You would get a different MR solution in P41212 than in P43212 so you
shouldnt test the SAME pdb in both SGS?
Not sure I am understanding this though.
Eleanor

On 19 November 2013 05:02, #CHEN DAN# <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi Eleanor,
>
> I checked P43212 and P41212 by changing the header of mtz file and running 
> refmac for the same PDB input. P43212 is a better match than P41212.
>
> Sincerely,
> Dan
>
> ________________________________________
> From: CCP4 bulletin board <[email protected]> on behalf of Eleanor Dodson 
> <[email protected]>
> Sent: Monday, November 18, 2013 8:47 PM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [ccp4bb] translational pseudo symmetry
>
> I guess you have checked that P43212 is a better match than P41212?
> (And that you are running REFMAC against an mtz file with the same
> symmetry as the input PDB - you may need to change the SG in the mtz
> header by hand.
> mtzutils hklin P41212.mtz hklout P43212.mtz
> symm P43212
> end
>
> Or vice versa..
>
> Sorry - THIS IS CRAZY but there you are..
>
> Re the pseudo translation -Randy summs up the situation very clearly.
> I would build my model by hand actually but I am sure PHASER  does itwell too!
>
>
> Something I dont understand but maybe it is to do with your patterson 
> sampling.
>
>
> Peak 3 is a consequence of Pk 1 and Pk2 -
>  Pk 5 is the consequence of Pk 1 and Pk4
> but the peak heights dont exactly fit..
>
> Eleanor
>
> On 18 November 2013 10:19, Randy Read <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Dear Dan,
>>
>> First, you don't want to reprocess in the smaller cell.  What xtriage is
>> saying is that, if *and only if* the translation detected in the Patterson
>> map were an exact crystallographic translation, then you would get the
>> smaller cell.  However, in order for that to be a plausible hypothesis, the
>> Patterson peaks would have to be near to 100% of the origin peak.
>>
>> You actually seem to have a very interesting case, where the Patterson peaks
>> are related by multiples of approximately the same translation.  If you take
>> a translation of 1/2,1/2,1/6 and multiply it by 1, 2 and 3, you get
>> something close to the three biggest peaks in your Patterson (taking account
>> of lattice translations), and these are related by the Patterson inversion
>> centre to what you get if you multiply by 4 and 5.  So the six molecules
>> should be related to each other by something close to a repeated translation
>> of 1/2,1/2,1/6.  (You should check this in the solution that you already
>> have.)  If this were exact, you would have a smaller cell, but it's not
>> exact, and one way in which it is not exact is that the translations along z
>> are not exactly multiples of 1/6.
>>
>> This is reminiscent of a structure that we recently collaborated with
>> Mariusz Jaskolski and Zbyszek Dauter to solve (paper accepted for
>> publication in Acta D).  In that case, there are seven translations of
>> approximately 0,0,1/7.  The difficulty with cases like this is figuring out
>> how to break the exact symmetry.  Any solution that has approximately the
>> right translations will basically fit the data, but you need to find the
>> right combination of deviations from the exact symmetry to get an optimal
>> answer.  If you get the wrong deviations from exact symmetry, the refinement
>> will stall, and this may be the problem that you're facing.
>>
>> You can deal with problems like this in Phaser by using the TNCS NMOL 6
>> command (to say that there are 6 copies related by repeated applications of
>> the same translation).  You should tell Phaser to use the 1/2,1/2,0.174
>> vector (TNCS TRA VECTOR 0.5 0.5 0.174), and hopefully this will break the
>> symmetry in a way that subsequent rigid-body refinement can deal with.  I'm
>> happy to give you more advice on this, off-line, because this kind of case
>> isn't something that we've figured out how to deal with automatically yet.
>> The optimal approach probably involves getting a deeper understanding of
>> commensurate modulation, which is another way of thinking about
>> pseudo-translations.
>>
>> Best wishes,
>>
>> Randy Read
>>
>> On 18 Nov 2013, at 09:19, #CHEN DAN# <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> Dear experts,
>>
>> I am working on one dataset (2.5A) which  was processed using space group
>> P43212 ( 107.9, 107.9, 313.7; 90, 90, 90).
>> After running MR with 6 molecules in ASU and one round of refmac, the R
>> factors are high (38%/45%).
>> I ran phenix.xtriage and found that translational pseudo symmetry is likely
>> present. It suggested that the space group is I4122 with the unit cell about
>> 1/3 smaller (I paste the patterson analyses below).
>> I tried to reprocess the data to get the suggested space group and unit cell
>> using HKL2000. But the index always gives a long c axis about 313A.
>> Could you provide any suggestions on how to proceed?
>>
>>  Patterson analyses
>> ------------------
>>
>>  Largest Patterson peak with length larger than 15 Angstrom
>>
>>  Frac. coord.        :    0.500    0.500    0.174
>>  Distance to origin  :   93.757
>>  Height (origin=100) :   55.763
>>  p_value(height)     :    3.018e-05
>>
>>
>>    The reported p_value has the following meaning:
>>      The probability that a peak of the specified height
>>      or larger is found in a Patterson function of a
>>      macro molecule that does not have any translational
>>      pseudo symmetry is equal to  3.018e-05.
>>      p_values smaller than 0.05 might indicate
>>      weak translational pseudo symmetry, or the self vector of
>>      a large anomalous scatterer such as Hg, whereas values
>>      smaller than 1e-3 are a very strong indication for
>>      the presence of translational pseudo symmetry.
>>
>> The full list of Patterson peaks is:
>>
>>   x      y      z            height   p-value(height)
>> ( 0.500, 0.500, 0.174 ) :   55.763   (3.018e-05)
>> ( 0.500, 0.500, 0.500 ) :   51.209   (5.796e-05)
>> ( 0.000, 0.000, 0.326 ) :   32.915   (8.699e-04)
>> ( 0.000, 0.000, 0.348 ) :   18.765   (1.266e-02)
>> ( 0.500, 0.500, 0.151 ) :   11.396   (9.756e-02)
>>
>>  If the observed pseudo translationals are crystallographic
>>  the following spacegroups and unit cells are possible:
>>
>>  space group                operator         unit cell of reference setting
>>  I 41 2 2 (a+1/4,b+1/4,3*c)   x+1/2, y+1/2, z+1/6  (107.94, 107.94, 104.58,
>> 90.00, 90.00, 90.00)
>>
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Dan
>>
>>
>> ------
>> Randy J. Read
>> Department of Haematology, University of Cambridge
>> Cambridge Institute for Medical Research      Tel: + 44 1223 336500
>> Wellcome Trust/MRC Building                   Fax: + 44 1223 336827
>> Hills Road                                    E-mail: [email protected]
>> Cambridge CB2 0XY, U.K.                       www-structmed.cimr.cam.ac.uk
>>

Reply via email to