I’ve had success with MRSAD as Kay suggests.  One option is to try putting 
everything into Auto-Rickshaw.  It can run multiple cycles of MRSAD, 
auto-building a model for improved molecular replacement, finding new heavy 
atom sites and repeating.  

There is a paper on this available:  http://dx.doi.org/10.1107/S0907444909029643
And an Auto-Rickshaw server:  http://www.embl-hamburg.de/Auto-Rickshaw/

Cheers,

Jason.

—
Dr Jason Busby
Laboratory of Structural Biology
School of Biological Sciences
The University of Auckland
Private Bag 92019
Auckland Mail Centre
Auckland
New Zealand

ph:  +64 9 3737599 ext 88958

On 14/10/2014, at 6:48 am, Gabriel Salzman <[email protected]> wrote:

> Hello,
> 
> I am wondering if anyone has experience or advice for my current situation:
> 
> I have a native dataset of a ~50kD protein complex at 2.4angstroms. One of 
> the members of the complex (~10kD) was able to be found easily by molecular 
> replacement. The space group was determined as P65. I was able to use 
> phenix.mr_rosetta to generate a partial model of the other member of the 
> complex (~half of this 40kD protein). When I do molecular replacement for 
> these two members of the complex in PHASER, the TFZ score is ~20-30. 
> Therefore, I am confident that this partial model is accurate.
> 
> I recently soaked some complex crystals in a variety of heavy atoms to obtain 
> experimental phase information. My best signal is from an iodide soak. These 
> crystals diffracted to 3 angstroms and I can see a very weak but significant 
> anomalous signal to 5-4.5 angstroms. I have used autoSHARP to determine that 
> I have one site of ~99% occupancy and 4 other sites of <50% occupancy. I am 
> inclined to think these other sites are not true. My density modified map 
> seems to me to be better if I only include the single high-occupancy site in 
> the phase determination. Even with this weak experimental phase information, 
> my map is not good enough to see the substantial density from the piece of my 
> protein that was not included in the MR model. 
> 
> I have also tried phenix.phaser_EP with mediocre results.
> 
> I apologize for the long question, and I would greatly appreciate any 
> suggestions for how to combine all of these data into a workable map so I can 
> build out the rest of the structure.
> 
> Thanks,
> Gabriel

Reply via email to