The MAX IV laboratory in Lund has opened a position for a Postdoctoral fellow
to strengthen the biological SAXS environment at the current SAXS beam line.
The position will be for two years and is embedded in the BIOSTRUCT-X EU
program.
Full information of the position is available at:
http://
Hi Stefan,
you write
"The diffraction pattern looks great, the 3.4A reflections are visible by eye
and the edge of the detector is about 2.8A."
and for the 3.4A data Mean((I)/sd(I)) in the highest shell is 2.3 .
I'm tempted to ask: what prevents you from using higher resolution data to,
say
Postdoctoral Research Associate-Structural Biology
Applications are invited for a postdoctoral Research Associate position funded
by Cancer Research UK programme in the field of signalling deregulation in
cancer, covering structural and systems biology. The post holders will join an
established
Hi
I'd agree with Kay here - since the edge of the detector is at ~2.8Å. It is
almost always worthwhile integrating to a higher resolution than you can see
spots on the images - for what I would call "normal" datasets, I would always
integrate to ~0.2Å higher (as a first estimate), then after e
ANNOUNCEMENT
SECOND RESEARCH COORDINATION MEETING (RCM) ON
UTILIZATION OF ACCELERATOR - BASED REAL - TIME METHODS IN INVESTIGATION
OF MATERIALS WITH HIGH TECHNOLOGICAL IMPORTANCE
_24-27 SEPTEMBER
2013_
WEBSITE: http://iaeaupat.wordpress.com/ [1]
VENUE:
Porto Rio hotel
http:
Engin Özkan wrote:
On 7/22/13 11:20 PM, Ethan Merritt wrote:
Which brings up the point that something seems to have
gone wrong in one of your processing runs.
Both runs claim mean (I/sigI) in the outer shell is 2.0,
but in one case this is for the 2.4A shell and in the other case
it's for the 2
Dear All
We will be hosting the 4th MX User Workshop at Diamond as part of the
Synchrotron User Meeting, September 4th-5th, 2013. This year the workshop
programme will cover new beamline capabilities, data processing and techniques.
The meeting will also feature updates from the Membrane Protei
On 7/23/13 9:01 AM, Edward A. Berry wrote:
Here we need some clarification on which I/s(I) is meant - sigma(I)
for the
individual measurements, or sigma(I) from error propagation to the final
which as Engin notes will be lower.
Isn't the reported Mean(I/sigI) in the reported Aimless table fo
Hi,
On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 10:11:04AM -0500, Engin Ozkan wrote:
> Isn't the reported Mean(I/sigI) in the reported Aimless table for
> the merged/averaged reflections (because that is what we are
> discussing about)?
Yes - according to
1.
http://ccp4wiki.org/~ccp4wiki/wiki/index.php?title=Symme
Engin Özkan wrote:
Also, why would we be using the batch-wise I/sigma's for determining
resolution cutoffs?
Agreed. For cutoff I guess it should be the final sigma going into the refinement program that matters, irrespective of
whether that was achieve by averaging more images or using a stro
Nat,
What do "correct" B-factors look like? What refinement strategy did you
> use for them?
>
1) If I see strong positive density in the Fo-Fc map along the backbone of
two turns of an correctly placed alpha helix, therefore the B-factors are
too high in that region. The model after refinement
11 matches
Mail list logo
