On Mon, 2012-03-26 at 16:30 +0200, [email protected] wrote:
> It is like with Heisenbergs uncertainty principle. Either one has a
> complete model with a number of atoms having a coordinate uncertainty
> of 4-6 Å, or one has a model where the uncertainty of all atoms is
> below say 0.5 Å, but with a lot of truncated side chains with clearly
> contradict available biochemical evidence.
Excellent analogy. I am not sure why truncated arginine (as long as it
is not renamed to alanine) contradicts biochemical evidence though.
Termini are routinely truncated, no problem there. I have plenty of
biochemical evidence that there are more waters in the crystal than I
model.
If the truncated model contradicts biochemical evidence, the projected
model contradicts crystallographic evidence. I agree that a truncated
model may lead to interpretation problems, and thus the option of
depositing a projected model resolves that.
Cheers,
Ed.
--
Oh, suddenly throwing a giraffe into a volcano to make water is crazy?
Julian, King of Lemurs
