Just a warning: When doing twin refinement (and in general) you should always 
use original data for refinement. After refinement data may be different (in 
case of twin de-twinned).

I will have a look as soon as I have some time.

regards
Garib


On 10 Feb 2011, at 22:06, Patskovsky Yury wrote:

> Thanks, Garib
> 
> It might be the case.
> As a matter of fact, you are welcome to look at the original data here
> 
> http://www.rcsb.org/pdb/explore/explore.do?structureId=2GL5
> 
> The data turned out to be twinned ( I also have other datasets - all with 
> certain degree of twinning) and now I am trying to re-refine and then 
> re-submit the more correct structure to the PDB.
> 
> 
> 
> Yury
> 
> On Thu, 10 Feb 2011, Garib N Murshudov wrote:
> 
>> Maximum theoretical drop R/Rfree for perfect twin from 30% is around 25% 
>> (i.e. it could go down to 5%). However it could only happen only if twinning 
>> is perfect and there is no pseudo rotation parallel to twin operator.
>> Hypothetical case it can happen if you have refined one crystal structure at 
>> sufficiently high resolution till (almost convergence) and another crystal 
>> is twinned but otherwise perfectly isomorphous to the first crystal and you 
>> take coordinates from the first crystal and refine against the second 
>> crystal.
>> 
>> regards
>> Garib
>> 
>> 
>> On 10 Feb 2011, at 20:14, Patskovsky Yury wrote:
>> 
>>> Dear all,
>>> 
>>> 
>>>       Twin refinement has yielded  Rwork/Rfree values of about 0.10/0.12 
>>> for a nice quality 1.8A dataset (Rmerge 6%, space group I4, twin fractions 
>>> 0.6/04) and almost the same R/Rfree (0.095/0.115) for another 1.5A nice 
>>> quality data set (Rmerge 6%, space group I4, twin fractions 0.74/0.26). 
>>> Refinement of untwinned data resulted in Rfree of ~32% and ~22% 
>>> respectively.  REFMAC and PHENIX both have produced the same results and 
>>> almost identical R factors, which are suspiciously VERY LOW for this 
>>> resolution of data.  Twin refinement in REFMAC has produced exceptional 
>>> quality maps even for 1.8A data (they look rather like 1.2A maps)  - I can 
>>> not tell the same for PHENIX - maps were looking worse (may be someone has 
>>> a better idea why).
>>>      Normally twin refinement results in lowering R-factors - say, the drop 
>>> in R from 30% (without twin refinement) to 20% (with twin refinement) would 
>>> be considered normal, however we can see the drop from 32% to 12%.
>>>       I wonder if anyone else has experienced similar problems and what 
>>> would be the most reasonable explanation for that.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Thank you
>>> 
>>> Yury
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Yury Patskovsky, Ph.D.
>>> Associate,
>>> Dept of Biochemistry
>>> Albert Einstein College of Medicine
>>> 1300 Morris Park Ave
>>> Bronx, NY 10461
>>> phone 718-430-2745
>>> [email protected]
>> 
>> 

Reply via email to