Ragnar Österberg

Bio: Ragnar Österberg is an academic researcher from Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences. The author has contributed to research in topics: Radius of gyration & Small-angle X-ray scattering. The author has an hindex of 14, co-authored 38 publications receiving 613 citations.

The condensation of DNA by chromium (III) ions.

Abstract: Cr(III), one of the most potent inorganic carcinogens, induces condensation of DNA into a very compact product at 37°, as shown by electron microscopy. The condensation begins with the appearing of some supercoil structures and complete condensation occurs at relatively low Cr(III) concentrations; for 3 and 30 mM ionic strength they are 4.5 and 45 μM, respectively. Under these conditions, Cr(III) inhibits the interaction between ethidium and DNA as shown by absorption and fluorescence spectra.

Fractal dimension of humic acids : a small angle neutron scattering study

Abstract: Small-angle neutron scattering experiments have been made on solutions of humic acid aggregates with an acidity corresponding to pH 5.0 and at 0.1 M ionic strength. We observe power-law decay of the intensity over one decade of the scattering vector, Q, indicating that the aggregates are fractal. We explain the normalized intensity in the entire Q-range by assuming that the humic acid particles can be described by building units of a radial size, ≤ 25 A, aggregated into clusters with an average radius of 400–500 A. For humic acids obtained from two different sources, we determine the fractal dimension, D = 2.3 ± 0.1. For small values of Q, the measured data of one of the samples extend into the Guinier range giving an average radius of gyration of 320 ± 20 A.

Methods in Enzymology.

Abstract: I read this book the same weekend that the Packers took on the Rams, and the experience of the latter event, obviously, colored my judgment. Although I abhor anything that smacks of being a handbook (like, \"How to Earn a Merit Badge in Neurosurgery\") because too many volumes in biomedical science already evince a boyscout-like approach, I must confess that parts of this volume are fast, scholarly, and significant, with certain reservations. I like parts of this well-illustrated book because Dr. Sj6strand, without so stating, develops certain subjects on technique in relation to the acquisition of judgment and sophistication. And this is important! So, given that the author (like all of us) is somewhat deficient in some areas, and biased in others, the book is still valuable if the uninitiated reader swallows it in a general fashion, realizing full well that what will be required from the reader is a modulation to fit his vision, propreception, adaptation and response, and the kind of problem he is undertaking. A major deficiency of this book is revealed by comparison of its use of physics and of chemistry to provide understanding and background for the application of high resolution electron microscopy to problems in biology. Since the volume is keyed to high resolution electron microscopy, which is a sophisticated form of structural analysis, but really morphology in a modern guise, the physical and mechanical background of The instrument and its ancillary tools are simply and well presented. The potential use of chemical or cytochemical information as it relates to biological fine structure , however, is quite deficient. I wonder when even sophisticated morphol-ogists will consider fixation a reaction and not a technique; only then will the fundamentals become self-evident and predictable and this sine qua flon will become less mystical. Staining reactions (the most inadequate chapter) ought to be something more than a technique to selectively enhance contrast of morphological elements; it ought to give the structural addresses of some of the chemical residents of cell components. Is it pertinent that auto-radiography gets singled out for more complete coverage than other significant aspects of cytochemistry by a high resolution microscopist, when it has a built-in minimal error of 1,000 A in standard practice? I don't mean to blind-side (in strict football terminology) Dr. Sj6strand's efforts for what is \"routinely used in our laboratory\"; what is done is usually well done. It's just that …

The study of biological structures by neutron scattering from solution

Abstract: Neutron small-angle scattering provides a new tool for investigation of the structure of biological particles. The method is derived from X-ray small-angle scattering. The very large difference between the scattering amplitude of neutrons by hydrogen and deuterium gives the basis of this method, which is explained with reference to the X-ray technique, as both methods have a complementary aspect. Experimental results so far obtained are reviewed, with an emphasis on biological structures composed of two kinds of molecules, such as ribosomes, nucleosomes and viruses.

Protein volumes and hydration effects. The calculations of partial specific volumes, neutron scattering matchpoints and 280-nm absorption coefficients for proteins and glycoproteins from amino acid sequences.

Abstract: Amino acid sequences, carbohydrate compositions and residue volumes are used to compare critically calculations of partial specific volumes v, neutron scattering matchpoints and 280-nm absorption coefficients with experimental v values for proteins and glycoproteins. The v values that are obtained from amino acid densitometry underestimate experimental v values by 0.01-0.02 ml/g while the v values from crystallographic volumes overestimate the experimental v values by 0.04-0.05 ml/g. An intermediate consensus volume set of amino-acid-residue volumes is proposed in order to predict experimental v values using sequence information. The method is extended to carbohydrates and glycoproteins. Neutron scattering matchpoints can be calculated from crystallographic residue volumes on the basis of the non-exchange of 10% of the main-chain NH protons. Crystallographic results on protein-bound water are used to account for the experimental values of v and matchpoints. Finally, 280-nm absorption coefficients, A1%, 1 cm 280, of 5-27 are found to be well predicted by the Wetlaufer procedure based on the totals of Trp, Tyr and Cys residues. Average errors are +/- 0.7, and the experimental A(1%,1cm)280 values can be larger than the predicted values by 3%.