Dear Veronica,

In this case I would remove the poorly defined residues. They make your model 
worse.
Herman

-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: CCP4 bulletin board [mailto:[email protected]] Im Auftrag von V F
Gesendet: Mittwoch, 11. Januar 2017 16:33
An: [email protected]
Betreff: Re: [ccp4bb] To delete main chain or not

Dear Herman and Pavel,

>
> First a remark: the pdb is a repository and if you insist, they will accept 
> anything you send them so, yes you can deposit this.
> However, your question is off course, do I want to deposit this? One 
> does not want to end up in the twilight gallery or deposit a structure where 
> other crystallographers make fun of.

Hope I can avoid this!

> If you want to keep the residues, you need help from your free 
> Rfactor. You need to refine as good as possible the

R/Rfree is about 22/26. Whether, if I remove some of the residues (4-5), it 
drops by about 0.5 %.
>
> Since you mention that the disorder only occurs when a ligand is bound, it 
> might have a (biological) function, which would provide an incentive to 
> delete the poorly defined regions to illustrate this. However, if you 
> obtained your ligand complex by soaking, the disorder might be caused by the 
> fact that an interesting conformational change is blocked by the crystal 
> packing. In this case you should try to get the complex by cocrystallization 
> as well, otherwise you might have to do this when you receive the referee 
> reports of your paper.
>
> models refined against low-resolution data (diffraction or cryo-EM) 
> should have zero geometry violations (such as Ramachandran plot 
> outliers or rotamer outliers). This does not mean real structures do 
> not have such violations (in fact they do and there plenty of 
> examples), but low-res data can't justify them.

Thank you.

Reply via email to