Despite the high degree of workflow automation, a high-throughput lab like the MOUSE lab would always require at least two full-time permanent researchers. Two (or more) researchers would ensure continuity in case something happens to one, while allowing for enough headspace to work on structural improvements to the lab workflow. Since we’re now down to only one (me), it is necessary to hit the brakes and limit what measurements we will accept. So what will and won’t we do?
How did we get here?
In the past, we have pretty much accepted any and all projects that were technically feasible on the MOUSE. This has led to a good stream of interesting samples on which we could develop our comprehensive methodology (to great success, I might confidently add). With me and Glen, this worked reasonably well, leaving enough time for development and advancement of our methods.
He now has a permanent position running a lab in Graz, and since then his workload at BAM has landed on my shoulders. I’ve been doing the best I can, but I simply don’t have the capacity to carry that workload long term, leaving no time or headspace for serious thought, funding applications, or workflow/machine developments. The effects of this are probably recognisable to you as the “quiet time” on the blog: periods where there are little to no updates. This is not fun nor sustainable for anyone, so I have to make some changes to match the reduced capacity.
I am not going to discuss the origins of these developments too deeply, but a surprising amount of my colleagues in similar labs around Europe and the US are seeing the same trend; plenty of equipment but too few people left to run them effectively, everyone is just scrambling to keep things afloat. I suspect the only way out is to close some labs and combine efforts. Anyway, I digress… back to the topic at hand.
What will we accept?
Firstly, currently running collaborations are not in danger; we finish what we started. Also, people for whom we have measured already, and for whose samples we have analysis models, can continue sending in similar samples. It’s low effort for us to keep measuring and analysing those.
What we will stop doing on the MOUSE for now are liquid samples. We have not yet had the time to develop and integrate a liquid sample changer. There is a spare changer from a SAXSess standing in a corner, waiting for communication software to be written. Moreover, since the inorganic materials we get frequently stick to the flow-through capillary wall, this sample changer would need to be combined with a robust capillary washing system with systems integration that checks that the capillary is acceptably clean before loading the next sample. Lacking such an integrated system, liquids are too much manual effort for us to measure right now.
For new people who want to measure with us, we will also set the bar a bit higher than we used to. New collaborations should have 1) sufficient time remaining in their project, 2) a good project where X-ray scattering would play a pivotal role, and 3) a good, well-considered set of samples.
We will continue to accept powders and solids, but we will restrict these to projects where samples are well documented, and come in sample series of at least 10 samples per series. Just one or two poorly documented samples, that weren’t synthesised with a proper plan in mind (i.e. series) are unlikely to produce useful insights for anyone.
In-situ experiments are still very welcome, especially when they take more than a few days. If you have a need for long-duration in-situ measurements that can run autonomously (spanning a week or more), and you have a sample suitable for our system, then come chat with us.
Hopefully these restrictions will not affect too many people, and I will re-evaluate in a few months to see whether these changes are enough to carve sufficient time out of my schedule to get back to addressing the more foundational and fun issues in our field. Lastly, if you are struggling with the same issues in your labs, I wish you the best of luck in addressing them. As Chamberlain so ironically said: “Peace for our time”.