Hi Ian, perhaps there are as many answers to this as many subscribers to this list, but personally "Cysteine with attachment" seems more logic and clear to me than calling the whole thing a different name. Although I would also understand arguments like if it is a CYS with an attachment it is not really CYS any more and perhaps should be called a unique name. From refinement viewpoint both a fine. Pavel
On Wed, Apr 24, 2019 at 8:59 AM Ian Clifton <ian.clif...@chem.ox.ac.uk> wrote: > Hello everyone, > > PDB structure 4qdu contains a “modified residue”, 30V. This is joined > into the rest of the main chain by means of LINK records. In 5kwj, a > similar type of modification is described as a cysteine with a > side‐chain LINK to its “bound ligand”, 6Y3 . (These structures are just > two clear examples we found to illustrate the question.) > > Is there any reason to prefer one of these approaches over the other? > Does it just depend on what ligands are already in the PDB? > > Thanks, > -- > Ian Clifton ⚗ ℡: +44 1865 275677 > Chemistry Research Laboratory ℻: +44 1865 285002 > Oxford University 📧: ian.clif...@chem.ox.ac.uk > Mansfield Road Oxford OX1 3TA UK > > > ######################################################################## > > To unsubscribe from the CCP4BB list, click the following link: > https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?SUBED1=CCP4BB&A=1 > ######################################################################## To unsubscribe from the CCP4BB list, click the following link: https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?SUBED1=CCP4BB&A=1
