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


Dear CCP4BB,

Thanks for all of the suggestions re my Phaser problem. I should now turn off 
'pessimistic mode' and call it "my Phaser solution".
I mutated the top solution from Phaser to my sequence (very easy in COOT - 
thanks COOT people) and after a quick refinement at 2A I have a model with 
R/Rfree 45/49 and an omit map from SFCHECK looks pretty good.

Now I need to go and build the extra bits - probably into a DM type map. Or do 
the "boring" Arp/Warp...

Thanks to all.
Ed
--------------
** Please note new contact details **
--------------
T.Edwards Ph.D.
8.111 Astbury Building
Astbury Centre for Structural Molecular Biology
University of Leeds, Leeds, LS2 9JT
Telephone: 0 (+44) 113 343 3031
FAX:       0 (+44) 113 343 3167
Mobile:    0 (+44) 794 077 4012
Email [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.astbury.leeds.ac.uk/

> Dear BB,
>
> I have a high resolution native data set (1.7A) and a decent model
> for MR (35% identity over 70 residues, 100 residues total in ASU).
> Data scales well in P 3 2 1 (but not P6), and there are absences
> indicating a screw axis along the 3-fold.
>
> I'm trying MR with Phaser using data from 15 - 3.0 A.
>
> Phaser does not produce solutions with Z scores over 5 for P 3 2 1 or
> P 31 2 1.
> However, in P 32 2 1 there is a solution with Z score of 8.57. A part
> of the .sum file is attached below. The 2 solutions written out from
> set 1 trial 3 both have high Rfactors in a rigid body refinement
> (over 55%), so I'm assuming that is not a correct solution.
>
> I tried the MR protocol is CNS. The cross rotation function scores
> look good, but not the translation function scores and the top
> solutions all have Rfactors over 55%.
>
> There is no evidence of twinning.
>
> So... can anybody point me to something else I should look at/try?
> Also - why is there no "third" solution for set 1 trial 3?
>
> Thanks
> Ed

Reply via email to