Thanks to all respondents.

 

It seems the source of the discrepancy is that some programs use nuclear
distances and some use electron density peak distances.

 

Now, does it matter, for example, using  nuclear distances for placing
riding Hs in the VdW terms,

(i.e., a model for dipole interactions which are largely electronically
dominated) and then validate

against X-ray (i.e. electronic) distances? If this use of different distance
sets were consistent (I am not even sure of that), 

then we would probably introduce systematic bias.

 

The point is probably academic in practical terms but somehow it would be
interesting

to understand how using which distances when is justified.

 

Best, BR

 

From: Zhijie Li [mailto:[email protected]] 
Sent: Friday, April 28, 2017 3:42 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [ccp4bb] CH-bond length discrepancies

 

Hi Bernhard,

I believe this is the data you are interested:

http://journals.iucr.org/b/issues/2010/03/00/so5037/so5037.pdf

Zhijie

 

On 28/04/2017 1:33 PM, Bernhard Rupp wrote:

Dear Fellows of the Bond,

 

when validating a QM refined homology model with Molprobity, I noticed
various 8 sigma deviations in the carbon-hydrogen bond distances.

Out of curiosity, I then used refmac to calculate riding Hs for the same
model, and at least in one instance (N-H backbone) there are 

significant differences between Molprobity and Refmac H bond distances
(differences to the QM distances in other 

instances I find interesting, but less relevant for us).

 

The riding H vs Molprobity presumably should be consistent, because if we
use them in VDW restraints but

they differ from the validation target, systematic bias will occur. I have
no feel how significant that effect

might be - maybe someone more erudite can comment.

 

Examples

 

distance                  MP       REF     QM

backbone N-H       0.86    1.01    1.00   

phenyl C-H             0.93    0.93    1.09

 

Best, BR

 

PS: If someone has accurate experimental values for CH distances I'd
appreciate a link.

No access to CSD.

 

------------------------------------------------------

Bernhard Rupp

Crystallographiae Vindicis Militum Ordo

http://www.hofkristallamt.org/

[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> 

+1 925 209 7429

+43 767 571 0536

------------------------------------------------------

Many plausible ideas vanish 

at the presence of thought

------------------------------------------------------

 

 

Reply via email to