Dear Eugene
plz find the merging statics over this link
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/3155bp0c8axo7tx/0P1RWTTD8z?n=21758536
I have tried different subset of images for indexing, only cell edges are
changing very marginal ( < 1 ) but no change in space group.
Dear Manfred
I have collected my dat
Hi Pramod,
Can you post your merging statistics in different space groups, not just
log files from scaling? These are summarised nicely by Scala or Aimless.
Also, have you tried indexing from different subsets of images? Perhaps
there is a substantial contribution from a 'satellite' crystal in on
Pramod:
[1] Please refrain from posting excessively large (>1MB) attachments to the
ccp4bb. Either use a compression technique or use another means of transmitting
large files to your recipients without spamming the entire group.
[2] Your predictions are not overlaying well with the spots . W
On 06/20/2013 06:20 AM, Eleanor Dodson wrote:
But you say you took the Balbes model into phaser? and I think Balbes
automatically runs cycles of refinement so any comment on R factors
may not mean much.
I have seen a model coming out of Balbes pipeline hitting extremely high
marks when fed in
As others say - the Rfactors look pretty good for MR, mine usually start
over 50% even with a better model and one hopes they then decrease..
But you say you took the Balbes model into phaser? and I think Balbes
automatically runs cycles of refinement so any comment on R factors may not
mean much.
Yes, I would agree with Francis that diffraction shows contribution from
several lattices, which could lead to misindexing. However, it should be
feasible to get a model that refines from this sort of data.
Pramod - could you please post your data processing statistics from your
scaling program? B
On Jun 17, 2013, at 12:36 PM, Pramod Kumar wrote:
>> I have a crystal data diffracted around 2.9 A*,
>> during the data reduction HKL2000 not convincingly showed the space group
>> (indexed in lower symmetry p1), while the mosflm given C-centered
>> Orthorhombic, and again with little play ar
el: (+44) - 1865 - 287783
> and rob...@well.ox.ac.uk Fax: (+44) - 1865 - 287547
>
>
> Original message ----
> >Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2013 03:20:57 +0530
> >From: CCP4 bulletin board (on behalf of Pramod
> Kumar )
> >Subject: Re: [ccp4bb] str solving problem
&g
>
Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2013 02:58:36 +0530
To: mailto:CCP4BB@JISCMAIL.AC.UK>>
Subject: Re: [ccp4bb] str solving problem
Dear Abhinav
I would suggest you integrate in p1 and run pointless.
after integrating in p1 and running the pointless its still concluding the SG
c2221.
How do you dete
Hi Pramod,
Refined LLG value of 1800 and R-factor of 46% at the end of the Phaser run
does indicate a good MR solution. Your maps also look quite good and some
positive density is visible near side chains. It would be helpful to see
your translational Z-scores for both molecules placed, which can
*Dear Abhinav Kumar
*
*thanks for kind suggestions
*
*
I have tried as follow.
1. You should try to identify the correct space group first.
*integration in p21 given the following statics in pointless
*
* Alternative reindexing Lklhd CC R(E^2) Number Cell_deviation*
* [h,
Hi Pramod,
1. You should try to identify the correct space group first. Did you
integrate in p1 and run pointless?
2. A template with 31% identity is not a great model. The number of
molecules in ASU will affect your chances of success. Hopefully it's not
large. wrfac of 0.6 and Rfree of 0.5 s
12 matches
Mail list logo
