Dear Pooja,

A few remarks:


-        Matthews does not show 4 chains in the asymmetric unit, it suggests 4 
chains. However, in reality it can be more or less chains, although rare, 75% 
solvent (2 chains) is not unheard of.

-        An initial Rfree of 38% is ok, 32% after refinement is a bit high

-        Disordered loops do exist and you may have to live with them (not be 
able to build them).

-        To correct for anisotropy, I suggest the staraniso server from global 
phasing.

-        Unless you ran your molecular replacement in P1, Zanuda will confirm 
the space group you choose for MR. So run MR in P1 (if your symmetry is not too 
high) and run Zanuda again. (Have someone) look critical at the assigned space 
group and assess whether another choice might also be possible.

Good luck!
Herman

Von: CCP4 bulletin board [mailto:CCP4BB@JISCMAIL.AC.UK] Im Auftrag von Pooja 
Kesari
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 26. Januar 2017 15:12
An: CCP4BB@JISCMAIL.AC.UK
Betreff: Re: [ccp4bb] Bad density for chains

We have a 2.6 A structure showing four chains in an asymmetric unit. Our 
protein is 360 residues around 40 kDa . Mattews shows four chain in an 
assymetric unit (solvent 49% mattews coeff 2.44). The template has about 60% 
homologous with our protein. The molecular replacement against this template 
gave an initial free R of 38.  We did chain tracing and found that we have good 
density (2Fo-Fc) for chain A and B but poor density for C and D.

1. The density for a particular stretch of 10 amino acids (disordered loop 
region) is absent in all the chains. We could not found density for this 
flexible loop region in any of the already known structures. Any suggestion on 
how can we build this region?

2. We did not find density for most of the loop regions in chain C and D which 
were well traced in chain A and B. How can we improving the density for these 
two chains based on chain A and B (Density modification)?

3. We analysed the data using phenix xtriage and found that our data shows 
severe anisotropy. Any suggestion of anisotropy correction?

Pointless and Ctruncate analyses didn't show twinning or NCS.  I have checked 
the space group using Zanuda. We are stuck at a free value of 32.

On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 4:47 PM, Eleanor Dodson 
<eleanor.dod...@york.ac.uk<mailto:eleanor.dod...@york.ac.uk>> wrote:
This is a bit too vague to help much.
How did you solve the structure?
Eleanor

On 26 January 2017 at 03:50, Pooja Kesari 
<pkesar...@gmail.com<mailto:pkesar...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Dear All,
Thank you all for reply.
We have checked the data for twinning.
Our protein is 360 residues around 40 kDa protein.
We have tried TLS refinement.
chain A and B don't superimpose well with chain C and D. (A and B chains also 
share slight difference )
Since we don't have proper density for some regions  chain C and D, we are not 
sure whether these chain have similar or different conformations.
We tried anisotropy correction and the model refined a bit.


On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 10:32 AM, Debanu 
<debanu....@gmail.com<mailto:debanu....@gmail.com>> wrote:
Hi Pooja,

Are you positive you have the correct space group and there are no other issues 
like twinning, etc?

If sure, did you define NCS groups in refinement? TLS refinement? Try different 
refinement programs?

How big is the molecule? Was it solved by MR or experimental phasing?

You can try superimposing A/B on C/D and refinement with tight NCS then adjust 
NCS restraints during model adjustments based on local differences or also see 
if phenix autobuild helps.

Best,
Debanu
--
Debanu Das
Accelero Biostructures


On Jan 24, 2017, at 8:42 PM, Pooja Kesari 
<pkesar...@gmail.com<mailto:pkesar...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Dear All,
I have a 2.6 A resolution structure having four chains in an asymmetric unit.
The chain A and B have density for almost all residues however we don't have 
proper residue density in chain C and D.What can be tried to build chain C and 
D ?


Many Thanks
Pooja



--
Thanks & Regards,
Pooja Kesari
Research Scholar
Department Of Biotechnology
Indian Institute of Technology Roorkee
INDIA





--
Thanks & Regards,
Pooja Kesari
Research Scholar
Department Of Biotechnology
Indian Institute of Technology Roorkee
INDIA

Reply via email to