Your symmetry is of family P6. There is no dramatic difference between 7.8% and 9.3% of Rmerge Go with pointless, wave reviewer nonsense. BTW reviewer of what journal he is?
Dr Felix Frolow Professor of Structural Biology and Biotechnology, Department of Molecular Microbiology and Biotechnology Tel Aviv University 69978, Israel Acta Crystallographica F, co-editor e-mail: [email protected] Tel: ++972-3640-8723 Fax: ++972-3640-9407 Cellular: 0547 459 608 On May 7, 2014, at 21:16 , <Rain Field> <[email protected]> <Rain Field> wrote: > additional info: > If I let xds go through, it will choose P6. actually pointless suggest > P62/P64. > The thing is the Rmeas and Rmerge are significantly higher for P2/P3/P6 than > P1, especially the highest shell. > That indicates those higher symmetry ones are not the choice, it that right? > (Actually, this is also the reviewer's question) > > > P6 log from xds: > > SUBSET OF INTENSITY DATA WITH SIGNAL/NOISE >= -3.0 AS FUNCTION OF RESOLUTION > RESOLUTION NUMBER OF REFLECTIONS COMPLETENESS R-FACTOR R-FACTOR > COMPARED I/SIGMA R-meas CC(1/2) Anomal SigAno Nano > LIMIT OBSERVED UNIQUE POSSIBLE OF DATA observed expected > Corr > > 8.45 4512 216 239 90.4% 3.1% 3.3% > 4511 95.55 3.2% 100.0* 41* 1.124 182 > 6.27 7208 330 330 100.0% 4.0% 4.0% > 7208 72.47 4.1% 100.0* 22* 1.211 293 > 5.20 8925 401 405 99.0% 5.4% 5.4% > 8925 56.60 5.5% 99.9* 12 0.965 368 > 4.55 10585 470 474 99.2% 6.3% 6.5% > 10585 48.76 6.5% 100.0* 3 0.841 436 > 4.09 11898 529 542 97.6% 9.1% 9.0% > 11898 37.80 9.3% 99.9* -6 0.809 495 > 3.75 12425 550 573 96.0% 16.9% 16.7% > 12425 22.09 17.3% 99.7* 1 0.855 519 > 3.48 14344 638 639 99.8% 26.3% 26.1% > 14344 14.57 26.9% 99.3* -3 0.783 601 > 3.26 15001 668 671 99.6% 53.6% 56.1% > 15001 7.15 54.8% 96.9* -2 0.745 633 > 3.08 14177 704 725 97.1% 114.8% 124.6% > 14165 2.95 117.7% 87.5* -3 0.632 637 > total 99075 4506 4598 98.0% 9.3% 9.5% > 99062 30.73 9.5% 100.0* 1 0.833 4164
