>This nicely illustrates the danger of using too low resolution data to >compute the SRF (I'm referring to an earlier BB discussion on this >subject, where it was suggested to cut out the high resolution data, >against, it seems to me, all rationale). You should be using as high >resolution valid data as possible (it goes without saying that using >rubbish data at any resolution won't help!). >
The resolution is to 3A. >The 3-fold peak will be *very* strong, it's crystallographic after all: >seeing it 'leaking' onto adjacent sections and even stretching as far as >the kappa=180 section is common, particularly with low resolution data >and/or using F's. > Wouldn't the 2-folds then also be equally as strong? Thanks for your thoughtful responses. FR
