The knowledge of the three-dimensional structure of biological macromolecules constitutes an important cornerstone in all basic biological, biochemical and biomedical research. This even extends to certain translational aspects of such research, such as for instance drug discovery. Among all methods for obtaining such three-dimensional information at atomic resolution X-ray crystallography is the most powerful and the most prominent one as is evidenced by the fact that 90% of all available structural information is contributed by X-ray crystallography1. The major prerequisite of X-ray crystallography, which is at the same time its major limitation, is that diffraction-quality crystals have to be produced and prepared for the diffraction experiment. This step still constitutes one of the major bottlenecks of the method.
Historically, diffraction data from protein crystals were collected at ambient temperature. Individual crystals were carefully transferred into glass or quartz capillaries prior to data collection, mother liquor was added to the capillaries so that the crystals would not dry out and the capillaries were sealed2,3,4. Since the 1980s, it became more and more apparent that due to the ionizing properties of X-radiation and the imminent radiation sensitivity of macromolecular crystals, data collection at ambient temperature poses severe limitations on the method. Consequently, approaches were developed to mitigate radiation damage effects by cooling macromolecular crystals down to 100 K and to collect diffraction data at such low temperature5,6. For working at low temperatures, the mounting of the samples in capillaries became impractical due to the low rate of heat transfer. In spite of this, there are ongoing efforts to also use capillaries, in particular from counter-diffusion crystallization experiments, for low-temperature diffraction work7,8, but, irrespective of that, it became the standard approach in macromolecular crystallography to mount macromolecular crystals held by a thin film of mother liquor inside a thin wired loop9,10. Even though a number of improvements (e.g., the introduction of lithographic loops and similar structures11) have been made over time to this loop-based mounting, the basic principles that were developed in the early 1990s are still in use today. It may be safely stated that most diffraction data collections on macromolecular crystals nowadays still rely on this approach5.
Over time, there were some interesting new developments and modifications of the loop-based mounting method, but these approaches have so far not been widely adopted in the community. One is the so-called loop-less mounting of crystals, which was developed to achieve lower background scattering12,13,14. Another one is the use of graphene sheaths to wrap the crystalline samples and to protect them from drying out. Graphene is a well-suited material in that respect because of its very low X-ray scattering background15.
More recently, developments in the field of sample mounts were mainly focused on standardizing the mounts with the aim of increasing sample throughput16 or on designing mounts, which can hold more than one sample17, such as for instance patterned membranes on a silicon frame, which are capable of holding hundreds of small crystals mostly in the field of serial crystallography18,19,20,21,22.
All of the sample mounting methods discussed so far still require some degree of manual intervention, which means that there is an inherent danger of causing mechanical damage to the sample. Therefore, novel approaches are being sought by engineering the sample environment such that diffraction data of crystals can be collected within their growth environment. One such method is termed in situ or plate-screening23,24 and it is already implemented at a number of macromolecular crystallography beamlines at various synchrotron sources worldwide25. However, the use of this method is limited by the geometrical parameters of the crystal plate and the space available around the sample point of the instrument.
Yet another approach is realized in the so-called CrystalDirect system26. Here, entire crystallization drops are harvested automatically. The foils on which the crystals have been grown are custom-cut using a laser and directly used as the sample holder27.
In the work described here, the aim was to develop a sample holder, which would allow a user to move the crystalline sample from its growth chamber to the data collection device without touching it and which would enable the user to manipulate the sample easily. Since many researchers in the field of macromolecular crystallography are still using the 24-well crystallization format for optimizing crystal growth by modifying conditions identified in large screening campaigns, the new sample holder was designed to be compatible with this format. In the following, the design of the new sample holder will be described and the handling and the performance of the sample holder for in situ data collection and ligand soaking will be demonstrated. Finally, the suitability of this new sample holder as well as its limitations for the various work steps will be discussed.