If you deposit an mmCIF file that contains both the observed and calculated 
structure factors from your final round of refinement, then the PDB 
auto-validation reports the same (or so close to the same as to be negligible) 
R factors.

Phenix outputs all of this automatically for you if you click the correct radio 
button in the GUI.

Diana

**************************************************
Diana R. Tomchick
Professor
Departments of Biophysics and Biochemistry
UT Southwestern Medical Center
5323 Harry Hines Blvd.
Rm. ND10.214A
Dallas, TX 75390-8816
diana.tomch...@utsouthwestern.edu<mailto:diana.tomch...@utsouthwestern.edu>
(214) 645-6383 (phone)
(214) 645-6353 (fax)

On Feb 28, 2020, at 12:51 PM, Ethan A Merritt 
<merr...@uw.edu<mailto:merr...@uw.edu>> wrote:

EXTERNAL MAIL

On Thursday, 27 February 2020 16:34:50 PST Alexander Aleshin wrote:
Ethan wrote:
   - If you are not making claims about hydrogens but just want to
describe what you did during refinement, I'd go with taking them out

I've noticed that REFMAC and Phenix use riding hydrogens to calculate the
refinement statistics, and their exclusion affects R/Rfree. As a result, it
is not clear what values should be reported.

In my opinion, riding
hydrogens play same role as the TLS parameters, which we keep in a pdb
submission. So, I am not convinced their omission is a good idea.
I think PDB curators should provide a guidance  how to deal with issues like
a resolution of anisotropic or incomplete data sets, riding hydrogens,
sequence numbering etc.

Alex:

You are right that the PDB auto-validation step of recalculating R factors
from the deposited model and observed F's is far from perfect.
I have not looked at the DCC source code, but my impression from the
R factors it spits back at me during deposition:
- it ignores TLS records
- it ignores the header record specifying choice of solvent model
- it does use scattering factors f' and f" from the mmcif coordinate file
- I have no idea what it does with twinning descriptions

As a result there is often a noticeable discrepancy between the R-factors
from "Depositor" and "DCC" in the validation reports.

Regards,
Alex




On 2/27/20, 4:05 PM, "CCP4 bulletin board on behalf of Ethan A Merritt"
<CCP4BB@JISCMAIL.AC.UK<mailto:CCP4BB@JISCMAIL.AC.UK> on behalf of 
merr...@uw.edu<mailto:merr...@uw.edu>> wrote:

   [EXTERNAL EMAIL]

   On Thursday, 27 February 2020 15:35:05 PST Whitley, Matthew J wrote:

Hello all,



I am nearly finished refining the structures of two mutant proteins
from
crystals that diffracted to very high resolution, 1 Å and 1.2 Å,
respectively.  Refinement was conducted in the presence of explicit
hydrogens on the models.  I am preparing to deposit these models into
the
PDB but am unsure about whether to retain or remove the hydrogens for
deposition.  On one hand, these hydrogens were explicitly used during
refinement, so that makes me want to keep them, but on the other hand,
they
were added at theoretical positions by MolProbity’s reduce tool
for refinement and were not positioned on the basis of experimentally
observed electron density, so that makes me want to delete them from
the
experimental model.  Which is the preferred option for this
situation?


   The order of operations you describe is unclear.

   If you explicitly refined hydrogens then their final positions are
indeed
based on experimentally determined data.
   The fact that you initially placed them into ideal geometry is not
really
any different from the non-H atoms of individual protein residues
in your model, whose original positions were also based on known
stereochemistry.
   On the other hand, if you mean that the hydrogens you used for
refinement
were deleted and replaced during validation by Molprobity
(which I think it may do by default) that's not good.  You should rather
keep the hydrogen positions from refinement, not the ones from Molprobity.

   Assuming (since this is ccp4bb) you refined with refmac...
   - If you are at the level of investigating hydrogen positions, you may
want
to consider taking the refinement into shelxl.
   - If you are not making claims about hydrogens but just want to
describe
what you did during refinement, I'd go with taking them out and
settling for the standard record in the resulting PDB file:
     REMARK   3  HYDROGENS HAVE BEEN ADDED IN THE RIDING POSITIONS
   which looks like this in the corresponding mmcif file:
     _refine.details   'Hydrogens have been added in their riding
positions'

           Ethan




Thanks,
Matthew



---
Matthew J. Whitley, Ph.D.
Research Instructor
Department of Pharmacology & Chemical Biology
University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine




######################################################################
##

########################################################################

To unsubscribe from the CCP4BB list, click the following link:
https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?SUBED1=CCP4BB&A=1
CAUTION: This email originated from outside UTSW. Please be cautious of links 
or attachments, and validate the sender's email address before replying.


________________________________

UT Southwestern


Medical Center



The future of medicine, today.


########################################################################

To unsubscribe from the CCP4BB list, click the following link:
https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?SUBED1=CCP4BB&A=1

Reply via email to