Well....just to add, it has been our contention that many of the metal ions
have been modelled as waters in several structures- due perhaps to the lack
of sufficiently high resolution data.  We published some of the potential
metal binding sites in many structures a few years ago:

Proteins. 2008 Mar;70(4):1206-18.

Shekhar

On Thu, Mar 8, 2012 at 9:42 AM, Parthasarathy Sampathkumar <
[email protected]> wrote:

> Dear Uma,
>
> The water pictured in W12-1.jpg: could this be a potential metal ion? If
> you flip the side chain on Asn at 3.08Angstrom, then this has 3 or 4
> coordination with oxygen atoms. So, provided your crystallization condition
> or buffer contains metal ion(s), you could attempt to see if it fits better
> with a refinement cycle.
>
> May be a similar situation with the water described in W11-1.jpg as well?
> Difficult to say from these figures.
>
> COOT within the "validate" wizard has an option to search for
> "hihgly-coordinated waters" like the one you have pictured.
>
> Hope this helps,
> Partha
>
> On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 4:21 PM, Uma Ratu <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Dear Roger:
>>
>> Thank you very much for your comments. I use them as guideline and remove
>> many 'false waters".
>>
>> Still, I am not clear of some of these 'waters' are real or not. I have
>> the pic attached.
>>
>> In Pic-W11-1, the 'water' is connected to the adjust residues with 4
>> contacts, which are 'N' or 'O' atoms. I would consider this 'water' is
>> false. My question is: if these 4 contacts include "C" from residues, will
>> it be a polar contact or not?
>>
>> In Pic-W12-1, the 'water' is connected to the adjust residues with 3
>> contacts. The 4th is to another 'water'.
>> Will this 'water' is true or not? Similar case is seen in Pic-W190-1
>>
>> In Pic-W109-1, some 'waters' are connected to adjust residues, some not.
>> Are these 'water' true or not?
>>
>> Further more,
>> > and the b-factors are not way out of line,
>>
>> I am not clear on how to define "out of line".
>> How to find b-factor of individual residue in Coot? I search the web, but
>> find no answer.
>>
>> Thank you for advice
>>
>> Uma
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 11:44 AM, Roger Rowlett <[email protected]>wrote:
>>
>>> Uma,
>>>
>>> Remember that your structure, ultimately, is a model. A model is your
>>> best judgment of the true representation of the protein structure in your
>>> crystal. Your model should make chemical sense. Coot is pretty good at
>>> placing waters, but it cannot substitute entirely for the experimentalist.
>>> Coot will miss some waters, and mis-assign others into weak, unmodeled or
>>> alternate side- or main-chain density, or into density that might be
>>> attributable to cations and anions or other crystallization materials. Your
>>> waters should be subjected to inspection and verification. It is really
>>> helpful to turn on environment distances in Coot when you do this. Even in
>>> a large protein model, it is possible to inspect all waters for
>>> reasonableness pretty quickly. If you have no significant positive or
>>> negative difference density, and the b-factors are not way out of line, and
>>> hydrogen bonding partners are reasonable, then modeling a water is probably
>>> a good call.
>>>
>>> Waters should have hydrogen bonding partners with side chains or
>>> main-chain polar atoms, within reasonable distances, or be withing hydrogen
>>> bonding distance of other waters that are (chains of waters). If a "water"
>>> has strong electron density and more than 4 polar contacts, you might
>>> consider anion or cation occupancy. Most anions and cations will have
>>> higher electron density, and appropriately different types of polar
>>> contacts. (e.g. you might find sulfates near a cluster of basic residues).
>>> Low occupancy anions can often look a lot like water. PEGs can create ugly
>>> "snakes" of variable density that may be challenging to model. Modeling
>>> non-protein structural bits is endlessly entertaining for the protein
>>> crystallographer. ;)
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>>
>>> _______________________________________
>>> Roger S. Rowlett
>>> Gordon & Dorothy Kline Professor
>>> Department of Chemistry
>>> Colgate University
>>> 13 Oak Drive
>>> Hamilton, NY 13346
>>>
>>> tel: (315)-228-7245
>>> ofc: (315)-228-7395
>>> fax: (315)-228-7935
>>> email: [email protected]
>>>
>>>
>>> On 3/7/2012 11:20 AM, Uma Ratu wrote:
>>>
>>> Dear All:
>>>
>>> I try to add water to my model.
>>>
>>> Here is how I did:
>>> Coot: Find Wates
>>>                  Map: FWT PHWT;  1.8 rmsd; Distances to protein atoms:
>>> 2.4 min/3.2 max
>>>
>>> Coot found 270 water molecules.
>>>
>>> I then examed these waters. Most of them had ball shape. Some had two or
>>> more balls together. Some had irregular shape (not glabol shape).
>>>
>>> I run Water Check. The program did not find any mis-matched water.
>>>
>>> Here is my question: how could I tell the waters are real? Or something
>>> else?
>>>
>>> Thank you for advice
>>>
>>> Ros
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>


-- 
Shekhar C. Mande (शेखर चिं मांडे)
Director, National Centre for Cell Science
Ganeshkhind, Pune 411 007
Email: [email protected], [email protected]
Phone: +91-20-25708120
Fax:+91-20-25692259

Reply via email to