***  For details on how to be removed from this list visit the  ***
***          CCP4 home page http://www.ccp4.ac.uk         ***


Mitch Miller brought to my attention two excellent papers from Ian Tickle
and coworkers on the subject of expected Rfree/R ratio and how it depends on
resolution and method of refinement.  Note, in particular, Fig. 1 of each
paper.  Here they are:

Rfree and the Rfree Ratio. I. Derivation of Expected Values of
Cross-Validation Residuals Used in Macromolecular Least-Squares
Refinement. Tickle IJ, Laskowski RA and Moss DS
Acta Cryst. (1998). D54, 547-557
http://dx.doi.org/10.1107/S0907444997013875

Rfree and the Rfree ratio. II. Calculation of the expected values and
variances of cross-validation statistics in macromolecular least-squares
refinement. Tickle IJ, Laskowski RA and Moss DS  Acta Cryst. (2000). D56,
442-450    
http://dx.doi.org/10.1107/S0907444999016868






> From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Wed, 05 Jul 2006 14:23:39 -0500
> To: <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: [ccp4bb]: Re: Re: [ccp4bb]:
> 
> ***  For details on how to be removed from this list visit the  ***
> ***          CCP4 home page http://www.ccp4.ac.uk         ***
> 
> 
> an 11% gap seems worrisome to me.  When things are that overfit, I think it
> can be harder to find the problems just by looking at how the
> model-as-built fits the 2FoFc.  There are lots of "bad" ways to get a side
> chain into density.  You should check the geometry carefully, and if a
> residue has poor a fit in the Ramachandran plot, or if it has sub-optimal
> side chain dihedrals, first lego the backbone, then lego the side chain,
> and you'll probably find a better way to stuff the same thing into the
> density.
> It seems to me that the more automatic PI's think map-fitting should be,
> the more eclipsed leucines land in the databank ...
>      -Phoebe
> 
> At 09:55 AM 7/5/2006, you wrote:
>> ***  For details on how to be removed from this list visit the  ***
>> ***          CCP4 home page http://www.ccp4.ac.uk         ***
>> 
>> 
>> Did you refine the model after the molecular replacement? If so, do not do
>> so. Look at the maps directly and try to correct for any errors you see,
>> especially considering the difference maps (at 3 sigma).
>> 
>> If you run refinement without looking at the maps it would smoothen the
>> differences between the MR Model and your data and that is not desired at
>> this stage.
>> 
>> Tim
>> 
>> --
>> Tim Gruene
>> Institut fuer anorganische Chemie
>> Tammannstr. 4
>> D-37077 Goettingen
>> 
>> GPG Key ID = A46BEE1A
>> 
>> 
>> On Wed, 5 Jul 2006, [utf-8] Li Sheng wrote:
>> 
>>> ***  For details on how to be removed from this list visit the  ***
>>> ***          CCP4 home page http://www.ccp4.ac.uk         ***
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Dear Tim Gruene,
>>> 
>>> This structure is a mutant of a protein previously solved. The space
>> groups for the wild type protein is P2(1)2(1)2(1) for one crystal and
>> C222(1) for the other. The conditions of crystallization for the two
>> proteins are different. Of course, this structure is solved by molecular
>> replacement. We have not added water molecules now.
>>> We have tried both Rafmac and CNS, and the restraints was set to 0.05.
>> But we'll try again. Anyway, thank you all.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> ================= 2006-7-5 15:51, your message: Re:
>> [ccp4bb]:=================
>>> 
>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>>> Hash: SHA1
>>> 
>>> How did you create to this model? Was the gap between R and Rfree this
>>> high from the very beginning? If not, try to find out where the gap became
>>> so high.
>>> 
>>> - - did you introduce too many water molecules? You can overfit your data
>>>   this way by pretending noise were waters
>>> - - do you have to tighten the weights of stereochemical restraints? If you
>>>   use refmac5, try setting it to 'AUTO' or something below 0.1. A good
>>>   indicator off the weight being too high is the list of rmsd's at the end
>>>   out the refmac5 logfile.
>>> 
>>> Look at your difference map (fofc) at +/- 3 sigma, not 2 sigma. You want
>>> that map to show as little density as possible (either 3 or 2 sigma, but 3
>>> is more realistic, I dare say).
>>> 
>>> Tim
>>> 
>>> - --
>>> Tim Gruene
>>> Institut fuer anorganische Chemie
>>> Tammannstr. 4
>>> D-37077 Goettingen
>>> 
>>> GPG Key ID = A46BEE1A
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Wed, 5 Jul 2006, [gb2312] Li Sheng wrote:
>>> 
>>>> ***  For details on how to be removed from this list visit the  ***
>>>> ***          CCP4 home page http://www.ccp4.ac.uk         ***
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Hi, dear all,
>>>> 
>>>> Please do me a favour. I ever collected a data set of 2.7A. The space
>>>> group is C2. The model fit the 2fofc map and the omit map very well. The
>>>> R factor
>>>>  is 0.26 now but R free is 0.37 and can not be minished. What kind of
>>>> error can cause such a gap between R factor and R free?
>>>> Thanks in advance.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Sincerely yours,
>>>> Li
>>>> 2006.06.07
>>>> 
>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
>>> Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)
>>> 
>>> iD8DBQFEq8PcUxlJ7aRr7hoRAmpBAJ49RvoOuaXYNtD0S/ErcqCctbsHUgCg9+rG
>>> 8xzBUsvicmQqcAYD62OU+K4=
>>> =Pb/D
>>> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>>> 
>>> 
>>> .
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>> =============================================================================
>> ===============
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Sincerely yours,
>>> Li Sheng
>>> 2006-07-05
>>> __________________________________________
>>> Email:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>> Institute of Biochemistry and Cell Biology
>>> Institutes for Biological Sciences
>>> Chinese Academy of Sciences
>>> 320 Yue-Yang Road, Shanghai 200031, China
>>> Tel: +86-21-5492-1217
>>> __________________________________________
>>> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> ---------------------------------------------
> Phoebe A. Rice
> Assoc. Prof., Dept. of Biochemistry & Molecular Biology
> The University of Chicago
> phone 773 834 1723
> fax 773 702 0439
> http://bmb.bsd.uchicago.edu/index.html
> http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/cassini/multimedia/pia06064.html
> 

Reply via email to