Was there a reason that you turned off the scaling in Aimless ("onlymerge")? If
the data have come from Mosflm, this is definitely wrong - the result is that
(among other things) you have negative CCanom values which is unusual to say
the least
Just run it with the default options, that's usually the best thing to do to
start with
Phil
On 26 Apr 2014, at 14:38, Faisal Tarique <[email protected]> wrote:
> Dear Eleanor and Tim.
>
> i have reprocessed the data through imosflm and run the aimless through the
> unmerged output mtz..i am attaching the output log file of the
> aimless..please tell me how to interpret the anomalous signal from the log
> file and where the information is written..
>
> Thanks again for your much needed help.
>
> regards
>
> Faisal
>
>
> On Sat, Apr 26, 2014 at 5:22 PM, Tim Gruene <[email protected]> wrote:
> Dear Faisal,
>
> the lack of the CCanom line in the shelxc output suggests that your data
> are already merged, and my guess is you processed your data with HKL2000
> - all other integration programs I am aware of do not merge the data at
> such an early stage giving you access to the CCanom Eleanor mentioned.
>
> There might be a switch in HKL2000 to not merge the data. A CCanom >30%
> is a good indicator of the presence of an anomalous signal.
>
> Best,
> Tim
>
> On 04/26/2014 12:18 PM, Eleanor Dodson wrote:
> > Look at the aimless plot of CCanom . That is the best indicator I think and
> > very sensitive when you have such high redundancy
> > Eleanor
> >
> >
> > On 25 Apr 2014, at 22:13, Jim Pflugrath wrote:
> >
> >> <d"/sig> should be above 0.80
> >>
> >> There seems to be plenty of signal there with all values above 1.02. We
> >> have solved structures with less multiplicity and lower <d"/sig>.
> >>
> >> There is a different criteria of "signal" for when you know the positions
> >> of the anomalous substructure atoms and when you need to find the
> >> positions of the anomalous substructure atoms.
> >>
> >> As for "no signal", I think I am on record that there is always an
> >> anomalous signal. :) But can you detect it?
> >>
> >> Jim
> >>
> >> From: CCP4 bulletin board [[email protected]] on behalf of Faisal
> >> Tarique [[email protected]]
> >> Sent: Friday, April 25, 2014 4:06 PM
> >> To: [email protected]
> >> Subject: [ccp4bb] anomalous signal
> >>
> >> Dear all
> >>
> >> sorry about my previous mail where i forgot to mention that the data was
> >> collected on home source at Cuk alpha and at 1.54A.
> >>
> >> written below is the log file of an anomalous data processed through
> >> SHELXC..my question is ..what is the strength of anomalous signal ?? as it
> >> is said "For zero signal <d'/sig> and <d"/sig> should be about 0.80". Then
> >> in the present case is there really a signal or can be assumed no
> >> signal..we are expecting one Ca atom bound to the protein at its active
> >> site..the redundancy of the data is 11.6..with this signal strength can we
> >> assume Ca to be present there or whatever little anomalous if present is
> >> due to something else....or there is no signal at all ??...
> >>
> >> Resl. Inf - 8.0 - 6.0 - 5.0 - 4.0 - 3.8 - 3.6 - 3.4 - 3.2 - 3.0 - 2.8 -
> >> 2.60
> >> N(data) 375 493 580 1319 450 538 679 866 1081 1414
> >> 1709
> >> <I/sig> 58.8 38.6 32.6 38.3 27.7 27.2 21.9 18.4 12.6 9.5
> >> 6.1
> >> %Complete 94.7 99.0 99.3 99.5 100.0 99.6 99.7 99.8 99.6 99.6
> >> 90.9
> >> <d"/sig> 1.65 1.27 1.18 1.25 1.19 1.12 1.11 1.11 0.97 1.02
> >> 1.05
> >>
> >> --
> >> Regards
> >>
> >> Faisal
> >> School of Life Sciences
> >> JNU
> >
> >
>
> --
> Dr Tim Gruene
> Institut fuer anorganische Chemie
> Tammannstr. 4
> D-37077 Goettingen
>
> GPG Key ID = A46BEE1A
>
>
>
>
> --
> Regards
>
> Faisal
> School of Life Sciences
> JNU
>
> <223_aimless.log>
