Well - you seem to have absences for virtually all the (0 0 4n+1 4n+3)  and
(2n+1 0 0) reflections which is consistent with P42 212 but you can be
misled. Is there any pseudo translation with either X or Z 0.5 - that could
give you similar absences. As Ian says, be wary..
Eleanor

On 15 March 2013 15:51, Ian Tickle <[email protected]> wrote:

> Hi Gengxiang,
>
> Personally I find it impossible to reliably assign a space group from
> integrated reflections because you just don't know if the apparent
> systematic absence violations are due to a TDS streak or overlapping
> neighbouring strong spots.  "In the old days" (i.e. when we had precession
> cameras) we would never do this: we would look at the images and see if
> there was actually a spot at the Bragg position.  Now technology has
> "advanced" and with rotation images it's much harder to do this.  Maybe
> it's possible to make pseudo-precession images?
>
> What I would do is assume the worst and assign it temporarily as P422;
> then let the HA or MR program sort out the space group by trying all the
> possibilities; it's only CPU time after all!
>
>
> My 2p's worth.
>
> -- Ian
>
>
> On 15 March 2013 15:09, gengxiang zhao <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Dear CCP4s,
>>
>> I am looking for more experienced concerns to determine which space group
>> my crystal is. At present, we take it as P42212 (#94).
>>
>> HKL is below:
>>
>>       Intensities of systematic absences
>>       h   k   l  Intensity     Sigma   I/Sigma
>>
>>       0   0   9     -58.6      40.8      -1.4
>>       0   0  11    -204.4      53.9      -3.8
>>       0   0  13     -57.1      62.8      -0.9
>>       0   0  15    -470.6      92.7      -5.1
>>       0   0  17    -626.1     105.1      -6.0
>>       0   0  19     -64.7      62.4      -1.0
>>       0   0  21     266.6      75.9       3.5
>>       0   0  23    1372.4     116.4      11.8
>>       0   0  25    -543.9      84.8      -6.4
>>       0   0  27    -396.8      93.1      -4.3
>>       0   0  29    -598.8     102.1      -5.9
>>       0   0  31     617.4     116.2       5.3
>>       0   0  33     445.4      93.8       4.7
>>       0   0  35     -64.5      89.5      -0.7
>>       7   0   0    -241.4     134.7      -1.8
>>       9   0   0    -375.8      55.5      -6.8
>>      11   0   0     -39.1      61.8      -0.6
>>      13   0   0    -356.1      78.1      -4.6
>>      15   0   0    -262.6      65.6      -4.0
>>      17   0   0    -324.7      89.3      -3.6
>>      19   0   0    -178.7      88.5      -2.0
>>      21   0   0    -726.3     115.3      -6.3
>>      23   0   0    -189.4     131.0      -1.4
>>      25   0   0     157.7     157.5       1.0
>>      27   0   0    -591.5     213.4      -2.8
>>      29   0   0    -111.7     198.4      -0.6
>>      31   0   0     -94.2     247.0      -0.4
>>      33   0   0    -169.8     306.5      -0.6
>>      35   0   0     -71.2     347.8      -0.2
>>      39   0   0     -82.8     417.9      -0.2
>>
>>
>> Thanks a lot.
>> Best Wishes,
>> Gengxiang
>>
>>
>>
>

Reply via email to