The point _ought_ to be the general scientific argument, "does the
experimental evidence support the conclusions made?" The questions
that can be asked & answered will depend on the resolution among many
other things
EM blobs seem to be publishable :-)
Phil
On 11 Apr 2008, at 11:04, Jim Naismith wrote:
Dear All,
I have an interesting problem, we have a 3.45A structure of
a membrane protein. We have just been told that the structure is
"too low
resolution to be considered as the uncertainty is too high". We use
the
structure to identify helices which have moved.
Is there a blanket ban on low res structure operating at the moment?
The structure was refined extremely tightly, MolPROB 98th centile.
(I will
happily send the data and structure to anyone who wishes to
validate.) The
editors simply ignored everything but the res limit (I/sI in the
last shell
was 1.8 with a redundancy of 4)
Of course we will begin the usual journal shopping. However, does
anyone
know how to convince editors and non-xtallographers that 3.45A is
valid?
Best
Jim
James H. Naismith FRSE |Research mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
and.ac.uk
Professor of Chemical Biology |Teaching mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Centre for Biomolecular Sciences |Office: 1334-463792
The North Haugh |Fax : 1334-467229
The University |Lab : 1334-467245
St. Andrews |In UK add 0 to start of number
Fife Scotland, U.K., KY16 9ST |http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~strucbio
The University of St Andrews is a charity registered in Scotland : No
SC013532
