Dear Matthias,

Of course, high completeness is better than low completeness.
But as long as your low resolution is pretty much complete, there is no such 
thing as "too low completeness" at high resolution. Each reflection adds 
information to the map, and serves as a restraint in refinement.

best,
Kay 


On Mon, 25 Nov 2019 14:11:52 +0100, Matthias Oebbeke 
<oebbe...@staff.uni-marburg.de> wrote:

>Dear ccp4 Bulletin Board,
>
>I collected a dataset at a synchrotron beamline and got the statistics  
>(CORRECT.LP) after processing (using xds) shown in the attached  
>pdf-file.
>
>Do you think this dataset is usable, due to its low completeness? As  
>you can see in the attached file the completeness is just 50% in the  
>highest resolution shell, whereas the I over Sigma is above 2 and also  
>the CC 1/2 (80%) and the R factors (36.8%) have reasonable values.  
>Furthermore the overall statistic are good regarding R factor, CC 1/2  
>and I over Sigma. The only problem seems to be the completeness. If I  
>would set the cut-off at a lower resolution to get good completeness,  
>I would throw away nearly half of my reflections.
>
>I'm happy to here your opinion. In Addition to that: The space group  
>is orthorhombic and the dataset was collected over 120° using fine  
>slicing (0.1°).
>
>
>Best regards,
>
>Matthias Oebbeke
>
>
>-- 
>Matthias Oebbeke, M.Sc.
>Research Group of Professor Dr. G. Klebe
>Institute of Pharmaceutical Chemistry
>Philipps-University Marburg
>Marbacher Weg 6, 35032 Marburg, Germany
>Phone: +49-6421-28-21392
>Mail: oebbe...@staff.uni-marburg.de
>www.agklebe.de
>
>########################################################################
>
>To unsubscribe from the CCP4BB list, click the following link:
>https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?SUBED1=CCP4BB&A=1
>

########################################################################

To unsubscribe from the CCP4BB list, click the following link:
https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?SUBED1=CCP4BB&A=1

Reply via email to