From: Jeffrey C. Hansen <hansen@bioc02.uthscsa.edu>
  To  : rasmb@bbri.eri.harvard.edu
  Date: Fri, 19 May 1995 11:03:53 -0500 (CDT)

Re: sedimentation database

Dear RASMBers,

It strikes me that the recent dialogue concerning a raw data depository 
is lacking one essential ingredient: vision.  It has become clear that 
some of us favor the depository idea while some of us don't.  Somewhat 
bothersome to me has been the tone of those that don't; there seems to be 
an implication in some of these messages that a depository it a bad, if 
not worthless, idea.  However, I would like to suggest that the major 
potential benefits of a raw data depot will manifest primarily in the 
FUTURE - hence the need for vision by those of us currently residing in 
the present.  For example, if analytical ultracentrifugation make the 
type of comeback over the next 10 years that seems increasingly likely, 
it will spawn a new generation of Yphantis/Stafford/Demeler/Philo et al. 
clones who will look at what we're doing now with analysis methodologies 
and conclude that they can do things better (and of course, they are 
likely to be correct!).  A well stocked depot will certainly facilitate 
their efforts.  Also, while I think that synthestic data with added noise 
is a nice place to start, to imply that this is all anyone needs is 
naive.  I have routinely observed boundaries that are so complex that we 
would have never even considered the possibility that such complexity 
could exist if we hadn't stumbled across it empirically.  These types of 
data push ALL current data analysis protocols beyond their limits, hence 
they need to be available to anyone who wants them, at any point in the 
future.  For all I know, I'll be pumping gas 10 years from now, so the 
idea of direct contact as a way to get my data in the future seems risky.

A second specific benefit of a raw data repository involves education.  I 
hope that no one disputes the fact that we need to get the principles and 
practice of analytical ultracentrifugation back into the standard 
biochemical curriculum.  It can't be that hard to see that Prof. Doe at 
Podunk U. will be better able to develop a truly state-of-the-art 
lecture/lab exercise in analytical ultracentrifugation if he/she has 
instant and easy access to hundreds of gigabytes of broad spectrum AU 
data, compared to what such a person is likely NOT to do if they have to 
hunt it down from individual sources or try and synthesize it 
themselves.  Remember, I am not talking about the present, but a proposed 
near future in which the internet has revolutionized information transfer 
and accessibility.  There are many other specific examples, but I will 
stop here.

All of this having been said, Olwyn's comments are certainly true; 
because of the sheer amount of data involved, a raw data depository 
exceeds the scope of RASMB.  Instead, I suspect that it will eventually 
become associated with one of the current "Centers", which will somehow 
get grant monies to fund the whole thing.  At any rate, if nothing else, 
remember the importance of vision when contemplating the future of 
analytical ultracentrifugation.

Jeff Hansen