Thanks all for your comments!
Yamei Yu
On Jul 5, 2014, at 5:10 AM, Nat Echols wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 3, 2014 at 7:50 AM, Nat Echols wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 3, 2014 at 6:53 AM, Dirk Kostrewa
> wrote:
> yes - unfortunately, in my hands, phenix.xtri
On Thu, Jul 3, 2014 at 7:50 AM, Nat Echols
wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 3, 2014 at 6:53 AM, Dirk Kostrewa
> wrote:
>
>> yes - unfortunately, in my hands, phenix.xtriage reads the XDS_ASCII.HKL
>> intensities as amplitudes, producing very different output statistics,
>> compared both to the XDS statistic
Sorry - the stats DO indicate perfect twinning - I misread the first Email..
Please ignore that comment!
Eleanor
On 4 July 2014 13:16, Philip Kiser wrote:
> Hi Eleanor,
>
> If I'm not mistaken, the mean I stats​ are indicating perfect twinning.
>
> Philip
>
>
> On Fri, Jul 4, 2014 at 4:49 AM
To answer the original question.
The indicators are that it is not twinned,
If the Mean s are close to the untwinned values - you can probably believe
it.
Why are you worried?
Eleanor
Determining possible twin laws.
0 merohedral twin operators found
0 pseudo-merohedral twin operators found
I
On Thu, Jul 3, 2014 at 6:53 AM, Dirk Kostrewa
wrote:
> yes - unfortunately, in my hands, phenix.xtriage reads the XDS_ASCII.HKL
> intensities as amplitudes, producing very different output statistics,
> compared both to the XDS statistics and to an mtz file with amplitudes
> created from that XDS
Hi Tim,
yes - unfortunately, in my hands, phenix.xtriage reads the XDS_ASCII.HKL
intensities as amplitudes, producing very different output statistics,
compared both to the XDS statistics and to an mtz file with amplitudes
created from that XDS file. I've contacted a phenix developer a few
we
Hi Dirk,
that would truely be very sad - the XDS file format is such a beautiful,
self-contained and well documented format for diffraction data that a
misinterpretation should really not happen.
Cheers,
Tim
On 07/03/2014 01:42 PM, Dirk Kostrewa wrote:
> ... and please check, whether phenix.xtri
... and please check, whether phenix.xtriage recognized the input data
as intensities or as amplitudes.
In case of doubt, convert the intensives first into an mtz file with Fs
instead of Is and run phenix.xtriage on the mtz file.
Best regards,
Dirk.
Am 03.07.2014 13:36, schrieb Tim Gruene:
H
Hi Yamei,
did you by any chance feed the output file from XDS into xtriage? It
would indicate the data were twinned even for a near perfect insulin
test crystal. After discussion with the developers I understand that
phenix does not seem to handle unmerged data well.
With phenix.xtriage V. phenix
Hi Yamei,
A possible explanation is that the actual space group is P4(2) but the data
are perfectly hemihedrally twinned, which makes the crystal appear to
possess 422 point group symmetry. No twin operators are found because
merohedral twinning is not possible in crystals with true 422 symmetry.
HI all,
I have a data set processed to P42 21 2 (the space group was suggested by
pointless ). then I use phenix.xtriage to analysis the data. I was confused by
the phenix.xtriage result.
According to the following number it is twin data, but why it couldn’t find any
possible twin law?
De
11 matches
Mail list logo
