>there are even more harsh referees comments on gel appearance and quality than comments on cutting data based on R,RF and sigmaI :-) Especially when one is trying to penetrate into prestigious journals...
Ok I repent. For improving gels there is the same excellent program, also useful for density modification - Photoshop ;-) Best, BR Dr Felix Frolow Professor of Structural Biology and Biotechnology Department of Molecular Microbiology and Biotechnology Tel Aviv University 69978, Israel Acta Crystallographica F, co-editor e-mail: mbfro...@post.tau.ac.il Tel: ++972-3640-8723 Fax: ++972-3640-9407 Cellular: 0547 459 608 On Mar 3, 2011, at 18:38 , Bernhard Rupp (Hofkristallrat a.D.) wrote: >> related to what I feel is recent revival of the significance of the >> R-values > > ....because it's so handy to have one single number to judge a highly complex nonlinear multivariate barely determined regularized problem! Just as easy as running a gel! > > Best BR > > -----Original Message----- > From: CCP4 bulletin board [mailto:CCP4BB@JISCMAIL.AC.UK] On Behalf Of > Ed Pozharski > Sent: Thursday, March 03, 2011 8:19 AM > To: CCP4BB@JISCMAIL.AC.UK > Subject: Re: [ccp4bb] I/sigmaI of >3.0 rule > > On Thu, 2011-03-03 at 08:08 -0700, Bart Hazes wrote: >> I don't know what has caused this wave of high I/Sigma threshold use >> but here are some ideas >> > > It may also be related to what I feel is recent revival of the significance of the R-values in general. Lower resolution cutoffs in this context improve the R-values, which is (incorrectly) perceived as model improvement. > > -- > "I'd jump in myself, if I weren't so good at whistling." > Julian, King of Lemurs
