Dear all,

I recently collected several datasets for a protein that needs experimental 
phasing.
The crystals are hexagonal plates, and (automatic) data processing suggests 
with high confidence that the space group is P622. This is where the fun begins.
For some datasets (processed in P622), the intensity distributions are normal, 
and the L-test (aimless, xtriage) and Z-scores (xtriage) suggest that there is 
no twinning (twinning fractions < 0.05). However, for other datasets (same cell 
dimensions), the intensity distributions are not normal (eg Z-scores > 10). 
Given that twinning is not possible in P622, this suggests to me that the real 
space group could be P6 with (near) perfect twinning.

If I now process the "normal L-test P622" datasets in P6, the twin-law based 
tests (britton and H-test in xtriage) give high twin fractions (0.45- 0.5), 
suggesting all my data is twinned.
Does this make sense (ie can one have twinning with "normal" intensity 
distributions)?
If it does, would the "normal L-test" datasets have a higher probability of 
being solvable?

Is there any strategy for experimental phasing of (near) perfect twins? SAD 
would be more suitable than SIR/MIR? (I also have potential heavy atom 
derivatives).

Thanks for any insights!

Bert

Reply via email to