*** For details on how to be removed from this list visit the *** *** CCP4 home page http://www.ccp4.ac.uk ***
Here's what Acta Cryst has to say about resolution- >From the "Notes for authors 2006" from Acta Cryst D: http://journals.iucr.org/d/issues/2006/02/00/me0308/index.html "11.1. Resolution The effective resolution should be described clearly. Values of the internal agreement of the data, Rmerge, together with the multiplicity, the mean value of I/ and the percentage completeness of the data are required for the overall data set and the highest resolution shell together with the limits of that shell in Å. For high-quality data obtained with synchrotron radiation, values of Rmerge < 20%, completeness > 93% and observable data > 70% should be achievable for the highest resolution shell. A complete table listing the above criteria as a function of resolution should also be submitted, but will normally be included in the supplementary material..." We had a reviewer quote this verbatim in his review of a journal article submission. Interestingly, I've never heard anyone _publicly_ defend anything close to this standard in the modern maximum likelihood era, but from our experience and that of others on this bulletin board, it seems like it comes up in review an awful lot. Anyway, I think part of the reason that you see I/sig(I) of 6 in the high res bins of data tables is that people want to get their papers published and they are running into this sort of thing... Maybe it's time for some new and improved, CCP4-approved guidelines about data, so that when one gets a reviewer comment like this one could have something published to hang one's hat on? Josh _____________________________________________ - Joshua Warren, PhD ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) - - 212 Nanaline H. Duke - - DUMC - - home: (919) 918 7860 - - work: (919) 681 5266 - _____________________________________________
