Hmm - this is odd. For twinning to occur you need two (or more) lattices to
overlap..

Your cell is  40.29 66.01 161.37 90.00 94.09 90.00  with symmetry P2/m

If I reindex with operator h,k,-h-l the cell becomes:

 40.3000   66.0000  163.5358   90.0000  100.1290   90.0000

ie there is not much change in the c length but quite a big change in
angle.

I think you probably  need to process this data as P1 ?

Eleanor


On 21 October 2016 at 12:04, Robert Gustafsson <[email protected]>
wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Space group is P21, cell parameters is 40.29 66.01 161.37 90.00 94.09 90.00
>
> From Aimless:
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> ------------------------------------
>
> |                                 operator | L-test | |Rtwin| | H-test | 
> Britton | ML Britton   |
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> |                              -h, -k, h+l |   Yes  |  0.34   |  0.14  |  
> 0.11  |  0.05 ( N/A ) |
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
> From refmac:
> Twin operator: H, K, L : Fraction = 0.806; Equivalent operators: -H, K, -L
>
> Twin operator:  H, -K, -H-L: Fraction = 0.194; Equivalent operators: -H, -K,  
> H+L
>
>
> In viewhkl summary all columns go to 2.0 Å.
>
> Robert
>
> _______________
> Robert Gustafsson
> PhD Student
> Department of Biochemistry and Biophysics
> Stockholm University
> 106 91 Stockholm, Sweden
>
> e-mail: [email protected]
>
>
>
> On 21 Oct 2016, at 11:54, Eleanor Dodson <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> Hmm - what is your space group, cell, and twin law?
> The mtz file output from REFMAC contains detwinned data - ie the column
> labelled as F is NOT the measured amplitude derived from the measured
> twinned intensities.
>
> So in some SGs it is conceivable that an index has been generated..
> This shouldnt happen with merohedral twinning but it can with
> pseudo-merohedral twinning.
>
> No the other hand, are you sure the extended resolution does not just
> involve the Free R column? look at the viewhkl summary to see if all
> columns extend to 2.0 resolution
> Eleanor
>
>
>
> On 21 October 2016 at 09:24, Robert Gustafsson <
> [email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I am currently refining a structure that is at a resolution of 2.1Å and
>> slightly twinned. Below is the message in the aimless results:
>>
>> WARNING: the L-test suggests that the data may be twinned, so the
>> indicated Laue symmetry may be too high
>> Rough estimated twin fraction alpha from cumulative N(|L|) plot 0.209
>> +/-(0.015)
>> Rough estimated twin fraction alpha from < |L| > 0.202
>> Rough estimated twin fraction alpha from < L^2 > 0.192
>>
>> I have been refining with twin refinement, and without, and using twin
>> refinement gives better R-factors, as expected.
>>
>> When looking in the results files more carefully however, it seems that
>> 0.1Å of data have been added to my data in the detwinning process! It
>> suddenly comes out of refmac with a 2.0 Å in both pdb and mtz resolution,
>> and it just suddenly seems to decide that for itself. I have looked for
>> differences in my input and there is none other than choosing amplitude or
>> intensity based twin refinement, instead of no twin refinement. Input mtz
>> and pdb are the same, but in the log file of refmac it suddenly uses 2.0 Å.
>>
>> This error is not captured afterwards, both Molprobity and PDBe
>> validation tool finds the structure to now be 2.0Å resolution, however i
>> can see in both refmac output and PDBe validation output that the
>> completeness is lowered (which I guess would be expected since some data
>> does not exist…)
>>
>> So the question is, is this a bug of some sort, or should I have chosen
>> something in the input of refmac? I am using the latest update of ccp4
>> (7.0.021) using the CCP4i interface. I have looked back at my files ( the
>> project started 2 years ago) and the problem was there as well, so it is
>> not a new problem.
>>
>> Sincerely,
>> Robert Gustafsson
>>
>>
>> _______________
>> Robert Gustafsson
>> PhD Student
>> Department of Biochemistry and Biophysics
>> Stockholm University
>> 106 91 Stockholm, Sweden
>>
>> e-mail: [email protected]
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>

Reply via email to