I am even more cautious - if I want to check the anomalous map for a strong
scatterer  I set the putative anomalous scatterer occupancy to 0.0 .
 Theoretically it shouldn't be necessary - the atom map uses Phic+90 (or
maybe Phic -90??) but if the site is excluded you feel more secure in
drawing conclusions.

Eleanor

On 25 August 2017 at 20:31, James Holton <[email protected]> wrote:

> That just looks like bulk solvent to me.  Might be extra dense to the the
> barium, but disordered bulk nonetheless.
>
> If, as you say, the anomalous peak only shows up after you model in a
> strong anomalous scatterrer and not when you don't model in anomalous
> signal, then I suspect all you are seeing is the fabled "model bias".  Weak
> signals (like anomalous) are particularly sensitive to this.
>
> It is an interesting test to try:
> 1) measure the anomalous difference peak height after refinement (I use
> "peakmax" in CCP4)
> 2) set the Ba atom's f" value to 0, and re-refine to convergence.  What is
> the peak value now?
> 3) set the Ba atom's f" value to twice what you expect theoretically.
> Re-refine. Now what do you see?
>
> Once you've done this, you should have a good feeling for how much of your
> anomalous peak is coming from your model vs from your data.
>
> -James Holton
> MAD Scientist
>
>
> On 8/21/2017 3:05 PM, Betty Chu wrote:
>
> Hi Craig,
>
> The data collection wavelength was 0.92 Angstroms. Since we observe
> anomalous signal for Ba at this wavelength, we would expect greater
> anomalous signal if As were present. There is a possibility for weak
> anomalous signal in this positive density, but the weak anomalous signal
> only shows up if I try to model a Ba in the density. Without modelling
> anything, there is no anomalous signal.
>
> This is what the map looks like after one round of refinement with the Ba
> in the density. But since there are waters that are 1.6 Angstroms, 1.9
> Angstroms, and 2.2 Angstroms away from the Ba, which is smaller than the
> coordination distance between Ba and water, we are skeptical of the Ba
> being there.
>
> https://cbsostorage.chem.umd.edu/owncloud/index.php/s/O4lI2iKvRsQUoRo
>
> Thank you,
> Betty
>
> On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 5:21 PM, CRAIG A BINGMAN <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> What is the data collection wavelength/energy? Would you expect
>> significant anomalous diffraction from As at this wavelength?
>>
>> On Aug 21, 2017, at 11:37 AM, Betty Chu <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Shailesh,
>>
>> When I modelled in the Barium ion with octahedrally coordinated waters
>> and ran the refinement, the distances from the barium to some of the waters
>> ended up being too close (<2.2 Angstroms). Also, the positive electron
>> density is connected. If the density indicated barium with coordinated
>> waters, would that mean there are multiple ones present in the positive
>> density?
>>
>> Here are more views of the connected positive density.
>>
>> https://cbsostorage.chem.umd.edu/owncloud/index.php/s/j5CgZIJe6NKgUlZ
>>
>> https://cbsostorage.chem.umd.edu/owncloud/index.php/s/YbiNFbT8AW1iHUQ
>>
>> On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 12:00 PM, Shailesh Tripathi <[email protected]
>> > wrote:
>>
>>> Looks like Ba2+. Since it exist with coordination number 6 or above
>>> check what geometry water is following there (trigonal bipiramidal or so
>>> on). Water might also be shared by symmetry related Ba cation.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Shailesh Kumar Tripathi,
>>> Phone: 9686289668
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 9:17 PM, Betty Chu <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Yes, I have. The cacodylate ion does not fit well into the density.
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 11:44 AM, Pradeep Pallan <
>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Did you try modelling in a cacodylate ion (CH3)2AsO2-?
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 10:19 AM, Betty Chu <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Dear ccp4bb,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I am refining a 1.40 Angstrom data set for a DNA oligonucleotide.
>>>>>> While the model for the DNA fits very well into the density, there is a
>>>>>> patch of positive electron density in the solvent space that we are 
>>>>>> having
>>>>>> trouble with.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The screenshot can be viewed through this link:
>>>>>> https://cbsostorage.chem.umd.edu/owncloud/index.php/s/J5cKnOpCC4vb1VC
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In the screenshot, the yellow color is the anomalous map and a barium
>>>>>> ion is fitted into density near the positive green electron density.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The oligonucleotide was purchased from IDT. The crystallization
>>>>>> condition is 15% MPD, 120 mM BaCl2, and 30 mM NaCaC pH 6.4. I have tried
>>>>>> modelling Ba2+ with coordinated waters, MPD, and sodium cacodylate into 
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> electron density, but none of those fit well.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Any suggestions regarding the identity of this electron density is
>>>>>> much appreciated. Thank you!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sincerely,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Betty Chu
>>>>>> Paukstelis Research Group
>>>>>> Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry
>>>>>> University of Maryland, College Park
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>>
>>>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> Pradeep Pallan
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>

Reply via email to