out the DNA and then produce the molecule in quantities suitable for characterization and structural studies. Most of the molecules I helped solve the atomic structure of were about 50 kilo daltons or more. The largest were whole virii.

We then went on and designed drugs specific only to the molecule in question! It was a case of feedback design from a precursor drug molecule and see how it reacts with the known sructure. It is called 'Intelligent Drug Design'.

By the way these days it is called Protein Crystallography. The father and son Bragg have been mentioned in previous dispatches. They got the Nobel prize for showing that atoms diffracted xrays and that the spots had a relation to the atomic positions. Reciprocal space and all that jazz!

Bert

[Peter Ward]

I can see from the literature that the group, or lab, effort was often based around identifying the structure of large organic molecules.

But was more interested in your role (I gathered the diffraction analysis) as many disciplines look to be involved with that effort.

[leon]

Same here Bert.

Leon

[Peter Ward]

Bert,

I was taught ( albeit fleetingly) about Bragg diffraction while at Uni...but not about Protein Crystallography...it does look to be an application of the Bragg physics....is this not correct?

[avandonk]

If you think that elucidating the structure of NaCl is Bragg diffraction then solving the structure of the Human Insulin Receptor is called Protein Crystallography. The molecule is almost as intransigent as some people I know. Flexible and labile so pinning down the structure was not straightforward. We used specific antibodies to 'FIX' and hold the labile bits.


Bert

[avandonk]

My role totally was to run the lab with $3 million worth of equipment. I collected and did the prelimanary analysis of the data to make sure it was of the highest quality. It is hard enough to solve a structure with good data and impossible with even mediocre data. I won't bore you with all the complexities.

Ok here is the complexity. Each spot intensity we measure gives us a magnitude of one of the many vectors of the three dimensional Fourier Transform of the molecule,we do not know the 'Phase' or direction of these magnitudes. We use heavy metal derivatives or other even more subtle methods to bootstrap into a solution. The really nice thing is with good data the solution is unique!

Bert

[Peter Ward]

Ah I see. A bit like getting lost with $US300 million of B747 under your bum

That said...bits of a molecule that change with a bit of heat or radiation does not sound like a problem a Physics graduate is trained for (then again neither is flying a 747 )....so you were primarily working as a chemist?

[avandonk]

No peter it is not at all simple. I have been to many synchrotrons to get better data. The one in Chicago cost $4 billion to build. I have taught many PhD students and it took some years to get them up to speed. I will not bite at your flippant remarks. Would be quicker to wait for you to grow up than to teach another lot of PhD students?

Bert

[Peter Ward]

Bert... I never intended to make the implication that it was simple...and my sense of humor takes some getting used to...( I have a hard enough time trying to write out a Taylor series than come to grips with a 3D fourier solution...yet have a small understanding to the complexities of the modeling you were doing).

More my point was your work was clearly demanding but I was simply puzzled as to how a Ph.d in Physics gave you the right tools to deal with the organic chemists.

So which Uni were you teaching at? I suspect you may have crossed paths with my old Physical Chemistry Professor from many many moons ago.

Hang on.....something doesn't add up. You would have been 19 years old starting with Kodak. When did you write up your doctorate?