TWILIGHT database, PDBREDO database, ... what else I forgot to name? I
wonder why it should be under different brands and names, and not just be
where it belongs to - the PDB?!

Back in 2005 when I (and colleagues) started re-refining the entire PDB (to
test phenix.refine, mostly) and seeing oddities (by now well documented in
the above mentioned debases and related publications) I felt very excited
about starting a databases of curated structures, but thinking a bit it
appeared strange and unnatural to have a "parallel" version of PDB.

Pavel


On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 11:23 AM, Nat Echols <[email protected]>wrote:

> That is an extraordinary case, and it certainly took a huge amount of
> work.  What about structures that are obviously wrong based on inspection
> of the density, but no one has bothered to challenge yet?  The TWILIGHT
> database helps some, if that counts, but it doesn't catch everything.
>
> -Nat
>
>
>
> On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 10:48 AM, Patrick Shaw Stewart <
> [email protected]> wrote:
>
>>
>> I may be missing something here, but I don't think you have to rebut
>> anything.  You simply report that someone else has rebutted it.  Along the
>> lines of
>>
>> Many scientists regard this published structure as unreliable since a
>> misconduct investigation by the University of Alabama at Birmingham has
>> concluded that it
>> was, "more likely than not", faked [1]
>>
>> [1] http://www.nature.com/news/2009/091222/full/462970a.html
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 15 May 2014 18:00, Nat Echols <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 9:53 AM, Patrick Shaw Stewart <
>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> It seems to me that the Wikipedia mechanism works wonderfully well.
>>>>  One rule is that you can't make assertions yourself, only report
>>>> pre-existing material that is attributable to a "reliable published
>>>> source".
>>>>
>>>
>>> This rule would be a little problematic for annotating the PDB.  It
>>> requires a significant amount of effort to publish a peer-reviewed article
>>> or even just a letter to the editor, and none of us are being paid to write
>>> rebuttals to dodgy structures.
>>>
>>> -Nat
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>  [email protected]    Douglas Instruments Ltd.
>>  Douglas House, East Garston, Hungerford, Berkshire, RG17 7HD, UK
>>  Directors: Peter Baldock, Patrick Shaw Stewart
>>
>>  http://www.douglas.co.uk
>>  Tel: 44 (0) 148-864-9090    US toll-free 1-877-225-2034
>>  Regd. England 2177994, VAT Reg. GB 480 7371 36
>>
>
>

Reply via email to