I guess it was since summer and was only in cases if you gave
anom formfactor SE <number> <number>

If you did not then nothing was done.

Garib

On 3 Jan 2008, at 18:01, Ethan Merritt wrote:

On Thursday 03 January 2008 01:25, Boaz Shaanan wrote:

 Is the wrong value pointed out by Ethan the reason why we tend
to nearly always see +ve difference peaks over Se-met after refinement ?

Could be.
I have attached a plot of the net scattering factor for the two
sets of values.

I am curious as to exactly which version[s] of atomsf had the wrong
value for A1.  The various old copies I have lying around on my disks
all contain the correct value.

        Ethan





 Just curious.

      Regards,

                   Boaz

----- Original Message -----
From: Garib Murshudov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wednesday, January 2, 2008 19:19
Subject: Re: [ccp4bb] Refmac 5.4.0066  versus Refmac 5.4.0034
To: [email protected]

On 2 Jan 2008, at 17:15, Ethan Merritt wrote:

On Tuesday 01 January 2008 06:40, Mark A Saper wrote:

Well, I guess one shouldn't change versions of refmac in the middle
of a structure refinement.  What are the major
differences between .
0034 and .0066 ?  I noted that form factors for the Se
atom have
changed dramatically even though I'm using the same " anom
formfactor>> SE -8.13 5.05 " command.  Is this because the
program is now using
the wavelength on the .MTZ file ?

with .0034:

  SE     8.8706
2.4098   5.8196   0.2726
3.9731  15.2372
4.3543  43.8163   2.8409

The first coefficient here is wrong.

with .0066:

  SE    17.0006
2.4098   5.8196   0.2726
3.9731  15.2372
4.3543  43.8163 -11.7969

These are the values given for a1, b1, ... a4, b4 in Table 6.1.1.4
of International Tables for Crystallography Volume C (1995).

The value of c (-11.7969) corresponds to an f' value of
-14.6378  (=  -11.7969 - 2.8409)

This could only be possible at the inflection point of the Se
anomalous scattering curve, and only for a beam with a very narrow
bandwidth.   Current generation beamlines more
typically yield an
effective f' of -5e to -10e in practice.

We have corrected it. It was due to double addition of f' (one
from
anom formfactor and one from a la crossec calculation). Now it
should
not happen

Garib



--
Ethan A
Merritt            Courier Deliveries: 1959 NE Pacific
Dept of Biochemistry
Health Sciences Building
University of Washington - Seattle WA 98195-7742



Boaz Shaanan, Ph.D.
Dept. of Life Sciences
Ben-Gurion University of the Negev
Beer-Sheva 84105
Israel
Phone: 972-8-647-2220 ; Fax: 646-1710
Skype: boaz.shaanan‎


--
Ethan A Merritt            Courier Deliveries: 1959 NE Pacific
Dept of Biochemistry
Health Sciences Building
University of Washington - Seattle WA 98195-7742<Se_scatter.gnu><Se_scatter.pdf>

Reply via email to