*** For details on how to be removed from this list visit the *** *** CCP4 home page http://www.ccp4.ac.uk ***
> Something I have never found to work to my satisfaction has been solvent flattening after molecular replacement where the model is somewhat partial (i.e. more than 20% of the new structure is not modeled by the MR solution). In a case I was trying out for someone else a few months back I used DM with a variety of automatic and more manually-generated solvent masks, and this produced no significant gain in the phases to my eyes. So I am left with the suspicion that I'm not using the best methods. You don't mention which resolution you're working with, which probably makes a big difference. I tryed this out with a ~4 Angstrom dataset, using a mask that worked well for the experimental phases; solvent flattening on model phases didn't show any sign of density not present in the model (given the resolution, I wasn't expecting it to; but you're probably using higher-resolution data). > Does anyone have any advice ? - I've found Coulombe and Cygler's 1997 paper (Acta Cryst D53, 426-433) - but I imagine that there is other information out there that an hour's Googling has yet to turn up. Other than not trying it <g>...give pirate a shot with a couple of different reference sets, or use the partial model to make it easier to find HA sites for experimental phases. Pete Pete Meyer Fu Lab BMCB grad student Cornell University
